The Great Dilemma: Recruiting Style
With the unbelievable recruiting success this early in the 2013 class, people are beginning to talk and debate about available spots and the best ways to use them. I figured it was time to begin the discussion on what everyone believes and would do if they had the choice. We are at 14 commits and the common belief is that we will get to (at least) 22 scholarships. The great debate arises mostly at LB, where McCray has committed, and Gedeon, Levenberry, and O'Daniel all have us as their leader. But other position needs and best use of scholarships is also debatable. One thing that some may disagree with me on below is that I think we only take 1 DT. Explain to me why you disagree with anything i say here as this is meant to be discussed.
Further needs combined with projections IMO:
1 RB
1 WR (possibly 2)
1 TE (looks like the coaches want 1 more)
1 DT
2 LB
1 DE
1 CB
That puts us at 22 exactly.
In my opinion, if we missed on the top TE's or DE's we're after, we could possibly fill that scholarship with the 4th LB or a 3rd WR could be added. McCray could move to DE eventually, and O'Daniel could be taken as a Safety or Running Back if we missed on Isaac, so there is that possibility as well.
We could also get to higher than 22 available scholarships* which would free up one or two "best available spots" and take the 4th LB in that place. It could then come down to if we get a guy like Cravens (Safety) or Tunsil or possibly Pocic (OT) to take that "best available spot" in which we would then not likely have room for all 4 of them.
Overall, I think this is a great problem to have mainly because a lot can change between now and February. I think if any of these 4 get turned away, it's more a sign that we got the guys we wanted at other positions, rather than we didn't have space.
* One thing that I ask is that we do NOT debate how we could get to 22 or more than 22 scholarships via attrition or not renew 5th year scholarships to certain players.
Let the debate begin!
with only taking 1 DT, but I really want 2 because I think we just need another 2 5 techs at the DL posistion. Only wanna add whatever Hoke and Mattison decide I am good with. I really think they know what we need and I trust their judgement much more than mine.
Completely agree that I trust whatever the coaches do! The second they take a player at a position i didn't mention or if they took 2 DT's, I would instantly agree with what they chose to do!
With that said, i figured we could all discuss what we would do or what we believe they should do given what we know - as fans!
Wouldn't a 5 tech be a DE? I feel like it's another 1 tech that Michigan needs. I think Pipkins will be great but the depth behind him is pretty shallow and Hoke wants to rotate heavily on the DL. But if there is one place I trust this staff more than anywhere else, it's DL recruiting.
Possibly huge sidenote/tangent on DE recruiting,
Tremendous just put of an update on 4* DE recruit Joe Mathis. Mathis talked about his recruitment by Michigan: apparently the staff is pushing hard for him, and he's been getting a lot of letter, and he is very interested. But the kicker is that he plans on visiting together with his cousin, 5*-everything Su'a Cravens.
Definitely worth a read. Somehow, if we could pick up both of these guys, that would be a HUGE coup for the staff.
I'm drooling. We are now in on several monster recruits that could potentially wait til the AA games to commit. Treadwell, Mathis, Cravens, maybe Poggi, Levenberry... Probably some others as well that I can't think of. This must be nerve wracking for the coaches. Even if these guys have huge offer lists and we're not likely to get all of them, you'd hate to be the one to eliminate the possibility by filling up the class with guys lower on your board when there's still a chance with these guys. Part of me thinks Hoke would have an established practice for such a problem, but another part says I don't think he's ever had this problem before at SDSU or Ball State...
With an elite program like ours, you have to take the risk and save several slots for NSD, in the anticipation that you will pick up some top recruits that you are in on but won't decide until then.
Yes, you can get burned (example: uh . . . Michigan, this year) but you need to take the chance. We did not get any of the top recruits we were in on, but it hardly killed us.
Keep in mind that just because a kid waits until NSD or the AA game to declare does not mean that waited until then to make his decision. Some of these kids can be silent commits months in advance who just want to announce at the AA game or on NSD. The coaches are holding a slot, but it's not speculative. The risk is no different than any of your verbal commits changing their mind at the last minute.
I really love Vanderdoes's film and love what he has said about Michigan but after reading that I might have new favorite DE prospect. Mathis and Cravens would be an unreal pull! I have said repeatedly that Su'a Cravens is my favorite player in the country that we have offered, period. He is incredible, one of the best high light films I have ever seen as a running back and safety. I will watch Mathis's tape tomorrow and see what I think but he is a top 100 type player so I'm sure I'll like him. What this staff is doing in incredible...or dare I say, TREMENDOUS.
I completely agree on Cravens. The dude's unreal on tape (from both sides of the ball too!). It's between him and Isaac for the guy I want most in this class. I want Isaac because he is an great player at a position of need, and I want Cravens because the kid can play.
Cravens has the best highlight tape I have seen. His speed to the ball and ability to finish is very impressive. He looks like he is playing at a total different speed than everyone else.
Per Eddie himself, the coaches haven't given him a specific position that they are recruiting him at. He's capable of playing in the middle or out on the end.
