I'd probably say "They're Michigan fergodsakes!" But I have a sneaking suspicion that would end up backfiring.
If you were negative recruiting against Michigan today....what would you say?
I hope you, however, like Bolivia.
For an SEC school against any B1G school:
- Big Ten sucks
- more girls
- essssss eeeee seeeee
Helmets got wings
I would say "They don't even have a mascot! One of the oldest programs in college football history and they still haven't figured out how to design a mascot!!" lol
Michigan is in the Big Ten and the conferences recent bowl record leaves a lot to be desired. ESPN also has done a great job of making public opinion think that any conference other than the SEC and USC is inferior and not capable of winning anything. Until the Big Ten has a couple great bowl records along with a National Championship I think many coaches can use that to discredit Michigan and the other schools in the Big Ten.
You must be an under-cover Ohio fan. There's NOTHING negative about Michigan, so let's not waste our time on this here thread.
The analogy between negative recruiting and negative campaign adds is wrong. Negative campaign adds tend to keep independent voters from voting and bolster the confidence of those that hold the same views as the campaign that puts out the ads.
I was using the election analogy to demonstrate the reasons why people "go negative" in any medium rather than the specifics of voting behavior. Despite public backlash against the tactic we see it over and over in a variety of arenas for one simple reason - it's effective in achieving one's objective.
People think that the objective is to sway voters to a side. Thus, they liken negative recruiting to negative campaign ads. I'll agree that most people find negative ads/recruiting objectionable. I just don't think they're comparable with respect to intentions. Which, I thought was your point. I was just using my one post per 6 months( or whatever) to point out that they are not the same, as well as shed light on a common misconception about compaign ads.
I'm honored that you chose MY post to render your bi-annual thoughts in public.
After mostly lurking, I knew you would respond.
Now, on to the purpose of your post:
Our school is easier
We aren't going to punish you
More recent success
All of the aforementioned
Better competition (real or not)
Michigan won't give you anything under the table. No hostesses, no golden handshakes, no free drugs, beer, or tats. And they make you do your own school work, too. They'll kick you out of school if you get arrested for anything worse than DUI, and they won't even let you do more than one of them.
If you come here to blah blah U, you won't have to worry about the police, either. We handle everything "in-house." And even if you get caught, we have the DA in our back pocket. You can come here and do whatever you want on your way to the NFL, or you can go there and have to follow rules.
Thank god we don't give golden handshakes! Coaches always wash their hands
Probably lack of recent success, like how we haven't won the Big Ten since 2004, or how our last National Title was in '97.
Michigan has not won the conferences since 2004, they have only won 1 bcs bowl game in over a decade, and they haven't competed for a national championship in 15 years.
Plus the Big Ten isn't as highly regarded as the SEC. Better teams, better competition, better chance to prepare for the pro game.
If that doesn't work you go for more national night games, better weather, better girls, and $$$.
Almost forgot to add that SEC players have "more chest" according to Les Miles....
I've always wondered if some coaches warn kids about how tough UM's academics are as a way to steer recruits away. I'd imagine a degree from Auburn would be somewhat, ah, easier to attain than one from UM.
I could think of quite a few things I'd say if I was talking to a receiver...
Maybe-- "Why would you want to go to a school that has won 42 conference championships? Why not come here and try to build something?". Or "Do you really want to be blue your whole life?"
Right now it is difficult to put a whole lot of negative spin on playing with Denard or playing for the coaches we have.
worst thing we did was hiring Rich Rod
One thing is the offensive style of play. Our outside receivers haven't put up monster numbers in a few years, and I think other schools have been mentioning this to recruits.
If I were negative recruiting, I would use Michigan's performance in the Sugar Bowl. Any recruit interested in Michigan surely watched the game, and let's face it, while Michigan won, they didn't play all that well. We know injuries played a big role, but recruits probably haven't analyzed it that carefully. With prospective TE's and WR's, I would push the idea that Michigan is a run-first program, doesn't pass that often, and can't pass all that well. Again, we know the full story, but someone pushing a half truth can get a lot of mileage out of these tactics.
