Casanova

September 23rd, 2019 at 11:32 PM ^

Hurts but fair.

this got a chuckle:

“Asking Jordan Glasgow — a former walk-on safety who is now an inside linebacker — to take on a Wisconsin guard in a short-yardage situation is completely unfair. He had no hope. Watching him try was like watching the good guy in the movies who gets wounded and then tells his friends to go on without him and then as they run off, they can hear him screaming while he empties his gun into whatever menace is tearing him apart.”

 

TheCube

September 23rd, 2019 at 11:53 PM ^

The part about how OSU had ten more defensive linemen with 4 being injured sums it up well. Harbaugh’s classes are too top heavy with not enough kids in the middle or in 2018 and 2020s cases: not enough talent at all. 

It’s almost like giving scholarships to fullbacks and players like BVS, Ben Mason and Gaige Garcia are a complete waste of roster space in 2019. 

It’s recruiting, stupid.

Maizen is cackling with glee somewhere. 

buckeyejonross

September 24th, 2019 at 12:09 AM ^

This comment here is why I've argued on this blog so much about last year's OSU class v. last year's Michigan class. I hear the arguments that if you lop off the bottom players from Michigan's class, their top 17 is better than OSU's 17. And that's fine. Ok. But that means you have 9 players in the 500s just taking up space for four years. And that murders your depth. Scholarships are finite. Keep taking 6-10 projects a class and suddenly every 4th year you have a roster 30% full of projects. Then what? Fullbacks play DT and safeties play linebacker. Michigan's recruiting under Harbaugh has made no sense for years. 

MGoStrength

September 24th, 2019 at 7:46 AM ^

But that means you have 9 players in the 500s just taking up space for four years. And that murders your depth. Scholarships are finite. Keep taking 6-10 projects a class and suddenly every 4th year you have a roster 30% full of projects

I'm not saying JH doesn't have recruiting questions to answer to, but this is not one of them IMO.  Because those bottom 9 players don't stick around for 4 years.  If they aren't contributing and are getting passed by younger guys at year 3 they are as often as not getting processed out of the program in one way or another.  I think retention is just as much of an issue as anything.  Asiasi, Hudson, Solomon, Simms, Singleton, etc.  That's a lot of the top end talent of recruiting classes.  And, I totally agree on the FB thing.  I'm not sure why all the safeties, although I feel like that's a Brown philosophy thing with wanting tall corners and VIPERS, both of which are kinda like safeties.  I'm not sure JH is to blame there.  And, there are surely holes in some classes like OT, DT, and now CB.  But, I don't think other argument makes sense because those guys are not retaining roster spots for 4 years in many cases. 

TheCube

September 24th, 2019 at 8:07 AM ^

Yeah but 9 players transferring out of the program in 4 years doesn’t mean you automatically fill them with 9 fresh players. Recruiting these bizarre under the rock players ranked 700+ also means you’re not taking 3 star players in positions of need. 
 

That doesn’t account for player development and assumes a freshman is equal to a potential upperclassmen with a one year delay in getting them to campus. 
 

Look at all the players who have left this program. It doesn’t help at all. Clemson won their first championship with similar recruiting but retained way more of their talent all 4 years. 

MGoStrength

September 24th, 2019 at 9:58 AM ^

Recruiting these bizarre under the rock players ranked 700+ also means you’re not taking 3 star players in positions of need. 

I don't see anything wrong with the last year's class.  The bottom of the class is Velasquez, Kent, Johnson, Newburg, & Sainristill.  Velasquez, Kent, Johnson, & Newburg are ranked outside the top 600, while everyone else is under.  That means they took a shot on 4-5 guys, not 9.  If you space, why not.  I'm sure they got the best guys they could.  They still had 18 guys in the top 500, 17 in the top 400, 12 in the top 300, 9 in the top 200, and 5 in the top 110.  That's just one year, but I don't see anything wrong with that distribution. 

The key will be do those 12 guys in the top 300 live up to their recruiting profile.  We need Dax to turn into an All American, Mazi, Hinton, Charbonnet, Jones to turn into first team all conference types, and Rumler, Johnson, Keegan, Perry, Solomon, Barnhart, McNamara, & Jackson to turn into second team all conference types.  That's what living up to your recruiting profile means.  But, instead historically some are transferring, a hand full are panning out, but most aren't living up to expectations.  So far only Charbonnet has shown evidence of living up to his profile.

MGoStrength

September 24th, 2019 at 10:08 AM ^

Planning to process out a third of your recruiting classes is not a good strategy. It’s a terrible strategy. 

I'm disagreeing with your argument, which was that you've got 9 guys holding up roster spots for 4 years.  I don't think that's happening.  That does not mean the coaches are expecting guys to wash out.  Plus, where did the number 9 come from?  The 9th lowest recruit from last years class was DJ Turner who played at IMG and is national #400.  I'd hardly call him a shot in the dark.  He had offers from Bama, Clemson, LSU, ND, Oklahoma, etc.

