February 7th, 2014 at 3:34 PM ^
Foote thinks the University should lower their admission standards for football. that isnt going to happen.
February 7th, 2014 at 3:36 PM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 3:39 PM ^
created. He always said that he looked for kids who were tough and smart. . . I think it was coaching but not just player development but also building that Stanford specific culture which has been carried further by the current guy. I forget his name.
February 7th, 2014 at 4:45 PM ^
“Do the university hire an agency to do the investigation?” Foote added later.
He doesn't sound like he was subjected to too tough an academic standard.
February 7th, 2014 at 5:29 PM ^
February 8th, 2014 at 5:46 AM ^
I missed him on the show, does anybody know of a way to find to audio.
That article seems to bounce a little bit and doesnt flow right for a normal conversation.
I am just curious to see if he was taken out of context or if that is all legit.
February 7th, 2014 at 4:35 PM ^
My understanding is that Stanford recruits to the NCAA requirements and then, maybe, expect a bit more from their students. But it's not like Stanford is only taking kids who could have gotten into Stanford without football, just like NW, Vandy, Duke, etc. don't either. Some of it is recruiting and coaching, and some of it is a well-designed PR and marketing of an image.
February 7th, 2014 at 5:28 PM ^
busting oregon in the chops several years in a row and winning rose bowls certainly helps. harbaugh is a beast with a very confident vision - he demands a lot but works his butt off too and all his players love him. and he would have done even better at um with their resources....he will forever be the one who got away
February 7th, 2014 at 8:35 PM ^
Maybe. He didn't stick around too long at Stanford, and he probably would have rubbed people roughly as well. I know people talk about him being demanding, but lots of coaches are just as motivated and focused. I continue to not love Harbaugh because he strikes me as an arrogant guy who is great when he's on your side and completely insufferable and hypocrtical when he's not.
February 7th, 2014 at 9:09 PM ^
One day he will be sick of coaching in the NFL and will return to college. My hope is after a good Hoke 10 to 12 year run, Harbaugh wil take over when he turns 60. You know what they say, Today's' 60 is yesterday's 40! I think he will finish his coaching career in Ann Arbor.
February 8th, 2014 at 8:12 AM ^
That was my thought about Harbaugh as well. Maybe he'll chill with his old age and get along better and be a better fit. Either way I'm a big fan.
February 8th, 2014 at 9:59 AM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 3:48 PM ^
We can't really lower them much more than they are. If a guy is academically qualified under the NCAA's criteria, we will usually accept him.
February 7th, 2014 at 3:58 PM ^
Admissions was reportedly unhappy that RR was bringing in too many recruits close to that NCAA minimum. They limit how many waivers they'll grant. They rejected Witty and Standifer who were NCAA qualified. I'm sure there have been many more players we didn't pursue because of their policy.
February 7th, 2014 at 3:55 PM ^
Don't we already lower our admission standards?
February 7th, 2014 at 4:05 PM ^
They need to balance their high standards while seeing potential in those with less opportunity (aka shitty schools in Detroit).
February 7th, 2014 at 5:42 PM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 3:35 PM ^
it isn't always all good in the hood
February 7th, 2014 at 3:40 PM ^
but pretending that recruiting players based on academic standards is also a joke...Michigan needs to ease up a bit or get lost in multiple 7-5/8-4 seasons
February 7th, 2014 at 4:07 PM ^
Isn't it likely though that players with lower academic achievement might not be as attracted to Michigan? They'd more likely go to the SEC, where they can win big and slack in the classroom. Kids with higher academic standards for themselves are probably more likely to be attracted to Michigan's ideal of success on the field and in the classroom. (see Jabrill Peppers)
February 7th, 2014 at 3:35 PM ^
Can we stop being Notre Dame? This is the kind of thing you see from former Irish all the time.
February 7th, 2014 at 4:18 PM ^
Funny, I was thinking the same thing... What's ironic about what Foote is saying and the Irish jumping ship, is that havent they lowered their standards to make room to play teams like BC, WF, GT.... If you asked, Im sure they care less about standards if it means they can increase the lead in all time winning percentage.
February 7th, 2014 at 4:35 PM ^
Yah because its not like we don't play FSU (you know the national champs), Clemson, Louisville etc... Getting to the playoff means scheduling a list of teams that gets you there with the least amount of losses. Also lets not discuss your out of conference, or even in conference schedule.
February 7th, 2014 at 4:37 PM ^
Usually you put some effort into your constant trolling rather than this naked, vanilla shit.
February 7th, 2014 at 4:47 PM ^
Fuck the Notre Dame Fighting Chickens.
February 7th, 2014 at 4:53 PM ^
Non-conf schedule? Two years ago where Michigan sacked up and stared the beast right in the face that was Alabama?
2012 was the first time in decades your program did ANYTHING worth talking about.
February 7th, 2014 at 6:41 PM ^
And really when was the last time yours did anything?
February 7th, 2014 at 10:35 PM ^
2011, chief. Michigan went 11-2 and won a BCS game.
I know, foreign concept to you since your irish never won a BCS game, EVER. 0-4 record.
That's absolutely hilarious given the system of BCS bowl games lasted for 16 seasons.