I would say the whole NFL approach you suggested probably plays a role, too. They might even use Michigan's high academic standards against us, along the lines of, "Do you want to work your ass off in classes, or work on your football skills and get a higher draft rating."
would work. Yes, the players played like crap. However, the coaches pulled it out. It shows how good these coaches really are. So to point out that we didnt play well but we won is actually a really BIG deal for the coaching staff.
players pulled it out.
The defensive game plan was clearly to stop the run (as it was against Ohio State) - betting on a Beamer game plan to keep the ball out of Denards hands rather than go hyper aerial.
Our offense struggled (and I'd love a UFR or some analysis to understand why), and didn't adjust well (like the MSU game). But the players stuck together and never gave up (and Molk risked his future career playing injured) and came out with a win.
I don't think recruits worry too much about individual games the way fans do. They know that teams have off-days.
Too many students with plus 100 IQ's. You know they'll kick you out if you flunk your classes? Come here. We got the diploma all filled out.
Not sure on the academic angle. When I was in school way back from 78-81 there were a LOT of cake classes that existed seemingly for no other reason than lifting ones GPA. I took a 300 level geology class that was only open to students with departmental approval and had NOTHING but football and basketball players in it other than me and a handful of other "normal" students in it. We spent the year weighing things and reporting the weights on tests. Not kidding here. I think everybody got an A.
Things may have changed since then but I wonder. The only player of note I can think of getting booted recently was Tate and he flat out just stopped going to classes. We may be harder than SEC schools but I dont know that it's THAT much harder for the classes a lot of athletes chose to take if all they want to be is academically eligible.
For the recruits, everything is perception at this point--not reality necessarily.
I don't know if it's you or me, but in the last couple of months, most of your posts have started making sense...
Let's stop pretending academics plays much of a role in football recruiting. Take a look at the majors of the football players. A whole bunch of "general studies" and "kinesiology" majors.
People also seem to think that somehow, going to an SEC school will somehow make it harder for a player to get a job after graduation. This is complete nonsense. A former football player in Alabama, even with an Auburn degree, will have no trouble finding a job assuming they're even mildly compentent. Once you get your first job, nobody really cares where you went to school. They only care if you can do the job.
I suspect academics is very low on a recruits priorities.
0. (for maybe 5% of recruits) Money
2. Opportunity to play
2. NFL prospects
4. Girls (this is probably too low)
Why thank you.
Tate would not have gotten thrown out at Ohio State. Someone would have covered for him while he was avoiding classes.
It's not that we have some easy classes recruits can take, it's that at some other schools they don't have to take classes at all - easy or hard.
Tell that to Duron Carter.
You would have to hit on several things, including perhaps:
- the recent lack of high NFL draft picks (which is a developmental issue that would probably ring large in the minds of recruits dead set on going pro at some point).
- relative lack of recent major titles (overall historic performance and bowl record notwithstanding, it's been 15 years since a national title, and almost ten since we won the B1G)
- the recent perception of the B1G as a middling conference (I imagine that the ones that are set on the pros might want to be tested against the perceived "best")
- climate (this might matter to some people - we are the 4th cloudiest state and fall can be bloody damp and winter can be bloody cold)
- the standards (which are high for obvious reasons, academically and otherwise, but you could probably spin that into "You won't be able to commit fully to you game", which again, might sway a few people)
This is not exhaustive, of course, but it is an intriguing introspection.
Definitely agree with all of this....We haven't won a big ten title/national championship in awhile. Also, academics really aren't a concern in my opinion for some of the highly ranked players in the country because most think they will make the NFL someday so they would rather not have to worry about the burdens of having a tough academic career while playing football. I just think that could lead to a lot of stress for some 18-22 year old kids. I could be wrong but since I am 21 I couldn't imagine going to one of the top universities in the country while playing football. It would make life extremely difficult. Weather could be a big thing for recruits from southern states/states out west that people are recruiting, but since a lot of the Midwest kids are used to playing in a colder climate this may not be as big of an issue as dealing with kids from the south. Obviously, some Midwest kids would like to play in warmer climates but they would also have to be further away from home which may be tough for some of these kids to deal with.
You wrote: "... recent lack of high NFL draft picks (which is a developmental issue that would probably ring large in the minds of recruits dead set on going pro at some point) ..."
How do you explain Brandon Graham and Jonas Mouton?
