Courtney Avery Commit #15 to Wolverines
Changes his "commitment" from Stanford to UM today.
http://michigan.scout.com/a.z?s=162&p=2&c=873785&ssf=1&RequestedURL=htt…
Cornerback (#23 - Scout)
Lexington (OH) Lexington
Ht: 5-foot-10
Wt: 165 lbs
We better have room for the better db's who want to come.
for other CBs to commit to Michigan. RR will take at least 3 CBs for '10 class. Avery's not the only one coming to Michigan. ;-)
Avery had an outstanding camp and he earned the offer.
I'd take Mathis, Christian, Knight, and Williams over him. Hopefully we get at least 3 of those guys. What if 3 of them want to come here (very possible)? I don't think RR will take 4.
I'm starting to think...he could play safety also.
Dude, set your sights a little lower. Landing three or four 4 stars at one position in the same class is a rare feat.
Not all of those guys I listed are 4 stars. I know we had a 3-9 season, but in most years we should have a pretty equal amount of 3 and 4 stars, not lopsided like it is now.
"Most years" we weren't 3-9, you underestimate the effect. 3 and 4 four stars don't pile on top of each other in a class, except for the chance to play at perennial NC candidate. Maybe in a few years again.
I know. But we still had a top ten class this year. The in-coming recruits still stayed with us being 3-9. Eventually we'll be bringing in top 10 classes just about every year.
There is no more reason to think that the previous poster is underestimating the effect of 3-9 than there is to think that you're overestimating it. If we were raking in a killer class it would be equally easy to say that people had underestimated the effect of selling recruits on potential early playing time. What I'm saying is that your argument is, at its heart, mostly circular. And to your claim that multiple highly rated players won't commit to play the same position except for a perennial NC candidate I need only say: Notre Dame, last year.
Seconded
good chance that Avery and Christian will be 4 stars in the next round of updates. Avery because he is now almost 5'11" and Cullen because he proved he can be a corner in college at 6'1". I think there is even outside talk of Cullen Christian being high enough to get consideration for a 5th star in the end, similar to the way things finished with Justin Turner last year.
RR turned down Travis Williams, a CB, who wanted to commit to Michigan. It's not like he'll accept anyone to his class.
Avery has outplayed all CBs at camp and he earned the offer. Camp is a better indicator because you face better competition than what you would see in HS game.
Mathis would be a solid CB but Avery is more of a natural corner. Not so sure if Mathis has the hips to be a successful CB. Mathis is a better slot WR than a CB IMO.
I'm pretty sure Mathis is better than this guy. What camp was he at and was he playing against good competition?
Avery was at, it was at Michigan's camp. Today. An invite-only affair with about 80 attendees. I'm pretty sure Coach Rod approved of the competition at the camp.
Mr. Avery also got a nice mention at the Pittsburgh Scout Combine, along with some other guy named Cullen Christian.
http://recruiting.scout.com/2/848546.html
Not to hijack the thread, but reading through your link there was also a nice mention of Paskorz.
"Hampton defensive end Jordan Paskorz continues to impress the more we see him and he may be the most athletic defensive end in the state this year. Paskorz dominated with technique, power and speed in the one-on-ones. He got everyone’s attention when he hit on offensive lineman in the chest and the player flew through the air and landing on the quarterback dummy."
The competition sucked, he was running drills against me, Mcfarlin and Rick Mahorn
Well then maybe he's legit.
LOL thank you, I am now going to run up the 2 stairs of my front porch just to get a little extra work in!
Mathis is better than Avery at CB? On what basis did you see from him in person as well as gamefilm(not highlight film) that you came away with this conclusion?
I can't. But all of Mathis' rating are better.
than Avery if you have never seen both play live.
Star rankings doesn't mean much especially when there's not much difference between 4* and 3* players. They're essentially interchangeable.
4* and 3* are not interchangeable otherwise there would be no such thing as star rating. I also think he does have basis to say Mathis is better than Avery. Scout and Rivals both have Mathis ranked higher. These are people who are paid to evaluate talent, rate, and rank it. That being said, if Rod saw fit to offer this kid and he has been showing well at camps then I am all for his commitment. RR has forgotten more about football and talent than I will ever know.
there is not much difference between 41th ranked player and 150 ranked player.
Just because they rank players, it doesn't mean that you can take it as a gospel. More times than not, they are often wrong on ranking players. Mike Hart, Braylon Edwards and to name a few disprove that theory.