February 8th, 2014 at 12:39 PM ^
Oh I get it. When was Michigans last National Championship before 1997? We can play these games all day long, but did you know you that are currently approaching 20 years since your last Natty or appearance thereof? BCS games are beauty pagents and nothing more. You had a lucky season that year and ended up playing Virgina Tech, both on merits of you filling seats in a stadium. Congrats.
My point is that do not poke others schedules without taking a deep hard look at your own. For every OSU you have on your vaunted BIG conference slate, ND has 2. We played (and beat) the BIG champion, we also played the BIG12 champion, and the PAC12 North and South division champions. You, not so much.
February 7th, 2014 at 6:01 PM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 7:29 PM ^
What scheduling of Clemson? What scheduling of Louisville? ND hasn't played either school in years....oh, you mean future schedules as part of a quasi-conference alignment. Even at that ND is only scheduled to play those three, FSU, UL, Clemson, once each over the next three seasons.
February 7th, 2014 at 6:07 PM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 3:35 PM ^
Well, guess you can cross him off the list of future linebacker coach. Shoot.
February 7th, 2014 at 3:35 PM ^
Larry Foote does not strike me as very bright, going by this article.
February 7th, 2014 at 3:37 PM ^
February 8th, 2014 at 9:37 AM ^
Foote deserves a TON of credit for the way he took in his son, only learning he had one when the kid was around 12-14 years old.
He has a radio show on the "all sports all the time" Pittsburgh radio station on Tuesday mornings, and when you listen to the Steelers who either have shows or are frequent guests on shows, (Foote, Woodley, Emmanuel Sanders) it seems to be a contest for who can sound "most ghetto."
I went to the Spring Game after RR's first year when they made the big push for fans to go. Larry Foote was signing autographs and talking to fans in the section in which I was sitting. He had very gracious dialogue with us, and I can tell you, his level of "ghetto" that day was NOTHING compared to what we're seeing here and what I listen to on the radio. This, "Do the University..." quotation reeks of an attempt to sound "ghetto" to fit the tone of the conversation and project some image he wants to project. He likes to do that too when he's on the radio. In Pittsburgh, the Steelers always get ratings, so there's no resistance from anyone for him to do what he does.
It's sad that someone would rather sound "ghetto" than like a Michigan educated man.
February 7th, 2014 at 3:37 PM ^
or something like that...
February 7th, 2014 at 3:38 PM ^
All I can say is yikes.
February 7th, 2014 at 3:39 PM ^
‘We’re not going to be able to compete with SECs year in and year out, and every now and then we’re going to be toward the middle or the bottom of the Big Ten. The best football players are not your best students."
Can't argue with that, results on the field have been proof positive to confirm what LF has said.
February 7th, 2014 at 4:32 PM ^
if you have to compromise the schools integrity in order to be successful in a sport is it worth it? Is having players who are not able to cope with the academic challenges just to get another win really worth it? Are you doing any service to those kids by just forcing them through "general studies" to get those extra sacks/picks/touchdowns on saturday?
I say No.
We call ourselves the "Leaders and Best" and how does lowering standards achieve that? College Athletics may be changing or more likely has always been corrupt and schools have funneled kids through garbage degrees so they can put them on the field but I always thought we were better than that. That when michigan won on saturday it was winning the right way. That all the success basketball has been having and hockey has been having and softball has been having and the 134 years of success that michigan football has had were done the right way.
Sure we had the Fab Five along the way and Practicegate but overall it was a program producing those who would go on to succeed both in professional sports and as doctors, lawyers, engineers, teachers, managers, governors, representatives, senators, and presidents. That when kids left Michigan they were prepared to succeed in everything they will do after.
February 7th, 2014 at 9:53 PM ^
and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee
February 7th, 2014 at 3:41 PM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 3:41 PM ^
Yeah, this article is dumb....Larry probably should've thought twice before opening his mouth like so on an MSU radio show
February 7th, 2014 at 4:05 PM ^
I don't know about that. The fans demand wins or the coaches head. Are we willing to trade our higher academic and character standards for wins on the field? LF is saying yes, loosen the standards. I'm not saying he's right, but he does sound like much of our fan base.
February 7th, 2014 at 5:11 PM ^
He's making the assumption that we have less talent because of our academic standards, which I think is complete bullshit. He's begging the question, to a point. I'm quite sure that we've recruited just about every player that was a) good, and b) interested in us, regardless of their academics. We haven't been saying "no" to highly sought after kids because of their grades.
Does he have any evidence to suggest that the kids we have now have any better academics than the teams had when he was on them? He can say that he feels the talent is less than it used to be, but in terms of the "why" I think he's pulling that completely out of left field.
February 7th, 2014 at 5:14 PM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 8:34 PM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 3:42 PM ^
February 7th, 2014 at 3:43 PM ^
That was a heavy dose of reality from a guy I really respect but I have to disagree about recruiting from the ghetto. Stanford puts out a pretty good product and their academic standards might be more strict than UM. ND has strict academic standards and they were in the national championship 2 years ago, sure there was a lot of luck down the road to the NC game but they got there nonetheless. Johnny football comes from a well to do family, not the ghetto. So I get what he's saying but they don't need to ease academic standards to win football games. Kids still want to play in the biggest stadium in the country and wear the winged helmet. Coach 'em up! That's where it starts.