Yes, I'm cherry picking there, but I'd say the lack of recent NFL draft picks (Mallet excepted) has more to do with a *lack* of talent rather than talent development. The '05 to '07 classes, in retrospect, look pretty weak. What's frightening is that they may end up looking great compared to the '09 to '11 range.
The University of Michigan has more active players in the NFL than any other school.
Let me repeat that: The University of Michigan has more active players in the NFL than any other school. That is amazing.
You can recruit negatively against Michigan NFL-wise for the last couple years only. Recruits are young and memories are short, but the last couple of years can be easily overcome.
...per ESPN's listings - http://espn.go.com/nfl/college/_/letter/m
That is pretty awesome to basically have half a team in the NFL of just your former players. Listed right below them is MSU with 19. On the same listing, however, Ohio (that Ohio) has 46.
To be honest, when I wrote my list, I was rather thinking of it in terms of what I would say if the conversation were taking place today. You're right, of course, in a few years, the slight decline might be all but forgotten and it wouldn't be an argument someone could use.
NOTE: If anyone is interested, Shippensburg and Slippery Rock have made contributions to the NFL, with 2 and 1 listed resepctively.
Where are you getting that? Everything I find on Google has Michigan at around #6 (behind Texas, LSU, Miami, USC and OSU).
I would say their cheap when it comes to paying for good coaches,and lack of success against Ohio.
Why would a recruit care how much the head coach is making? Besides, Mattison and Borges aren't exactly underpaid.
"Unlike us they UNDER sign their recruiting classes, fergodssake"
The point is we have to beat Urban and company in November.
ya like cars and tattoos?
That's what you chose to say for your first comment? Interesting. I guess it can only improve from here. Anyways, awesome name and welcome to the board as a contributing member.
guy he is replying to has the screen name "ohioplayer34." It was pretty funny.
They'll be warned in some subtle or not-so-subtle fashion that if they go to Michigan they will have to actually go to school, and won't be getting the cars, tatoos etc. Stamford's in the same position (though with better weather).
I guess if you like salt water better than fresh you could make the weather arguement but other than that.....
oops...got me before i caould fix it - I live in CT so cut me some slack :)
I was just teasing. Actually at first i thought you wrote "samford" and I have a buddy of mine whose daughter attends there. So i got that snarky response all cued up before i realized I had misread your mistype!
got me again before I could fix "caould"...rough morning so far...I think I'm too stressed thinking about our Giants tomorrow
My best friend is from Long Island and is HUGE Giants fan. I'm not telling him (yet) but i'm laying the 2.5 and taking Brady/Pats. I read an article today that said money is dropping 2-1 on the Giants and the points and usually when that happens, go the other way!
Either way I'm jelous you have a team in the game. I'm from Detroit (Lions fan) and have lived in Cleveland for the past 20+ years and now have Browns seasons tickets. So I have a strong rooting interest in two of the last teams to never make the big game!
My brother-in-law and his three sons are rabid Browns fans. Without a doubt the Browns are the most painfully frustrating team in the NFL. The Lions have actually been worse - with the Browns it's the near misses deep in the playoffs that kill you. From my time at UM the Lions are my second favorite team - hopefully it happens soon.
Can't argue with your logic - it is basically NY fans taking the Giants vs. nuetral fans taking Brady. Actual New England fans are not enough to sway it. I think the Giants are going to win but not easily, especially if they stay on their no-turnover run. Putting aside the much discussed pass rush advantage, I think the improvement of Eli may be the deciding factor. He has been razor sharp over the last 6 weeks.
Brady or Mannigham
"Son, why would you want to go to the school with the winningest program in college football? 11 National Championships? 3 Heisman winners? Great traditions that date back many years?"
After second thought, I have no idea how some of the coaches convince these kids not to go to Michigan. Man I love this school!
2) Our degrees are very comparable....large state school with big alumni network. Unless you're from Michigan, you probably wouldn't know the difference. Also, Michigan really sets itself apart in its grad programs...the undergrad is maybe top 30, to where if some SEC / Big 10 school is 40-60, I dont think a kid going into undergrad is really going to give a crap about the Michigan academic advantage...especially when most of that advantage will never be realized since Im not sure the last time a big time football recruit pulled a 170 on the LSAT or 30+ on the MCAT. Also, kids get jobs based on graduating at big time college football programs. Trust me, the football players going to Alabama, Texas, Florida, etc. that are graduating with a moderately human GPA are getting hooked up with jobs in the same way that Michigan players do.
