AZ QB Connor Brewer to Texas
According to Scout's Chad Simmons...
Was just told by Mrs Brewer that her son Connor Brewer has committed to the Texas Longhorns. Will be one of the top 2012 QBs.
Well...damn. He goes to Chaparral (HS of Craig Roh and Taylor Lewan) and is probably the most complete QB in the 2012 class. Being so close to him, Tom was a big fan of his, and hoped we'd pursue, a feeling he professed as recently as yesterday.
Thus begins likely another top 5 class for Texas. In case you're into torturing yourself, here are his highlights.
February 7th, 2011 at 9:47 PM ^
texas has lost recruits to baylor before. we've still got a chance
February 7th, 2011 at 9:51 PM ^
If you're referring to Ahmad Dixon, that is definitely the exception to the rule. Not saying it's impossible, but highly unlikely.
February 7th, 2011 at 9:56 PM ^
Plus Dixon was from Waco IIRC, so it's not like he decommitted to somewhere random.
February 7th, 2011 at 11:27 PM ^
his(dixon) recruitment and lache seastrunk's were so confusing
February 8th, 2011 at 7:46 AM ^
His older sister is a freshman swimmer at UT-Austin... no chance he goes anywhere else. This is a big assumption but... the kid seems super close to his family, he posted all of their names on his highlight video (along with his gpa of 3.85). Id say goodbye and goodluck to Mr. Brewer. Here comes Gunner!!!!
February 7th, 2011 at 9:49 PM ^
I'd rather have that OT from Chapparal. We'll get a good enough QB in this class either way.
February 7th, 2011 at 9:50 PM ^
Shane Callahan? I haven't seen him in person like Tom, but the dude's a monster run-blocking on film.
February 7th, 2011 at 9:54 PM ^
Yeah, thats him. I didn't realize he was from Chaparral HS in Colorado, but he seems like a great prospect and has interest in Michigan.
February 7th, 2011 at 9:56 PM ^
Whoops, forgot about that. Never mind, Tom probably hasn't seen him haha.
February 7th, 2011 at 9:50 PM ^
UT doesn't lose a ton of recruits but it is easier to get an out of state kid away from them. See Christian Westerman.
February 7th, 2011 at 9:56 PM ^
It helps when you win the national championship.
That being said, we have good chances with other quarterbacks who are closer to home (Kiel, Mauk, Gregory, etc.). Hopefully one of them just goes ahead and commits to Notre Dame so we have a chance at the others.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:02 PM ^
the people on this board are going to have to realize that we haven't done shit on the field to get elite recruits.
The last time these kids saw a good Michigan team was before they were even in high school.
Basically none of these kids love Michigan as much as you or I do. The only way to change that is by winning. Until then you can get very used to the elite recruits not even giving Michigan a look. Those in Michigan still remember the good old days of Michigan being very good probably because of the stories told to them by their parents. Those outside of Michigan? Good luck. Even the elite within Michigan have been heading out from RoJo all the way to Zettel. We simply are not as elite as we think we are in terms of college football.
Sad but true. I hope it changes, but that change is at least 5 years away.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:07 PM ^
before these kids were in high school? 2006 man and with every network showing the O$U and Michigan game they have to remember that
February 7th, 2011 at 10:10 PM ^
Not really. A lot of these kids weren't seriously interested in football until high school. And those that were, at least from other parts of the country, probably didn't care as much as they would now. Besides, teenagers are over-dramatic. 4-5 years, in their mind, is a 'lifetime'.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:15 PM ^
4-5 years is an eternity to a kid in high school. I mean how many kids across the country were serisouly paying attention to Michigan football when they were in the 7th grade?
February 7th, 2011 at 11:54 PM ^
1st sentence I agree with. But the 2nd sentence I do not at all. I'm 31 & remember watching UM games when I was 6 years old running outside singing the fight song after every TD. There's nothing I like more than watching Meeeeeeichigan Football to this day!
February 8th, 2011 at 9:58 AM ^
have the internet, better video games, cell phones, etc. We (i'm 30) had Atari 2600 and television. We also had to walk 2 miles in the snow, uphill both ways with no feet to get to school.
