Jonathan Hankins
November 29th, 2009 at 11:59 PM ^
Why didn't he have one before? And what is your source?
November 30th, 2009 at 12:00 AM ^
What do you think TOB? Looks like maybe Grimes, Murphy, and Hankins to round out defensive recruiting. Then maybe a swap of Kenny Shaw for DJ Williamson?
November 30th, 2009 at 8:06 AM ^
We need Furman. Really, really badly. And I think this looks like a reach as well since we never offered, nor did MSU which is troubling. But nevertheless, unfortunately the defensive needs are such that we need to reach, so ok.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:00 AM ^
I never thought he'd get offered after he failed to impress the coaches during camp. Did he improve his conditioning or are we looking to get any DT at this point?
November 30th, 2009 at 12:00 AM ^
This may mean Big Tex is staying with Arkansas. I like the offer. We need some size and he definitely has it.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:05 AM ^
I still hope we land Big Tex.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:57 AM ^
a good senior year and we haven't landed enough DTs at this point, so I think its both.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:02 AM ^
do you think it might be to late? i know he said that growing up he was a huge fan
November 30th, 2009 at 12:03 AM ^
that he comes here just because we offered. He's holding offers from Florida, OSU, and Oklahoma.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:06 AM ^
With as many top recruits that they're still in on I see him not being their first option. Their visitor list this past weekend was ridiculous.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:11 AM ^
also sharrif floyd has dropped penn state per espn
November 30th, 2009 at 12:13 AM ^
That OSU has been rumored to be the leader for his commitment. That's not what I want in Columbus for the next 4 years.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:29 AM ^
But is it too late?
November 30th, 2009 at 12:39 AM ^
Bowling Green
Florida
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Toledo
Virginia
Wisconsin
Oddly balanced offer list with feast (Florida, OSU, OK), famine (Bowling Green, Toledo), and some some stuff in the middle (MN, UVA, Wisc).
No MSU offer, nothing else from the big ten or any other big-time programs. Just struck me as odd b/c I would have thought he'd have more offers (in general) since he was able to earn offers from some big time schools academically and athletically.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:42 AM ^
You probably got this from his list on Rivals or Scout. Those teams are not necessarily his only offers, just the teams he like best.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:47 AM ^
That kinda makes sense, but on the other hand, it's even odder b/c how many recruits like OSU and FL as much as Toledo and Bowling Green? The mysterious world of recruiting shall live on.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:43 AM ^
Oh yes I do. This guy was (probably) right:
http://recruiting.arkansasonline.com/index.php/2009/11/24/talked-to-big…
*sigh*
November 30th, 2009 at 1:06 AM ^
Do we have room? If the 25 limit is true, and Grimes and Murphy's signing day announcement is just a "formality," and Sam Webb gave his gut feeling on Furman, that puts us at 25.
Can we take Hankins, or even Big Tex if he wanted to come here?
November 30th, 2009 at 1:46 AM ^
The only position that we have more commitments than needs is at WR. I wonder if some of them get slow played now.
November 30th, 2009 at 7:41 AM ^
Everything of substance that has been posted on this board says that you can still count early enrolees against the previous years class. That means we still have a few extra we can give out assuming we get some EE this year.
I don't think RR losing any current committs #'s will do anyone any good, especially UM in future recruits eyes.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:13 AM ^
Because that happens increasingly to many programs, and also given 5-7. If we all talked about this year's recruiting being negatively impacted by 3-9, 5-7 the next year can't help any. So I think we will have a de-committ anyway, and if so I just hope it's offensive rather than defensive.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:20 AM ^
If so I am having difficulty following what you mean. No offense intended, I just don't get what you mean "will happen anyway" based on my post.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:34 AM ^
My response was to your "I don't think RR losing any current commits will do anyone any good" sentence. I actually agree with that, but fear it will happen anyway, and if so would rather lose an offensive (preferably WR) player than a defensive one.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:56 AM ^
Actually though, what I said was losing recruits #'s (as in phone numbers). He may well lose recruits due to someone de-committing, I was saying I hope he doesn't make it a practice of losing recruits phone numbers to get them to de-commit. I know many coaches do it, I just hope he doesn't make it common practice.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:12 AM ^
count early enrollees towards '09 class. This is the new rule by the NCAA to prevent SEC teams from oversigning by 5-6 recruits.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:58 AM ^
Would you please show me that rule and stop qouting Sam Webb or who ever it is you are basing this off. I have seen you state this numerous times with zero evidence.
Umhero did extensive research of the actual NCAA rule book (the current edition) and found no such rule change. If you want to continue saying this, at least back it up with better evidence than umhero has, and if you can't, then stop saying it as if it were gospel and not just something you heard.
November 30th, 2009 at 11:15 AM ^
I think tim had a link to the changed rules in his last recruit roundup. I'm on my phone though so can't go looking for the link, but I'm pretty sure its there.
November 30th, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^
http://mgoblog.com/content/phoneboothin-how-many-cornerbacks-can-we-fit
The article says the rule looks to be unchanged.