3) Brady Hoke is all about the seniors....sooooo if you want to play early, you better beat senior X out by a huge margin. (This isn't necessarily true, but when you hear him on TV talking about the seniors, then another coach throws a half truth in there, it could stick: SEE Republican primary).
Parking situation, girls are smart, weather, and for Jordan Diamond: See Newton, Cam.
IF you can beleive the rumors from OSU fans, if Diamond was looking for extra incentive then Auburn is the finalist that would make me suspect the rumor more.
you have to go to class.
"They tell their players to think only of brunettes. Here, when the going gets tough, you are free to picture redheads/blondes/etc."
down to it. That's why Michigan really doesn't want to depend on getting last-minute kids to fill up our recruiting class. We're always going to do poorly trying to play this game because of the negative recruiting we're up against. Most of the players who are waiting to the last minute to sign are undecided (and possibly indecisive) and can easiliy be swayed by some slimy recruiter who waves some kind of inducement in front of them or makes pie-in-the-sky promises. Homey (Michigan) don't play that game! That's why we're going to lose out in most of these Jordan Diamond-like recruiting battles. He seems like one of those players where the more he looked around, the more undecided he became - not less.
Bingo - all the hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth over Hoke's "inability to close" at the end was a bunch of crap, because the coaches absolutely did close in that we lost no one at the end...
In my mind, this NSD rocked, because it was low stress, with no surprises, and no desperate hoping to get a stud or two while competing against the cheaters in the SEC...
There's still a good chance of one more, which will be nice, but beyond expectations at this time. Hoke's method works in securing low-drama, high-quality players early on in the process and then keeping them. I don't expect him to be able to compete late in the process until he has been in place longer and has some championships and NFL starters to his credit.
Coach prestige: Brady Hoke hasn't proven he can do anything at Michigan with his own recruits and say he's just benefitting from RR's players. The same goes at SDSU. He was only there for 2 years and didn't prove he could build a program. He also hasn't done anything on a national scale or proven he can sustain success.
Coaching longevity: Coach Mattison is 62 and will slow down soon.
What would I say?
"RichRod was the coach there very recently. In his 3 1/2 recruiting classes he took midgets at every position. You'll have mostly midgets on the field and the scout team won't have any players of normal size. You'd be better off at MSU or Wisconsin."
1. Michigan is so stacked that you'll never get any playing time.
2. Ann Arbor is too liberal for you.
Don't come here unless you want to compete against the best every day in practice.
I only want the kids smart enough to not buy into the negative as a part of my team!
If you walk over the Washtenaw overpass carrying new textbooks, there's a chance you'll get caught in a massive wind gust and all your books will fly out of your hands and onto busy Washtenaw below. (I saw this happen once after a person had just gotten a bunch of textbooks at Ulrich's).
Other than that, smooth sailing. Ann Arbor is awesome.
If I'm Saban probably the weather stinks, classes are harder, and I've won 3 national titles since they have won one.
Two points to address here. First of all Mgrowold, I disagree that there are only the 2 sales approaches you stated. I've been a successful entrepreneur for years and in my experience, the most effective method of "sales" (if you're looking for longterm relationships) is to absolutely acknowledge your competition and to do so positively. I objectively lay out what I do well and not so well and do the same regarding my competition. (trust be known, you can position things as positives for your competition that actually drive the prospect to you. See answer to your question below). You get the clients you should have and more importantly, KEEP THEM, and the ones you shouldn't have don't come to you. That's a positive too since I don't go to the up-front costs without reaping the longterm benefits. Most importantly, when your clients are a good fit, it's just more fun.
Ok, a sarcastic answer to your question is I'd tell recruits "if you'd rather play AGAINST the best rather than FOR the best, come to my school. We play Michigan every year and you'll never get a better chance to measure yourself against the best".
You are 100% correct. Let me restate...."while there are many different methods of conducting a successful sales call there are two widely known schools of thought...."
