Hello: Scott Sypniewski (long snapper)
According to Nesbitt. Long snapper from Illinois in the 2013 class. Says full scholarship.
Link:Hello — RT @TheChrisRubio: Long time Rubio Long Snapper Scott Sypniewski (IL, '13) has committed on full scholarship to #Michigan!
With the spots that are left, what now? A spot is reserved for LT. Which of the following, get the last spot or spots?
CB Leon McQuay
WR Alvin Bailey
RB Derrick Green
DE Joe Mathis
We now currently sit at 86 players for 2013. We are still looking to take 3 or 4 guys. That would put us at 89 or 90.
When looking at the breakdown, I don't see a single position besides maybe LB where we could not renew a fifth year senior. Honestly, I think attrition of 4 or 5 will be pretty high especially with family atmosphere Hoke has instilled.
I just hope we don't get negged for "oversigning" and have 87 or 88 players when next fall rolls around.
LT... hmmm... Laremy Tunsil ?!!!!
/s
We're in on far too many quality skill players of actual need to have spent this scholarship this way. If it were December, I could see it, but not now. It's June, for God's sake. Indiana doesn't even have a commit. There's plenty of time for long snappers.
It's odd to all of us, but Hoke has pulled in more 4-star guys than the rest of the board combined and is privy to team info that none of us are, so to the extent that he's earned our trust, I'm gonna trust that he knows what's best for the team. It's not like he was 'Damnit! I was hoping that guy wouldn't accept the offer!', right?
The MGoMasses have lauded Hoke for his choice of Asst. Coaches, his first recruiting class, his first season as Coach and thus far, a stellar 2013 class. Why should we now doubt a scholarship to a position of little depth, great importance and as defined by Hoke, a position of scholarship value? I for one, do not.
I don't want to knock the kid, but was giving him a full scholarship entirely necessary? Why not give him a preferred walk-on?
The way I see this now, it just gives us one less spot to take a Laquon Treadwell, or a Leon McQuay III. In the end, I can't complain too much about this class, and the coaches know a lot more about what they're doing than I do. But in my limited knowledge of recruiting, giving this kid anything other than a preferred walk-on position was a mistake.
is listed twice on Michigans commits for Rivals
It's not like they offered Tard McCoy. I'm pretty sure he would flip with the only other listed offer from Bethune-Cook. The internet would asplode!
/s
and yes, I love the name: Tard McCoy. Watch out Turd, this kid may replace you on the all-name team.
I just don't understand why a preferred walk-on couldnt do this job.
Perhaps the coaches feel that a .69 second snap that appears to be consistently accurate may provide a special teams advantage for punts and field goals. After all, it's got to be pretty difficult to block a kick if it's snapped and kicked before the Defense can take 3 steps.
walk-on < .75 D2 or D1 schollie < .69 Hoke schollie to UM.
It's also going to give the return man more time on every single punt, which doesn't seem like a good trade-off given that so few punts are blocked as it is. In terms of total field position, an ultra-quick long-snapper would likely be a negative imo.
the sooner the linemen can release on a punt. The most damage I've seen on punts results from broken lane assignments or the punter outkicking coverage; never seen a snap too quick that results in a negative for the coverage team (at least not in my 44 years of watching and 5 yrs of PT.) And I really don't see any downside on PATs and FGs. Just my opinion.
So the lineman and return men both get an extra .16 seconds. I don't like that trade.
Apparently so does Brady Hoke.
Another visit to the boards, another confirmation that the idiocracy is still in full force. I am positive that Hoke knows 100x more than all of you about the particulars of college football in this day and age, and about 1000x more than you all about the particulars of the Michigan football program in this day and age. Yet I visit here only to find that most everyone thinks they know more than Hoke and company. All the while passively dissing our newest wolverine, a high school kid. I'm sure Brian would approve. And I'm sure Hoke would be ashamed.
Well, I am ashamed of your sanctimonious ass.
You can sit there and say Hoke knows more about football, and there very well may be info that we are not yet aware of, but if not, there is absolutely no way to justify this move.
Using one of our few remaining schollies on a snapper does seem perplexing on the surface. So, perhaps there are less easily seen motives for this choice. eg if a coach--like any other "boss"-- tends to choose subordinates with characteristics similar to his own, then I would expect Hoke to choose someone with a lot of emotional intelligence. So, look again at the recruiting guru's snappy description of this snapper:
Tremendous personality. Does a great job of improving every single time. Great worker and will be a great teammate to those around him.
Then, ask yourself: if you were a 2014 recruit, what factors might motivate you to join UM? Certainly the quantity of 5* athletes could be a positive, given that it makes team success more likely. Yet, more recruits seemingly give "family atmosphere" or "fitting in" or as a reason for their school choices.Thus, in college--more so than in pro sports where "recruits" are merely drafted--the social aspect of the team may be more important.
Also, when one chooses high character kids, it is less likely that others--including the sometimes entitled 5* athletes--will follow their peers and get into trouble. What good is a 5* if he gets kicked off the team?
Likewise, what good is a 5* if he gets caught by the NCAA for cheating? Would you even want the #1 recruit in the nation, if you knew he would turn into Terrelle Pryor? Maybe, maybe not. But, clearly, the quality of a kids character can help reflect the public image of the team.
Finally, given the fallibility of recruiting rankings, ask yourself: are such rankings the sole--or even the major determinant of team success? If not, then, considering the kid's personality--and not skills alone---may do something that the recruit's rankings do not--ie improve team spirit. Thus, while the quality of the players is certainly important, the quality of the men is too. So, maybe Brady Hoke asked himself: What is most important to team success? And maybe he heard Bo's voice say: "The team!The team! The team!".