That’s roster mismanagement.

I'm not saying the roster management is good, but your argument was not IMO, nor was last years class bad.  I don't have a strong take as to why things are the way the are.  I just don't think your take hits the mark.  

dotslashderek

September 24th, 2019 at 2:18 PM ^

What point are you trying to make?  Cuz it sounds like you think we *passed* on better options to take those players.

Trust me, we didn't pass on a bunch of 4 and 5 stars to take "projects".  I'm sure it's wonderful to be alabama or osu and have your pick of the absolute top end - for the rest of college football we *have* to fill out the class with lower rated players and hope we're finding some diamonds in the rough. 

I mean, fuck, why would someone date any gal that isn't a 10 studying to be a brain surgeon?  Oh, right, necessity.

Cheers.

SMart WolveFan

September 24th, 2019 at 9:57 AM ^

What are you trying to say? That they should've undersigned? 

Besides they have a top500 DT from 2016 and two top100 true freshman and they don't get even garbage time. (lol at poor Kemp having to be in at 1 tech for Wisconsin's kneel down)

The problem is a broken meritocracy.

Mason is a favorite, Harbaugh felt bad for nuking his position, they shoe horn him in the DL without him proving it through merit and without giving others a chance to merit.

GOMBLOG

September 24th, 2019 at 1:20 AM ^

People crapped all over the Maizen guy but he had a valid point and now everyone is hitting the i believe button.  Inconsistencies is recruiting and the lack of game changing athletes is why a guy like Grubber has to play on the DL

“Jim Harbaugh’s recruiting has been top heavy since he arrived and his ability to spot talent has been as disappointing as his ability to develop it.”   - that dude is spot on.  

Harbaugh’s recruiting is like the fantasy football guy who drafts really well in the first two rounds then drafts a bunch of head scratchers only to have his roster look completely different after week 3. 

mGrowOld

September 24th, 2019 at 9:36 AM ^

You know who else said it?  MgrowOld said the exact same thing regarding our recruiting.  He was equally concerned over our lack of emphasis in Ohio specifically and questioned repeatidly the entire satellite camp experience as it took valuable time (and coaching energy) away from recruiting in our core battleground states.  Time and time again MgrowOld would make this statement and many here had a fit claiming he didnt know what he was talking about.

Oh damn it.  I need to remember to change that avatar when i do this.  Pretend that comment was made by some newbie you've never heard of who somehow accumulated a bunch of points seemingly overnight.

SMart WolveFan

September 24th, 2019 at 10:26 AM ^

UofM "recruited" 3 top 500 DTs(2 top100) on their team right now, accepted the 5* even after "fuck Michigan", had another top100 guy that they moved to OL and now he's a transfer nightmare with the bottom being it was Benedict Mattison failing at recruiting, maizing huh?

Plus the fact that this whole situation would be a lot better if we had our #800 "flier", that came along with Rashan Gary, back form injury.

LabattsBleu

September 24th, 2019 at 11:46 AM ^

what's your point? that the targets that the coaches identified didn't pan out and so that isn't their fault?

Michigan has a clear roster issue on the DL;  that's indisputable.

its not the ranking services fault kids wash out or have grade issues - that's part of the vetting process of identifying kids who can play at Michigan.

maizing indeed

LabattsBleu

September 24th, 2019 at 12:48 PM ^

presumably, if they aren't playing they aren't ready, which is possibly a development issue.

it sure seems like some of these young guys need to play as Mason can't be the answer. Wisky started a true freshman at nose tackle..

i would agree that a few of these kids need to play; the current starters won't be enough for the B1G schedule

Alumnus93

September 25th, 2019 at 9:33 AM ^

Agreed.  After we take over and over, Wr, OG,  DE, and always was waiting for OT and DT.  and they never dropped. And I didn't get it. How do they pay analysts and they still screw up roster management is fraud. 

We have a zillion WR, a zillion inside OL, and a ton of DE.    

LabattsBleu

September 23rd, 2019 at 11:43 PM ^

Usually a pretty fair read to be honest... one OSU writer that I think does a good job.

this week will be heavy with schadenfreude though, understandably.

"In the Michigan Monday following the Army game, I wrote this:

Michigan was very fortunate to get out of this game with a win, which is something that almost every championship team says at least once in a season.

If they don’t kick it up a few notches against Wisconsin in two weeks, however, this win won’t be one of those games that championship teams are remembered for. It will be one of those games where people first realized there was a very real problem.

I think that riddle has been solved and there are no easy fixes here."

BayWolves

September 24th, 2019 at 10:02 AM ^

I'm going to highlight one of the many things the coaches did that there was zero excuse or reason for:

There were times when Michigan’s defense actually played with just two defensive linemenOn third and short.