I stand humbly corrected. (eyes looking down at shoes)
Your sales approach only works if indeed your product/service is better unless you really spin the facts. I agree that for long-term relationships (and, keeping clients is a lot less expensive than getting new ones...) your method is sound. But if they start producing/providing a lot better product/service - you might be in trouble as loyalty only takes you so far.
It's why I'm an entrepreneur rather than a salesman. A salesman is generally locked into the product/product line he/she represents. In my environment, I keep a given product/service at a competitive advantage as long as possible (at some point someone always builds a better mouse trap or penetration leads to declining new sales) then discontinue offering to new clients once it isn't. It's why I always have an ever evolving product/service line going. Because product cycles move so fast today, I find it makes a whole lot more sense to establish strong macro client relationships and bring appropriate products rather than represent a product and always looking for new clients the way the majority does. Anyway, best of luck to you!
You like Michigan? What are they paying you?.......Nothing???!!!??? You don't want to play for an ameteur team, do you?
Strangely enough, I don't remember us playing Appalachian State or Toledo.
Rest of the coaching staff is a bunch of old white guys
And Fred Jackson, who thinks this list is tremendous!
Our coaching staffs will need a makeover
Actually, if I were negative recruiting an RB, I'd mention Fred Jackson. Something along the lines of:
"Prospect, according to Fred Jackson, every running back he's coached over the past three years has had the strength of Jim Brown, the speed of Chris Johnson, and the toughness of Herschel Walker. Yet despite that talent, the team's leading rusher has been the quarterback. So is he lying, or is he just a godawful coach?"
And Jerry Montgomery, who is definitely neither old nor white.
Is from incompetent. He pretty much aced his most important decision on the job.
You know Brandon has to be doing a pretty good job as our athletic director when the case against him boils down to "too much rock music" and "road uniforms aren't pretty enough."
I have coached in the SEC. I know how to beat Alabama and LSU. I have coached teams to win 2 BCS championships. Yes Mattison was there with me, but he us old a may retire before you graduate
Mattisons time in Michigan might be an issue
A lot of these comments are from the viewpoint of a school outside our conference, but what would other B1G schools say about us?
The lack of recent success, while true, is almost more of a positive aspect than negative. There's a reason we brought in a new staff, and they've done a tremendous job thus far.
Nothing comes to mind right away that another B1G coach could negatively and truthfully say about us. Perhaps they could mention Mattison's age as a concern. That's a worry of mine, but I doubt it would really sway a recruit away from us.
I wouldn't say the S&C program is a joke - Barwis coached most of those guys for 3+ years, and they have a rapport with him. My guess is that in 3-4 years, we'll see kids coming back to work with Wellman.
B1G coaches have a much harder time recruiting negatively against us. This is obviously evidenced by our tremendous success recruiting against the rest of the B1G. They have the same negatives we do - weather, the lack of B1G success nationally, un-glamorous midwest location - plus more negatives of their own.
The exception to this is Ohio State. Over the last decade or so, they have successfully positioned themselves as an "SEC North" school. They went the opposite direction of Notre Dame which emphasized academics and integrity, and instead made it clear to recruits that anything goes, someone will cover for you.
Bringing in Urban Meyer just fuels this even more. Make no mistake, this has been extremely effective for them. If you are a 4/5 * recruit who's plans are to play in the NFL in a few years, it can very attractive to go to a place where you can just hang out and run wild through town when you are not playing football. Who needs the extra burden of classes and lots of rules?
We have to hope that the spotlight on them from the NCAA infractions, and the instant hostility Urban Meyer has created among B1G coaches will constrain thier SEC-ness somewhat.
"Don't know if you noticed, but there's goat blood all over their locker room from the last coach. It's pretty gross. You don't want any part of that."
Their obesity is an indirect turnoff for some recruits. It's like a job interview. All other things being EQUAL, an employer chooses the well-groomed, fit candidate over the 350 pound, sloppy one.
I also think that a lot of blue chip skill position players like to have their egos stroked a little, which I don't think our staff does to the degree of others. I think their shtick works better with lineman (which recent events unfortunately don't corroborate). Also, being overly critical, it is possible that some players (maybe more of skill positions) have more confidence in someone who is more slim and fit. If u were a stud WR and saw some overweight coach vs a fit or simply not morbidly obese one, who would give u more confidence all otter things being equal? Parents' opinions are probably subconsciously affected as well. I know this post will draw some harsh responses, but keep in mind I'm talking about potential negatives that may affect a recruits' decision process when he is torn between two schools.