Also, get off my lawn.
February 8th, 2011 at 8:45 AM ^
The class of 2012 was in 7th grade in 2006.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:08 PM ^
I'll agree with almost your entire post. These kids haven't seen what we see as a dominant M team since middle school or even earlier. That perception stays in their mind.
Your last sentence isn't necessarily true, however. Look at the 2 teams that played for the national title game this year. Both Oregon and Auburn, over the past 2 years, have turned their entire programs around, to the point where they're top-10 classes nationally. Even schools that aren't in the title game, like FSU, or TCU, or South Carolina, or Washington have been able to catapult success in the short run as well as a reinvigorated attitude into school-record classes. 5 years is the worst case scenario, IMO
February 7th, 2011 at 10:11 PM ^
assuming that Hoke can get it done here, of course.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:13 PM ^
Well, yes, making that assumption.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:17 PM ^
And if he doesn't, well, we're Notre Dame. That's the worst case scenario, IMO.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:19 PM ^
I am assuming he fails epically (as everyone to a man did while we were still courting Harbaugh). I really really hope I am wrong, but I have literally no reason to believe Hoke will be a success here. I know it isn't what everyone wants to hear, but I am not a person who is swayed by the kool-aid of a man behind a podium. Besides I don't need the anonymous board poster friends.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:22 PM ^
..fair is fair. I'm not going to neg you for having a different opinion.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:24 PM ^
Negging is soooooo pre-board meltdown of 2011.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:34 PM ^
Cosigned 100%, saying the right things at a press conference, stealing some recruits from low-level BCS conferences, and getting a couple of 4-stars does not convince me of anything. The only really positive thing I've seen that gives me a sliver of hope for his success is his hiring of Mattison (not because he's ZOMG RAVENS ED REED RAY LEWIS, anybody can field a great defense with those players, but because he's supposedly a great recruiter. If he's as good as everyone says he is, then the best-case scenario is a lesser version of LSU, a team that wins in spite of its coaching due to its sheer talent.) If we took a straw poll before the bowl game, no one would say Brady Hoke is an elite coach. He isn't. Hopefully he's solid, but there's no way that we can attain the Bo/Mo/early Carr years with how OSU has emerged. If Hoke fails (which hey, I think he will, sadly), maybe we won't assume a nepotistic hiring process and go after the best candidate, and hopefully we can accept whoever may come next. I'm rooting for Hoke to exceed my expectations, but I don't think it's probable.
February 7th, 2011 at 11:37 PM ^
I would bet my last dollar that you guys gloomin and doomin don't know anything about Hoke's coaching ability beyond what you conclude from his overall record at two schools you never saw play. Same with his assistants. Throw in a dash of the general negativity Brian heated up during the hiring process and you have the bitterness cockail over us tossing away all those pending national titles.
What was Moeller's head coaching record before he took over at Michigan? What about Carr's?
Meaningless. Rodriguez' glossy record whipping up on second rate trash teams meant nothing here at Michigan either. You can be pessimistic and that is your right, but at least have a tangible reason.
February 7th, 2011 at 11:44 PM ^
Using your own logic, what's the reason for many to be so optimistic?
There's more evidence - albeit limited - for the "doom and gloom" crew than there is for the "we are going to win national championships!!!!" folks.
February 8th, 2011 at 3:00 PM ^
We know that we get to enjoy another transitional season, followed by a season with a schedule that will be challenging, to put it mildly.
February 8th, 2011 at 3:44 PM ^
Admittedly I haven't watched San Diego State with much frequency (I have seen a few games), but I did see a bit of him on those weeknight "showcase" MAC games wghile he was at Ball State. My tangible reason for pessimism is his shitty track record so far. Past performance is often an indicator of future success (not always obviously, exeptions are there and people will quote them ad nauseum to support their argument, but by and large this is the case), and Brady Hoke's past performance does not indicate a propensity for the future success that we're looking for. Tell me your tangible, legitimate reason that you think Brady Hoke will be successful here, because I haven't seen a whole lot of reasons myslef. I'd be more than glad to be wrong.
