DB's timeframe apparently not affecting recruiting
There has been a lot of overwrougt handwringing and angst about the supposed deleterious affect Brandon's coaching review timeline is having on recruiting. Bull hockey. With the commitment of Desmond Morgan and today Blake Countess, I hope this tired overused meme can be put to rest.
On the main page, Brian estimates that we can sign 20 fresh recruits. With the strong possibility of signing Zettel, Lyons, Bryant, and Frost, that leaves 2 or 3 spots open. I would say that's a good thing. Some teams out there have been hamstrung by allowing too many commitments, prematurely filling spots that then aren't available to better prospects. Also, with the class filling up, the coaches can tighten the screws on those who haven't yet committed. (i.e., "we only have a few more spots available, and if you are interested in Michigan, you need to make a decision, sooner, not later.")
One last thing. Clearly recruits have been willing to sign up. This either means that they are committed first and foremost to Michigan, or that they are confident that RR will return as coach next year. Those are both good options. These guys obviously believe that it's great to be a Michigan Wolverine.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:08 PM ^
no matter how much either side wants to say unless a recruit says "it's not a factor." positive news from the freep showed several recruits at the prep football banquet were Blue either way but no conclusive message could be why several haven't increased interest, etc. unfortunately too much rabble in either direction and not enough conclusiveness.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:10 PM ^
right, unless we can get inside these kids' heads, we have no way of knowing.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
But clearly, DB's timeframe didn't affect Morgan or Countess. They didn't wait until an announcement was made on coaching.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:19 PM ^
Because not all recruits are caught up on their coaches - but 90% of them are!
December 17th, 2010 at 5:19 PM ^
favorite Saved By the Bell episode?
December 18th, 2010 at 9:22 AM ^
Seriously, talk about a career that went from the toilet to....flush.
December 18th, 2010 at 2:15 AM ^
December 17th, 2010 at 4:42 PM ^
and I'm not trying to be "negative nancy", but they haven't signed yet. That is not to take anything away from the fact that the coaching staff has done a great job so far. Lucky for us they know you keep recruiting after they commit.
December 17th, 2010 at 5:26 PM ^
Morgan also said that after meeting with RR and talking with him and eating at his house it felt pretty confident that the direction of the program would involve RR and that he would be there next year.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^
As Geaux_Blue says, this isn't indicative of the macro situation. All this means is that Brandon's timeframe didn't affect Blake Countess.
I tend to be on "your side" of this debate, Mr. Kass, but I don't think this is a referendum that we're right.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:23 PM ^
I think we've seen that it's not having a devastating effect on recruiting. I'm sure it does affect some recruits -- how could uncertainty NOT have an affect on some people, right? -- but the panic and angst over Brandon's delay have probably been overblown.
As has been said a gazillion times, being certain that the coaching situation is in the best possible shape is a lot more important than a small subsection of one recruiting class.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:36 PM ^
I agree It has not been devastating, but imagine if RR had DB's full support. RR and his staff are going out and working really hard, but they aren't operating at their full potential because of the uncertainty.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:13 PM ^
I think there is evidence of it negatively effecting recruiting when Dee Hart is no longer planning to enroll early and maybe not at all at Michigan, Darian Cooper dropping Michigan from his list due to uncertainty at th coaching position, Avery Walls going to Cal, Jernigan eliminating Michigan, etc.
Yes there are recruits who would come here no matter what, such as Countess. However, there are many others that this is effecting and it may take a potentially great recruiting class to either good or average.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:22 PM ^
If Dee goes elsewhere I'll agree with you. But I don't think he's going elsewhere. His postponement is not a negative affect to me, however. It just forestalls his eventual commitment.
Regarding Walls & Jernigan, Tom VH has indicated that they were never strongly considering Michigan. If what Tom says is reliable, this also points to the timeframe being a non-factor. That is to say, they wouldn't have come to Michigan even if RR was given a contract extension a month ago, or if JH was hired as the new coach the day after the OSU game.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:28 PM ^
Tom never said that about Walls and I don't think he said that about Jernigan. I think one of the reasons Jernigan dropped us was the D scheme. As for Walls, I think he liked the west coast more and the CC had some effect. Not sure how much.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:32 PM ^
Dee not enrolling sure as hell is a negative, a big one at that. Those extra practices and time getting acclimated to college football would have helped a lot. With no clear cut number 1 back Dee could have taken that role. Obviously he can still do that but the odds diminish significantly now that he is not enrolling early.