1. See Charlie Weis. Couldn't coach, but could recruit like a monster. He was fat.
2. Hoke just put together a top 5-6 class. All while being fat.
As to skill players, I think that the issue holding us back is probably Denard and maybe devin. It is not entirely rational, as Denard is graduating this year and Devin has a strong arm, but for a WR prospect, our passing attack is still an unknown. If I were a top WR I am not sure i would want to take the risk of going to Michigan until we show that we will have a consistent passing attack. These kids are making decisions partly to get to the NFL and a team's recent history of utilizing their position has to factor in.
Let's be clear about this. Brady Hoke is NOT "morbidly obese" yeah he's a bit overweight but Charlie Weis he is not. Al Borges on the other hand is almost there.
U are correct in that the morbidly obese reference was for Borges, not Hoke, although I didn't explicitly say that.
And again, I was just suggesting that being overweight might factor in the decision process if recruits are torn between two schools. Imagine Borges walking into your house if u were a recruit and tell me his weight doesnt leave a negative impression on some level?
Now that's just silly, i'm not sure a recruit looks at Hoke and thinks "Hmm He's fat, I'm not going there." Just Silly
All other things being equal... More than once.
Do you know of a time in college football recruiting where this actually seemed to be an issue?
I'd buy that if not for the fact that it's not the other coaches at schools all hit the gym 3 hours a day and look jacked. I mean, I saw a list of the top recruiters in college and most of them look, um, well-fed. And while guys like Saban and Meyer look like they work out a bit, but Hoke doesn't look like a Mangino/Weiss; he's just husky.
Their obesity is an indirect turnoff for some recruits. It's like a job interview. All other things being EQUAL, an employer chooses the well-groomed, fit candidate over the 350 pound, sloppy one.
I would not assume that 17-year-olds' thought processes are identical to those of grown adults working in human resources.
I would say "hey look at this thread on mgoblog http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/if-you-were-negative-recruiting-against-michigan-todaywhat-would-you-say"
Score: -1 (Recursive)
They already have it all. They are the winningest program of all-time. Why not come here and be a part of building something.
"Ann Arbor gets cold in the winter, and you'll freeze your butt off." That's about it, and it only works for warm-weather schools, not our Big Ten competition.
Good that Meyer can't use that
Nice try Urban. I'm not helping your recruiting.
Urban got owned
Madonna s daughter will go there too
There isn't a large population of good looking girls at UofM, and most are lesbians. 80% of the male population are guy's who are 5' 7'' or shorter and they like soccer. They also have a inferrior complex because they are small and are geeks. They spend their friday nights playing video games instead of doing keg stands and chasing tail. A large percentage of the students will think they are better than you because their parents are wealthy, but the only reason that they got accepted in the first place was because their parents are alums. Brady Hoke will require you to attend class. Attending class sucks.
But it wouldn't be true. Sure the girls aren't as hot as probably any sec school. But you absolutely cannot look at the top end sororities here and say there aren't many hot girls.
Come on Chizik, why you gotta lie like that after getting Diamond?
Thar be moose in der state. Moose can be dangerous.
Moose in Michigan.. Lol
because this year and beyond will have more nfl players than the rich rod days
I would say "DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH IT FRICKIN SNOWS THERE!!!"
I think it's about to change with the globose warming going on
The guy from your high school that went there last year got eaten by polar bears.
If I'm an academically-rigorous school like NW, ND, Stanford, etc., I'd say:
- Highlight academic rankings.
- Talk about options after football.
- Point out athletic successes along with strong classrooms.
If I'm another Big 10 team:
- Coaching transition.
- Same conference, so still benefits of competition.
- Show "them" if they were slow to recruit/felt disrespected.
- "Arrogant" fanbase would spit you out.
- Proximity to home.
- National success.
- NFL success.
- Why play with the junior leagues where everyone is slow.
Not saying any of these points are true, but those would be my arguments.
you'll never play.
I like the recruits we already have in the 2012 class. Sure it would have been nice to add a few more OL, but if they don't want to play for Michigan, then best of luck to them elsewhere.