He's like 'Shit... they are going to rock next year! I already put my salary down on MSU beating the spread!'
I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
He's like 'Shit... they are going to rock next year! I already put my salary down on MSU beating the spread!'
I didn't see that, but I did see Mark May say, "The new face of college football is Ryan Mallett at Arkansas." More like the new FACIAL!! /malletted
If Pryor was ANYWHERE but Ohio State, May would be singing a different tune.
And by gang I mean neg.
but i really hope that the Michigan brass is smart and keeps him for one more year regardless of what their record is this upcoming season. In 2011 the roster will be loaded with juniors, rs sophomores and freshman, all with experience in Rich Rods system. We could be really dangerous in 2011 if they let him stick around.
Note: Im sure this had been said before, so sorry if I missed it.
EVeryone keeps saying that this team will be dangerous next year. However, I am convinced this team will be dangrous this year (2110) I don't forsee any reason why this team can't be very competitive and win with the caliber of players we already have. RR has now had 2 1/2 recruiting classes, that is 1 1/2 of his players under his direction with his style of player. I really am being very optimistic and am saying this team is going to surprise alot of folks this year.
Hell we should have beaten MSU, after a losey 3 quarters of play. Should have beaten Iowa on the road. Had Illinois on the ropes till we were unable to punch it in on 4 tries from the 1 yard line. Had Purdue till the second half blunders. As for OSU if I recall correctly we should have won that game as well, if not for all the turnovers we did win that game.
The way I see 2110 is the year for a Big Ten Title. The road will be a bit tougher playing on the road at ND, PSU, and OSU but if this team continues to get better, as I am sure it will, this team will be very very competitive this year.
So like, in 100 years?
why is this in the neg? its the truth.
UM could pull 20 5-star recruits, but unless we win, it means absolutely nothing.
You're so right. Florida, USC, Texas, and Oklahoma sure have had a hard time winning the last five years.
He fears the potential dreadlocks bring the the winged helmets.
I think he is obligated to not like our recruiting class just because so many are from the state below us(the one that smells bad and doesn't seem to have dental insurance) in an effort to make those kids look like talents below OSUcks. It shouldn't bother anyone if he isn't thrilled, he has said dumb things about us before and his school did get torched today with the recruiting.
Do you mean Charles Woodson or Desmond Howard?
Don't insinuate that the kids that just committed to play for your favorite school don't understand personal hygiene.
Herbie knows that "his" coach is a dinosaur, and that RR represents the chance of the pendulum swinging back toward UM. He also remembers being part of OSU's 2-10-1 "streak" against UM and doesn't want to see it happen again.
Whatever Herbie's personal views, JT showed me something late in the season. When it became clear that TP wasn't making the grade, the coaches clearly made adjustments. Sign of a good coaching staff. The Buckeyes also represented themselves and the B10+1 very well in the Rose Bowl. I've got no issues with JT, given the heat (deserved) that he was taking at the start of the year.
To be honest, he didn't seem that sure of his supposed stance, it may have simply been the ESPN's view. ESPN classified Michigan as a signing day "loser" but Herbstreet spent almost the entire time talking about how he doesn't put much stock in stars and how Rich Rod didn't necessarily pull great recruiting classes at WVU but instead turned guys like Slaton into stars.
Also, classifying Michigan a signing day loser seems odd since it's the same day they signed ESPN's 12th ranked overall player.
This is a good point. The whole time, he sounded pretty reluctant about what he was saying. I figured either he was going along w/ the official ESPN narrative, or else he was just trying to cover up the fact that OSU was actually the biggest signing day loser (not the worst class overall, but they whiffed on a lot of guys they thought they were in the running for).
I was befuddled by ESPN. Most recruiting analysts had UM ranked fairly well coming into NSD, and though they lost one guy (albeit a good one) they picked up one they didn't expect. One guy does not a class make, (unless that "one" is Charles Woodson).
herbie has been one of the most objective CFB personalities in the MSM over the past 5 years. yeah, he has his moments (MILES TO MICHIGAN!), but id say 95% of the time, he doesnt let his allegiance to his alma mater get in the way of his journalistic integrity.
so unless there's some kind of hard evidence *cough* link! *cough*, don't jump to hang the man.
jesus, i never thought i'd see the day when i was defending herbie.