Also, Chris Bryant's decision maybe effected due to this as well according to RIvals. Rivals has a good article up today on this matter. General sense is negative after reading it. I understand the trust we have in TomVH but he is not the only one with information. The RIvals staff have been doing this a long time as well and are as reliable as TomVH.
The biggest loss of this whole thing is the recruiting momentum that RR could have had. We will never get these 2 weeks back and that is most definitely a negative.
December 17th, 2010 at 8:49 PM ^
According to Sam Webb, there was a time when Walls was trying to get other guys to come to M...Sam mentioned two guys (Cooper was one of them?) who explicitly removed M from their lists b/c of the coaching uncertainty.
I'm not trying to argue that Brandon is doing the wrong thing, but as others have said, we can't say that the situation hasn't hurt recruiting.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:29 PM ^
But this was never going to be a "great" recruiting class. It has the chance to be a solid class, but not great or even good class if you use UM's track record in recruiting as a measuring stick.
RR's first class with its 17 4 star recruits was by far his best class.His classes have steadily gotton worse in terms of elite recruits. 13 in 09', 6' in '10, and 4 thus far this season.
December 17th, 2010 at 5:07 PM ^
I think out recruiting picks up just like our number of wins.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:13 PM ^
December 17th, 2010 at 5:39 PM ^
I think they are doing a great job, "under the current circumstances". The problem with that angle is, that some folks are arguing, that we need better circumstances.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:14 PM ^
Both seem to be holding their breath when it comes to the coaching carousel along with Zettel. I also would be willing to bet, M not getting Avery Walls had something, albeit maybe not a lot, but something to do with DB's time frame...
December 17th, 2010 at 4:14 PM ^
my timeframe would have an effect on recruiting..
December 17th, 2010 at 4:31 PM ^
"Hey kids - what's the deal with 'homework'? You're not working on your home!"
December 17th, 2010 at 5:05 PM ^
No, but your avatar is scaring away recruits
December 17th, 2010 at 6:22 PM ^
my avatar would scare you away. I think you're strangely aroused by this avatar.
December 17th, 2010 at 7:46 PM ^
I'm starting to think you really like cat woman
December 17th, 2010 at 9:15 PM ^
December 17th, 2010 at 4:16 PM ^
There are kids that it matters to (See Hart, Cooper, and Walls) and kids that it doesn't (See Morgan and Countess). There will be an uptick in recruiting in January either way. If Rod stays he will be able to secure the players that are waiting the coaching situation out, and if Rod leaves some of his targets may end up elsewhere, but you will start to hear about new targets that a new staff has been recruiting for a couple of years.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:15 PM ^
Is this topic SFW?
December 17th, 2010 at 4:35 PM ^
On a related note, I honestly want to thank StephenRKass for saying something about how some of the threads have, um, devolved.
I love bouncing boobies and funny pictures as much as the next guy, but as a guy who spends a ton of time on MGoBlog but has a wife and two young kids, it'd be nice to not have to worry about what I'll see when I scroll down the page on a Michigan sports blog. Yeah, I know, it's the internet and blah blah blah, but this site is better than that. That's why we're here.
And it pains me to see people chime in with comments like "Is this SFW?" or "Is this OK with StephenRKass?" Let's be mature.
EDIT: Not trying to hijack the thread, just been wanting to make that comment. Continue with recruiting discussion.
December 17th, 2010 at 5:49 PM ^
I think StephenRKass should be given credit for spawning one of the most epic threads in recent memory, even if unintentionally
December 18th, 2010 at 8:44 AM ^
I give the man kudos for (a) having the balls to say what needed to be said, (b) putting up with the inevitable shitstorm, and (c) coming back for more. Cojones, man... cojones.
With that said, the occasional NSFH (IF played properly) will remain funny for a while. And I think SRK is probably okay with that. He seems like a guy who can take things in stride.
December 18th, 2010 at 9:28 AM ^
NSFSRK and all will be well
December 18th, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
Don't worry about the SFW NSFW NSFH NSFSRK stuff. I can take it, and in a sense, I deserve it. Mostly, I just smile. Don't abuse me, but tease me? That's ok.