This isn't about Rich Rodriguez btw,
February 7th, 2011 at 11:26 PM ^
I don't blame you for having no reason to think Hoke will succeed and the proof will be when he takes the field in 2012 (not next year), but if you're looking for a reason to think Hoke will succeed, it's b/c the man works hard.
I'm not suggesting RR didn't work (regardless of the month off we understand he took off following his first class), but I think Hoke works harder than the average bear and I think working hard gets you pretty far - especially in recruiting.
February 7th, 2011 at 11:40 PM ^
Almost every D1 coach, save Lane Kiffin, has worked hard. That's why these guys are in the positions they're in.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:12 PM ^
this year and get some big recruits nationally but it will take a 9 win season this year to get back into the big recruiting picture. but say if we win the NC in 2012 season we will easily have a top 5 recruiting class based on the Michigan Brand and winning a National Championship
February 7th, 2011 at 10:28 PM ^
What about the roster for the next two years makes you think Michigan can contend for a National Championship in 2012?
February 7th, 2011 at 10:35 PM ^
Eh, it's probablye because everyone's roster looks good in February. There's no way we win a NC in 2012, heck, we'll be lucky to get to 8 wins with that schedule.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:40 PM ^
Yeah, or people write things without thinking them through. This team will be lucky to contend for a Big Ten title before 2013. Not trying to be a pessimist, just trying to be realistic.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:43 PM ^
Agreed. Talent-wise, we just can't reach the upper-level teams until '13 at the earliest.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:17 PM ^
attract elite talent after years of irrelevance?
Still befuddles me
February 7th, 2011 at 10:17 PM ^
attract elite talent after years of irrelevance?
Still befuddles me
February 7th, 2011 at 10:20 PM ^
That's something I'll never get...
February 7th, 2011 at 10:21 PM ^
NBC nationally televised games.
The "America's team" of college football.
Every catholic school in the nation is a feeder school (think Glenville is to tOSU).
February 7th, 2011 at 10:36 PM ^
While I understand the point you're trying to make saying that "every Catholic school in the nation" is a feeder school for ND (and to equate it to Glenville and OSU) is horribly inaccurate.
February 8th, 2011 at 12:37 AM ^
Notre Dame is, well, Notre Dame. Everyone knows Notre Dame.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:51 PM ^
I agree with a lot of this, but Michigan still has pull in a lot of other important areas. For one, there aren't many places where you can play in front of 110,000 people every Saturday. That's a big pull and one that Michigan will always have. Michigan also has facilities that are on par with the best in the country. And Michigan is better from an academic standpoint than most every BCS school, outside of Northwestern and Stanford (on par with Vandy, Duke, some others). That is a huge pull for kids and especially parents.
Michigan coaches may not be able to walk into a kid's house and say "we're one of the best teams in the country" but they can walk in and say "we have all of these things, the tools to become once again one of the best teams in the country, but we need players like you if we're going to do it." That isn't something that should be underestimated, especially with coaches like Hoke and Mattison who are from all accounts top-notch recruiters.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:56 PM ^
Being a teenager myself and growing up in multiple states (Michigan one of them) I can tell you that there are very few that actually remember Michigan. Hell, the most I have are YouTube videos and BTN Greatest Games to watch.
February 7th, 2011 at 11:30 PM ^
I'm in the same boat as you except I've lived in the south basically my whole life. Down here Michigan doesn't have much support and all I ever hear about is the dominance of the sec and rednecks complaining that woodson's heisman was an espn conspiracy (they freakin love peyton).
February 8th, 2011 at 2:50 PM ^
Rojo wanted to play WR and we needed a CB. That's why Donovan Warren ended up in AA.
As for the "elite," Will Campbell and DG came to AA and Lawrence Thomas and Gholston went to EL.
Zettel and Fisher were likely to sign on with RR if Brandon hadn't screwed up so badly.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:03 PM ^
We want Gunner.
February 7th, 2011 at 10:27 PM ^
...last year? Lesson to leanr is that class ranking doesn't = performance on the field.
Besides, it doesn't even look like he was considering Michigan. This is of no significance to Michigan.