Most of the time, star rankings is warranted if a player goes to camp and whatnot. If there's a player who is superior as a football player, athlete but doesn't go to camp or didn't send film to them, they will not be ranked. It has a lot of flaws in rankings. Besides, ranking players are usually political. Tom Lemming is a prominent example of overinflating ND commits rankings.
that skepticism of rankings and those performing the rankings is necessary. Taking rankings as gospel would be foolish, however, I disagree that the difference between the 150th and the 41st ranked player is negligible. I also don't think that, "More times than not, they are often wrong on ranking players." Mike Hart and Braylon Edwards were the exceptions not the rule. Yes there are diamonds in the rough, and yes rankings are not perfect. For every 3 star that explodes there are plenty of 3 stars ranked in the same area that may never even see the field. Just looking at depth charts of most major programs they are littered with 4 and 5 star talent at the top and filled with 3 star depth at the bottom. This is not to say that a 3 star kid such as Hart can't outperform his 4 and 5 star counterparts, I am just making the argument that normally this is not the case.
Now I am not a star gazer by any means and could care less what player rankings are. Again if RR sees fit to offer a kid I'm assuming he has a dang good reason. I care little about what a kid is ranked and very much about how he plays football when he sees the field.
I guess what I'm saying is I agree with you that rankings are not the end-all-be-all, but I do think there is some value to them. Of course rankings at the end of the recruiting cycle are also much more dependable than they are right now.
We need Chitown to provide his data on star rankings again. Star rankings are valid. Higher ranked players are more likely to start in college and go on to the NFL. There are, of course, exceptions.
are ranked below him on Scout and Dior is only two slots ahead of Avery. He's ranked 23rd in the nation and also ahead of Lo Wood.
Just because he's not rated on rivals and scout doesn't mean he's not a good CB. Its gotta say something when Michigan is already in good standing with CC, Mathis, and Knight and would offer a kid after that. He's a straight up sleeper and if you're premium on rivals/scout you would know why...
CC,Dior,Tony Grimes and Rashard Knight. Don't sweat it...
C'mon man, who is to say that this kid isn't better than some of the other higher "ranked" kids? Scouting services suck. He was the best corner at camp. Scout/Rivals love guys like you.
Is it just me, or does Stanford seem to pop up a lot with our recruits. Do they run the same time of offense or defense as us, or is there some other reason we seem to be targetting the same kids?
Kids who are serious about going to a school with good academics often end up in this position.
to have him. We need db's. I wonder how that conversation went with Coach Harbaugh.
If he's that good...then what's with the shabby list of offers? Other issues maybe?
He's just ok. 3 star on scout, nr on rivals, 73 on espn.
CA had one helluva camp whom the coaches felt deserve a scholly offer.
Take that, harbaugh!
So he doesn't have great size, or great speed. Never fear, he's got fluid hips.
Good point, fluid hips are a great asset...he could land on Dancing with the Stars down the road.
Everyone realizes that none of these kids have had a senior season right? They have one more year of competition. Full ratings haven't even been released yet. We know that right?
Once people commit, the scouting services are less likely to change the rankings a lot.
But that only weakens your argument. It now sounds like you want a highly-rated class regardless of their actual football talent.
Then maybe you should be a little skeptical of the rating services.
I am skeptical. Nevertheless, I'd rather have a higher rated recruiting class than a lower rated one. People outside MGoBlog will think, "Oh, wow, our class sucks, we have a bunch of 3 stars." Anyway, I think I'll just shut up now.
Why the fuck would you care what people you'll never meet in your life will say about Michigan football and the recruiting class? Are you going to cry in your bedroom when some OSU or ND fan makes fun of our recruiting class on some random message board? Get a grip.
I'm very sensitive. I've already cried for ten minutes straight. But really, I don't care. I just don't want to become the next McFarlin.
what a douche
the ship sail away.
Some say... there is this thing called "chemistry" with regards to the social quality of a group. It is not quantifiable, but a good leader will live and die by it. You don't necessarily want a team that is an amalgamation of talented bodies if they don't get along like a team needs to. Unfortunately, many of the most talented bodies have unwieldy egos attached, and this can erode the success of the team over time (see T.O. and the Dallas Cowboys, or USC's perennial regular-season meltdown, or the USA Olympic Bball team in 2004... etc.)
Teamwork is a human affair, and is not restricted to the purely physiological side of humanity. Rich Rod isn't just grabbing talent, he is building a team that will bleed and sweat for the greater glory of the Maize and Blue. I trust his judgment.
"I trust my eyes to Rich Rodriguez, and you should too." -Pavel Datsyuk
why USC loses to at least one team in the Pac-10 each year. I always just assumed it was the fact that going undefeated in any conference is really difficult when you are playing teams that know you very well each year, or being in a hostile environment against another talented team, or injuries to playmakers. Now I know it is ego. Huge egos are holding USC back from an undefeated season every year. Nothing else.