Actually, I haven't been here quite as often, so I probably miss half the references anyway. I think it struck a chord, and it seems there have been a lot less BOOBIE pics & gifs.
Ya know, I'm willing to say: I LOVE bouncing boobies, but want them live, not recorded, and in a particular context. Nuff said.
Also, I think my bone-headed post last week meant Brian didn't need to say a thing. I wasn't trying to channel anything, just speaking for myself. But if the net affect is a plus for everyone, well, it's all good.
Lastly, the board is self-policing. I haven't checked, but my guess is the mods don't have to waste as much time looking for and deleting this stuff. And when posted, a few have been negged to Bolivian. We're interested in Michigan sports. The OT stuff should stay within the bounds Brian and board sets.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:17 PM ^
You can argue about how much of an impact the pending decision on RR's future is having (or even whether replacing RR would be a positive or a negative), but it is naive to assume it has no effect simply because UM received a couple of verbal commitments this week.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:17 PM ^
Don't u want a kid who is coming for the school and not the coach however? Don't me wrong, I want all the best kids we can get, but I'd rather a 3 star commit because he loves Michigan instead of a 5 star who loves the coach and not really where he is coaching.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:21 PM ^
In happyland that may occur but in the real world kids commit about 90% on the coach and 10% on the school UNLESS the school is in a really sweet part of the country where lots of hot chicks reside.
Then it's the other way around.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:28 PM ^
90%? That seems pretty high.
At a school like Michigan, I'd say that number is probably closer to 20-30%
December 17th, 2010 at 4:40 PM ^
1. IIRC, none of the 1995 recruits transferred after Moeller's departure, and we continued to land commitments over the next several months, even as Carr was only an interim coach (he didn't get the nod permanently until November).
2. We hardly lost anyone from the 2008 recruiting class after Carr retired.
December 17th, 2010 at 5:33 PM ^
In 1995 whatever. Cmon, this isnt 1995, the 90's were the shit (see 90's hip hop music). However in 2010 kids are much more aware of the coaching situation and how it may affect there chances at going pro. The 2011 decomits and guys who dropped Michigan due to this coaching change situation prove my point. Hi Dee Hart, how are you?
December 17th, 2010 at 4:25 PM ^
I disagree. I would prefer the 5 star because once they get in the school they will become more invested in it. I understand the point you are trying to make, but generally speaking the kid will come to love the school (assuming he is playing, no extra troubles, etc.)
Reasonable people could disagree of course, especially given the mass defections when RR came on board, but I think most of those were because the new system put them at a disadvantage in terms of playing time or that they had to work harder than they did under Lloyd.
December 17th, 2010 at 5:51 PM ^
Of course we all want 5 stars. I want the best talent we can possibly get. I just want kids who love the University of Michigan for what it is and not who is there. I don't know maybe its a moot point, but I think you understand me anyway.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:25 PM ^
Unless the kid grew up a fan or fell in love on a visit, it's tough for a kid. I think Denard is a good example. He liked A2 but I am sure he liked some other places as well. Came for the opportunity that RR gave him and fell in love with Michigan. I hope there will be more like him.
December 17th, 2010 at 5:00 PM ^
December 17th, 2010 at 4:19 PM ^
So having uncertainty, as to who will be the coach next year, has no effect now? We can put that to rest? Where do you get that data? Boil it down to just common sense, if you were an 18 year old, would not knowing if the head coach, and his entire staff, are going to be there or not, have any influence on your decision? The guy who has been recruiting me may not be there next year. I have the other 3 main schools recruiting me with solid coaching staffs. It has no effect?
December 17th, 2010 at 10:44 PM ^
Why are there so many commas?
December 17th, 2010 at 4:19 PM ^
Someone post the Flo upskirt picture.
December 17th, 2010 at 4:22 PM ^
It might not bother some, as is indicated by Countess committing, but it certainly might bother others. Will we ever know if the timeline bothered an Avery Walls? Too hard to tell. We can't say it isn't affecting some people, but in the end, we can't change DB's timeline, so, its time we just let things play out.
Let's get excited for a New Year's Day Bowl Game for the first time in 3 years. Go Blue!
December 17th, 2010 at 4:21 PM ^
With two commitments thus far, maybe it's a POSITIVE factor. Lurking variables such as the fact that coaches are staying in more constant contact with recruits because of the situation may be winning out right no!