WTF is Don brown thinking by doing this shit?  And having Glasgow at the 3 tech on the goal line?  Seems like intentional sabotage. Who is paying these coaches to fuck up?

CoverZero

September 24th, 2019 at 1:27 AM ^

Right from Signing of the Stars, to multiple spring trips to Europe, to JH running smack on opposing coaches, to podcasts and khaki commercials....Harbaugh's program has been all about hype...and that hype is now collapsing all around him.

Lessons need to be learned from this.  

In the early 00s, they asked the B1G coaches their thoughts on opposing teams.  One HC, possibly Joe Tiller pointed at Michigan and said "Soft, overrecruited kids".  That proved out to be true in the late stages of the Carr era, through the RR and Hoke errors and on through Harbaugh's program.

When will Michigan get back to playing tough, gritty, no-quit football in the trenches?

WesternWolverine96

September 24th, 2019 at 1:44 AM ^

I never watched that Amazon series but it sounded like a bad idea

I want to see what happens down the stretch before I give up hope on Harbaugh

But I like the points you make

 

edit:

 

But I remember the first camp and the whole submarine thing and putting the kids up in barracks with no AC....so I think it started down this road

TheCube

September 24th, 2019 at 2:09 AM ^

The fact that Barstool managed to find Harbaugh filming a khaki commercial mid bye week and to have that confirmed in the most embarrassing fashion while getting our ass kicked on national TV (highest day rated game of the year so far btw, vintage Michigan) sums up everything.

All sizzle, no steak. 

BeatIt

September 24th, 2019 at 6:39 AM ^

Maizen was right it’s all about recruiting. Um’s 2016-17,18 classes had 12 top 100 players,2018 0. OSU on the other had 17 top 50 players and 32 top 100. Yes 3 stars can develop but you are not reloading when over half every year are lower ranked kids. Doesn’t get any better in 2020, only 2 had OSU offers and only 3 or 4 had offers from other big programs. As I looked @ the 2020 class, it dawned me that it looks like they are just signing the players that say yes immediately. As if they are not even trying that hard. um will never be relevant unless they turn around the recruiting. 

 

Michigan Arrogance

September 24th, 2019 at 7:15 AM ^

this recruiting stuff makes sense but I just don't think M has the local talent to be able to recruit better than OSU year in year out. They have to target any ohio guys who fit the M profile and may be open to leaving the state, but that is rare these days for obvious reasons. Not enough talent in MI for obvious reasons.

The thing that drives me nuts is that the talent can explain not beating OSU. It doesn't explain the Wisc debacle. They have something like ZERO top 1000 (<--- not a typo) players on D. Their entire offensive status turned around on ONE NFL-ish WR returning. M needs to recruit better - but I don't think that means more top 50-100 kids (sure it'd be nice but I think b/t results, playing school and bagmen, M and ND are at about the max they can reasonable expect there). But there is no reason, given the budget of the program, that M should be out-scouted at the 3* level by fucking Wisconsin.

Christ, just target the OLs and LBers and DLs that are "under the radar" that Wisc is going after. They've done it with 3.5* talent for 25 fucking year now.

UMxWolverines

September 24th, 2019 at 12:23 PM ^

We used to beat OSU all the time when they had the more talented team. Our recruitng vs them has to improve, but you have to manage to do SOMETHING with what you have. Texas has already beaten OU under Herman, Auburn beat Alabama two years ago. There's no reason why we can't occasionally beat OSU. 

And our recruiting vs OSU does nothing to explain why we went down 35-0 to Wisconsin. 

BeatIt

September 24th, 2019 at 3:23 PM ^

Bo,Moeler,Carr recruited nationally and Ohio and Pennsylvania. Bad luck with Moeller, he was 10 times a better coach than Carr imo. That was the start of the gradual decline possibly.?They usually did well on the west coast as well. Pulling scholly’s late doesn’t help either.You don’t have to have a great state base either, Tom Osborne had Nebraska in the top 20 for 20 years. To have zero top 100 commits at a big brand like um is ridiculous, no? OSU had more top 50 kids than harbaugh had top 100 in those same classes. Gotta figure how to turn around the recruiting. Better administrative support staff maybe? I remember you guys fighting with maizen, maybe it was just his delivery that irritated everyone?

The first step in conflict resolution is to define the problem first. No DL in 2018, 2 OL? Recruiting is #1 not broadening your cultural horizons with trips abroad. Meanwhile all your competitors are recruiting your commits and make up ground with other common prospects while your gone. There all different programs for that on a individual basis players can take advantage of. Conducting spring practice in Rome has to be a distraction, no way your team gets the needed focus to improve with all the sensory overload. It’s hard enough keeping their focus during the academic year. Just spit ballin’