ESPN on Michigan vs ND in recruiting

Submitted by Leaders And Best on
ESPN covered the shift in focus of Michigan and ND recruiting with the two schools competing less and less for the same recruits. Michigan has focused first in locking up states in the Big Ten footprint (Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, New Jersey, and Maryland/Virginia) while ND has shifted their focus to National recruiting with an emphasis in the Southeast especially now with their move to the ACC. ND has started to become an afterthought for kids in the Midwest. It will be interesting to see which strategy works out in the long run. As has been discussed on this board before, ND no longer has a home base to recruit from and they may regret that in the long run if they cannot repeat seasons like last year. Rittenberg: http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/9633815/michigan-notre-d… TomVH: http://espn.go.com/college-sports/recruiting/football/story/_/id/963311…

TheGhostofChappuis

September 4th, 2013 at 6:44 PM ^

I disagree with the premise.  Look at the commits.  Notre Dame isn't focusing on national recruiting any more than Michigan is.

jblaze

September 4th, 2013 at 6:46 PM ^

Has to be that kids get homesick/ their families don't get to see them play very often. That's good for Michigan.

Also, that's 1 less Midwest power Michigan does not have to compete with. It's basically Ohio and us for Midwest kids, and Ohio is going national too.

Longer term, this helps the B1G and hurts ND, since they are competing against the likes of the kids home team and other national powers.

LSAClassOf2000

September 4th, 2013 at 6:53 PM ^

Looking at Notre Dame's last few recruiting classes including the one in process (2014), it's interesting to see (counting kids from states with Big Ten schools here):

2014: 16 commitments to date, 5 from the "Big Ten footprint" (now including MD)

2013: 24 commits, only 8 from Big Ten territory (if you include NJ here)

2012: 17 commits, only 5 from traditional Big Ten territory

2011: 23 commits, only 8 from traditional Big Ten territory

I went back a little further, but it seems like the shift for ND has been in process for a while.

 

uvadula

September 4th, 2013 at 7:45 PM ^

I think its a sensible strategy for Notre Dame. If they're going to be playing Clemson, FSU, Miami, they should be recruiting kids away from those schools, thereby weakening their opponents (to at least some degree). If Michigan focused only nationally, the MSUs / Wisconsins would get better players from the only footprint they can recruit and would become stronger opponents, while we're sapping away the best recruits from schools we dont even play

MGlobules

September 4th, 2013 at 8:12 PM ^

as predicted, and Clemson, V-Tech, and one or two other schools become truly strong, ND is going to be a poor boy a long long ways from home. If NBC hadn't been propping them up the last fifteen years, where would they be?

Aspyr

September 4th, 2013 at 8:31 PM ^

I hope this is their strategy because if they are going to focus more on SEC land - something that OSU is also doing - then we will have less competition in the Midwest. What doesn't make sense from a marketing/recruiting standpoint is if you are dropping a team because of the recruiting footprint why drop Michigan and not MSU or Purdue?

 
2012 TV Ratings
Michigan - Notre Dame 4.0 or 6.4 million viewers
MSU - Notre Dame  3.2
Purdue - Notre Dame 1.9
 
Michigan - Notre Dame was by far the most viewed game last year during week 4 and was the most watched program on television that night. Second was Clemson - FSU with a 2.9 rating.

vablue

September 4th, 2013 at 9:23 PM ^

ND has said this pretty clearly. They wanted to drop one big ten team and Michigan was the only team they could drop and not have to buy them out of the contract. Thus the crappy letter handing at the last second.

Ultimately this was a good thing. Anyone want to have to play ND, MSU, and Ohio on the road in the same year?