He did say that on ESPN, since I was watching. His "problem" is the lack of 5*s in the class.
on ESPN they have 0 5* players, so Herbie can get bent.
Their classes are basically the same, Michigan's bein' a tad better bein' their depth and the fact that while each team has one 5 STAR, via Scout, I'll take a QB over an OL, but's that's just me. After that, the rankings and positions all but wash each out out, so I can't wait to see what Kirk says about the buckeye class. I am sure he'll love it though.
Heh! Sweet, sweet memories.
Never gets old
1. This is just not posted enough.
2. I'm still not sold that was a penalty.
Based on recruiting rankings, there were anywhere between 10 and 20 recruiting classes better than ours, and this is quite possibly the worst class for Michigan since star rankings came out.
So when a college football analyst is asked how a class stacks up both against its peers and its traditional recruiting prowess, there's some room to make an argument that the class isn't as strong as a lot of people on here seem to think.
Michigan fans may find ways to really like this class, and they may do so for good reason. However, all the high school talent evaluators and recruiting services agree with Herbstreit. Talent wise, this class is clearly below average for Michigan. If it weren't for the unusually large size of the class, Michigan would probably be ranked even lower.
I fall somewhere in between--I'm okay with the class, but I wouldn't say I'm especially excited about it.
You make a fair argument, but there are some factors I think you've missed. Factor #1 - we have won 8 games in the past two years combined, and yet our recruiting class is still in the top 15 in the country. The other teams who are near us in the rankings are all teams who've been contending for conference championships, etc. Also, this recruiting class in very needs-oriented. As in we needed defensive help, esp. in the secondary, and we went out and got it. We need tough, dual-threat QBs to run the RichRod system, and we got the best in the class. We need someone to replace the Space Emperor, and ... ok, yeah, I'm reaching on that one. But anyhow, looking at the big picture & all, I like this class quite a lot.
Both major recruiting services have this ranked as the 2nd best class in the Big Ten (UM's peer group) and ahead of the team that just won the conference championship and the Rose Bowl. On signing day, UM hauled in a highly touted recruit (one of only two they were in the running for) and avoided any decommits. OSU on the other hand whiffed on a number of high profile guys, many of whom they were believed to be the team to beat for. Calling Michigan a "signing day loser" makes absolutely zero sense.
I don't mean the Big 10. Indiana is not our peer. Our peers are other nationally renowned football programs: Oklahoma, Florida State, Georgia, LSU, Texas, Alabama, Penn State, OSU, Notre Dame, etc.
And I don't think when he says "signing day loser" he means, like, today, and only today. I think he means the class that was signed on signing day. He would probably call ND and OSU's classes "losers" as well.
There are a lot of valid reasons why this year's class is composed as it is. It doesn't mean RR can't recruit, it doesn't mean we're headed for down years, it doesn't mean these guys won't be key parts of conference-winning teams in the future.
But looking at (mostly) objective evaluations of our talent, most of the teams we see ourselves as competing against had more highly regarded classes.
I am pretty sure all those teams you listed have won a major bowl game in the past decade. While that is the group we want/deserve to be in, it isn't one we've been a member of for quite some time. I think we'll get their soon, but I think it is understandable to see those teams ahead of us when current recruits haven't seen us win a meaningful, nationally relevant game since they were 8 years old.
The fact that with our recent track record we have the #2 class in our conference (ahead of two teams that just won BCS bowl games) and one ranked anywhere from 12th to 20th nationally says a hell of a lot about the appeal this university has and the ability of the current coaches to recruit.
A team coming off back to back losing seasons that pulls in a top-20 or better class along with one of the biggest surprise commitments of signing day doesn't deserve to be called a "signing day loser" by any stretch of the imagination.
Capital One doesn't equal a BCS game, but beating Florida in Florida was a pretty "nationally relevant game", IME.
But the fact that beating a team that went 5-3 in the SEC in the Capital One Bowl is seen as a highlight of the decade says a whole lot. West Virginia, Boise State, and Utah have all won two BCS bowl games since the last time Michigan won one.
Smacking down Florida/Tebow/Meyer that day pretty much made my season, especially coming after the App State debacle.