November 30th, 2009 at 11:38 AM ^
You'd know that you can't count '10 recruits toward '09 class. TJB said that RR checked with NCAA or to some extent and they can't count Witty and other early enrollees toward '09 class. So Witty counts towards '10 class.
However, you can oversign by 2 so Michigan can get 27 recruits for '10 class. They must have it down to 25 by August practice.
November 30th, 2009 at 11:40 AM ^
So in other words, if everyone qualifies we have to cut two. But aren't LOIs one year scholarship commitments? Can't you not do that?
November 30th, 2009 at 12:11 PM ^
them to greyshirt.
There are two players(Kinnard and forget the other one) are in danger of not qualifying.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:46 PM ^
If they don't know that going into it that's a seriously raw deal for the recruit.
November 30th, 2009 at 12:14 PM ^
What I am asking for is the rule. Obviously this rule has just come into effect since last year, because you could count EE's toward the previous class then.
If this rule has changed in a matter of 1 year, the NCAA has done one hell of a lousy job at keeping the Universities aware of said changes.
Also, if it had changed, why have their rules in their...you know.....rule book, not changed?
I don't have a premium subscription to GBW because I don't put a lot of stock in their information. I also have no idea who TJB is. I can read black and white, and from the rule book, it doesn't seem as though this change you are talking about took place.
November 30th, 2009 at 1:20 PM ^
that the new rule took effect. If it's last year, we wouldn't have worry about class size issue since we can always count early enrollees toward '09 class. This year, we have to worry about the class size since 25 is basically the limit. Michigan coaches can slowplay other recruits into looking into a different school.
RR and coaches have checked with NCAA to see if they can count early enrollees toward '09 class and were told that they couldn't do it. This is why Witty counts towards '10 class, not '09 class.
November 30th, 2009 at 2:17 PM ^
If the rule was changed, where is it written, because it isn't written in the rule book. That is what I am saying here. Pull out the rule book and prove us wrong, but stop sticking to your story simply because you read something that someone else wrote about what someone else said........
If you pull out the rule book and reference sections that say schools can no longer do this then I might believe what you are saying. If you don't, I am going to choose to believe what umhero wrote because he DID reference the ncaa rules in respect to this topic.
November 30th, 2009 at 3:25 PM ^
believe what you want to believe but come signing day, you will see that early enrollees will not count toward '09 class.
Like I said, RR checked with NCAA and NCAA said no. Michigan has 3 spots to fill(2 of them are pretty much a lock with Grimes/Murphy) so it leaves just one spot to fill(if it's Furman, then consider the class over unless RR slowplay some recruits into committing to a different schools).
December 1st, 2009 at 1:21 AM ^
"I spoke with compliance at Michigan today. The rules say that we are allowed to take 25 commits each year, and we can't back date any of them."
Case closed.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:06 AM ^
Well, finally people will stop complaining about why Hankins wasn't offered by us. Praise the lord.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:18 AM ^
Don't hold your breath. If we don't get him now people will complain, rightly or not, that we didn't offer him earlier.
November 30th, 2009 at 8:19 AM ^
Michigan Football: Lowering our standards since mid-2009
November 30th, 2009 at 8:47 AM ^
If this is like most years, one or two kids will renege before signing day and one or two will probably not make the clearinghouse. So, in all likelihood, RR won't have to do anything to get the numbers the way he needs them.
November 30th, 2009 at 9:21 AM ^
What is the idea of "slow-playing" a recruit?
How does the it happen. This is one thing that I might dislike about rich rod, assuming its true. Any notable recruits that have been "slow-played" in the past?
November 30th, 2009 at 10:09 AM ^
Dewayne Peace and Jordan Barnes were slow-played last year. The staff wanted to bring Peace in to play cornerback, and he wanted to stick with wide receiver, so they kind of slow-played him and he de-committed.
I'm not really sure what the deal was with Barnes. He played a position of need (ILB), but the staff basically just stopped communicating with him and he ended up committing to Oklahoma State.
Still, they are the coaches after all, and their judgement is probably better than ours. Some people think that if Kenny Shaw or Stills (WR's) would commit, then the staff would slow-play DJ Williamson or Jerald Robinson.. but I don't really see it happening.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:51 AM ^
i can't imagine that we would "slow-play" the best of our six wr commits. maybe williamson or jackson.
November 30th, 2009 at 1:03 PM ^
to imagine slow playing Jackson considering his dad is our RB coach.
November 30th, 2009 at 4:43 PM ^
Might not be come next season
November 30th, 2009 at 10:39 AM ^
Every coaching staff everywhere slow plays recruits, it's not an RR-exclusive thing.
November 30th, 2009 at 10:57 AM ^
RR is the devil and only uses shady recruiting tactics! Lloyd, Les Miles, Urban Meyer none of those guys do anything like this and this is NOT the Michigan way!
*sigh*
November 30th, 2009 at 11:01 AM ^
I understand you are joking bouje, but it's still really annoying to here this every other day.