Don't know California well, but according to the Googs, Upland borders Rancho Cucamonga, the home of CB target Chris Hawkins. Further Google stalking indicates Mathis and Hawkins play in the same conference and have participated in some camps and junior days together. What does it all mean? Nothing, probably.
If anything it shows that Hoke is still recruiting California hard.
The coaching staff is doing so much work, and I don't have a clue, but they sure seem to know what they are doing. This whole debate on spots is fascinating, but hearing stuff like this post about Joe Mathis and cousin Su'a Cravens is just incredible.
I think your list is right on except that I think we really need to take the 2 more WRs. I hope we get to 23 and take exactly what you listed (with the 2 wrs), although its not that I want a TE but the coaches seem to. I would not take a 4th LB, I would use the 24th spot if available for a(hopefully) stud corner or safety, or even a rb if somehow we could convince Issac and Smith to come aboard.
I'm getting a feeling that this class is looking more like 24-25 right now. I have no clue where it's coming from but at this second but we were all sitting here last year when Hoke said 26-28 and started to freak out. I'm assuming the attrition bug is going to hit us around the end of spring practice and are numbers will be around the 25 mark.
My guess on what is left out there
1 rb (please be Issac)
2 wr (would love Treadwell and either Allen or Ateman)
1 DE ( Mathis would be great but I don't know if the spot will be open that long let alone he choose michigan)
2 DT ( Poggi and Crayton would be an awesome tandom up the middle)
2 LB ( Gedeon levenberry O'Daniel deathmatch... ready go)
1 CB ( Conley out Massilion seems to be a name that comes up often, Willis out of AZ I like a lot. Fuller is the pipe dream here)
1 S ( Su'a Cravens please please please please)
and another flyer in there.. maybe OL, TE, CB or LB (Pocic, Matuska* long list of CB, and the loser of the deathmatch of lb)
1 NT
1 DT
1 WR (slot) and 1 (wide)
1 (and 1) LB
1 SS
1 RB
That's 22.
Then
1 SDE
That looks right. Only exception is that the staff is going hard after another TE so they must feel that the number is higher than 22.
Right, so our number is 25? That's counting on losing another 3 to attrition. If the cap is 24, what do you think is higher priority, another CB, TE, or cutting into the NT/SDE positions? This third linebacker scenario is throwing a monkey wrench into my recruiting numbers. Damn you gold pooper!!
Look at us, with SEC problems.
Our butler does not get along with our yacht captain. Oh dear, whatever shall we do?
Life's good.
My head is spinning thinking of all the possibilities!!
I live in Rancho Cucamonga and yes both cities but up against each other. Mathis and Hawkins are both very legit as they play in a very difficult league. Average school is 3000 to 4800 kids per school. Cravens i still think he ends up at USC to be honest, Hawkins like Michigan alot so we will see. Mathis is getting more looks as the days go by so
as they say BUCKLE UP!
I live in Rancho Cucamonga and yes both cities but up against each other. Mathis and Hawkins are both very legit as they play in a very difficult league. Average school is 3000 to 4800 kids per school. Cravens i still think he ends up at USC to be honest, Hawkins like Michigan alot so we will see. Mathis is getting more looks as the days go by so
as they say BUCKLE UP!
Rancho Cucamonga
Upland
Corona
Riverside
There is a S**T load of talent at almost every school. He knows cause he was getting kids left and right at SD and he wanted the big studs but the SD just was too small. Rancho's whole Defensive Backfield has a ton of D1 offers already. And Centennial in Corona is just LOADED every year. I live here as I said and go watch games weekly around here and there is some serious talent here.
GO BLUE!
but think that a third TE in the same class would be a waste of a scholie, especially with so many other top recruits in the wings (more than we're likely to have room for-a nice problem). Of all the positions on the field, a TE recruit is probably the LEAST likely to have a large and immediate impact. I may be a little jaded because Michigan has so completely neglected the position in recent years, but it's also the case that we're not THAT stripped at TE as it is, especially if Williams pans out there, and with the position switch of Paskorz.
If we're up to 23 slots, then maybe a third TE would make sense, but otherwise, I would much rather see us take another WR, DT, LB, CB or S before a TE.
This is the best of all possible dilemmas.
I think NT is a no-brainer (of course, I could be completely out to lunch). We're thin here with just Ash and Pipkins in 2013, unless we get some major weight on one out of the Wormly/Henry combo. That might be a middling 3* type guy who we haven't offered yet, I don't know. I'm not sure who we are in for this spot other that Michael Hill out of SC, but he has a great offer list and I haven't heard anything about Michigan in his recruitment. Maybe Magnus or Tremendous knows more.
We'll have QWash in 2013 as well, but I agree with you that NT is a must get in this class. I don't think Wormley is a future NT because of his height, but Henry is a kid who will likely redshirt, and if he puts on some beef could get moved to the nose, especially with all of the SDE/DT types he'd be competing with.