Just ask Urban Meyer how big he thought it was at the time. As I recall "distraught" would be a considerable understatement
Dude take it easy, I expressed in my message that I don't take offense if Herbstreit was negative on the class... I just want to know what he said
IMO, Class rankings are stupid. It's just a stupid ploy to get people to Click a link (like arguing about which conference is better).
I agree that compared to other schools we did not always get the highest rated players, but the coaches seemed to get the guys THEY WANTED and not seconds, and guys who wanted to come to Michigan (note how many early commits there were). I'd love to see a rankings that analyzed classes based on need. What we got in 2010 was safties and corners, some LBs and a badass spread qb (who was the best at his position, but IIRC somehow outside espn's top 150). actually, there were a lot of 2010 Michigan guys who were highly ranked for their positions, but not in that top150. There's not the great 5 star OL, there's no giant DT, but I think that RR really hit the nail on the head with this class and got a bunch of guys we need to win. Doesn't really fucking matter what the recruits were rated as long as we get better, and I'll bet no one who reads mgoblog regularly doesn't believe that this class won't make us better.
If I were RR, I'd gather every single critical column and comment and posting I could find, blow them up to poster size, and hang 'em on the walls of the weight room.
The 5-stars are what get all the attention on NSD so he has to make that point. Overall I like Herby and think he is pretty smart and objective. I am less enamored with bringing in a few 5-stars than I used to be - would rather see a balanced group of good players who work hard and are coachable. I think that is what RR is going for, and he is succeeding. Looking forward to September - could be a very good fall.
Pretty sure the crux of Herbie's argument was something like he expected Rodriguez to be pulling in better recruits by his third season at Michigan given the combination of the coach's previous successes and Michigan's tradition in recruiting well.
That said, pulling this class after a combined 8 wins in the last two years including 1-5 against our rivals is a good thing imo. I maintain if RichRod is given 2 more years we will be a perennial powerhouse. I just hope he wins enough this year to stay on. I like the guy.
This is an unbelievably good class given what you just said.
Some three and four stars are going to contribute, some aren't -- it's up to the coaches to figure out which are which before recruiting them. Rodriguez doesn't have to be a lot better than the next coach at these evaluations, just enough to tip the balance. One or two savvy choices (either way) and everything changes.
While fun to follow, I don't put alot of stock in the ratings, in fact I find it terribly confusing on how they rank these classes. Ex. Texas A&m, South Carolina and Clemson are all ranked higher than Michigan's class yet they both have less 5,4 and 3 stars. So why the difference. On top of that the star ratings are arbitrary and inconsistent from recruiting site to recruiting site. I actually find it kinda comical while at the same time lamenting how I am sucked into the whole process. No matter what happened today the bottom line is that a coaching staff will have to develop them into a team and whoever does that best wins. (as log as too many don't get hurt)
Based on Michigan’s historical status as one of the major powers in the country, this was not a great class. Given the overhang of 3-9 followed by 5-7, it is not bad at all.
Of course, that’s assuming that two straight losing seasons have taken Michigan out of the running for certain elite recruits. It certainly makes sense, but Rodriguez has insisted that it is not the case.
of ESPN ironically listed Georgia, Miami, and OHIO STATE as losers with solid but disappointing classes. Pretty funny.
Someone a few months ago (during the FB season) did an analysis of Carr's final recruiting classes and how the key players (including all those 5- and 4-stars) were prosecuting their careers at Michigan. If I recall correctly, it was a pathetic picture. A large majority of those "highly recruited" players turned out to be busts.
Net-net: I put very little stock in "recruiting analysts".
Herbie never said anything about his own feeling about specific players, what they bring to UM, or why they are rated where they are. I have never heard him talk about high school players or recruiting, so it seemed pointless to have him talking on signing day. All he did was reference the high number of 3 stars and lack of 5 stars, and provided no sort of logical thought of his own into the criticism. It was just a great time for him to take a shot at UM because all he sees are 3 stars and immediately thinks we have a bad class. Most others at ESPN have been very high on UM, so this seems to make Herbie's comments even more irrelevant.
I saw what Herbstreit said and I thought it was a low blow. He had to pick a winner and a loser and of all the teams he could have picked for loser it had to be Michigan. Then he backtracked and talked about how RR has had success with lower starred recruits in the past. I like his commentary sometimes but that was just douche-bagesque.