About an hour ago, TomVH posted this tweet.
Looks like some early negative recruiting going on in the Big Ten already.
The question is.........
Who dun it?
About an hour ago, TomVH posted this tweet.
The question is.........
Who dun it?
sparty would be my best guess. God i hate them!!
Well, with their 0 commits so far, it ain't workin'....
Understood negative recruiting to mean getting less than zero recruits.
Don't sell Sparty short. They got a walk on long snapper. In state dominance continues......
like they don't celebrate the hell out of it.
Well then continue to sell them short. I am sure they are just letting us get all of the highly rated in-state clutter out of their way before they make their move.
Guys, guys, Dantonio is just ring selective. Their recent success on the field has enabled him to carefully pick and choose the players best suited for their team. He doesn't consider such ridiculous things as star rankings. He doesn't even know what Rivals is. He picks his players directly out of the Michigan court records. "Felonious assault? We got us a linebacker!"
Someone on 247 posted that Godin was considering pushing back his announcement. He later said that Godin had re-decided to announce on May 12 as scheduled. If that was what Tom VH was referring to, I think that points to Dantonio as the obvious candidate.
If you're right about Godin, I wouldn't rule out Bielema. He's also kind of an...unpleasant individual, although I'm unsure if that transcends ordering vicious assaults on field. But Wisonsin is also in Godin's top three, and they've had a lot of success in recent history. I believe Godin was also planning on visiting or cheese-eating brethren in the future (if I remember correctly).
I'm trying to figure what would be the content on the negative recruiting...
For someone like Bielema, it would likely be "proven success vs. speculative situation" or "insufficient supply of cheese." My money's on the latter.
I can see Bielema doing it. He looks like a goblin.
It's probably against osu. Makes the most sense.
But would Tom tweet about negative recruiting against OSU? It seems like it would have to be about another school badmouthing us.
OSU is the one school, that we know from a first-hand eyewitness, was NOT negative-recruiting.
It wasn't all that long ago, that former Head Coach Rich Rich Rodriguez gave this interview, specifically exonerating OSU, within his knowledge, as a negative-recruiting team:
What is still interesting to me was that Coach Rod suggested that everyone would hear, "soon," about some of the details on negative recruiting. I suppose that he might be talking about John U. Bacon's book. Or perhaps something else. Perhaps Tom VH knows. Perhaps Tom knows about more, newer, evidence since Bacon's manuscript has gone to the publisher. Maybe another source altogether.
Better yet; if it was in the Free Press, written by Roesenberg and Snyder together, with nothing but anonymous sources cited, and with nothing else -- no other on-the-record sources, no other information, documents, et cetera -- would you trust that?
Are we directly recruiting anyone against Nebraska other than Peat?
a corn allergy. So we have that goin for us, which is nice...
that's one mooky mofo right there.
And between Dantonio, Bielema, Tressel, and Hope over at Purdue, there are quite a lot of unpleasant people coaching B10 teams right now, no?
Bo Pelini anf Bret Bielema were once villains in a Disney movie.
Anyone other then Osu...
The sky is blue. Also Hope is a douche. As well as Dantonio. And Pelini is mean. And JoePa is old. And Zook is an idiot. And Tressel is a liar. And Kill...well he's got a cool name.
It's like Clue! I'll start:
Who: Bret Bielema
Where: De-Vonne Bingham's house
With: An oblique reference to Jim Tressel's problems with the NCAA
I'd rather know what's being said which, of course, might shed light on who it is.
I'd just like to know who, what, where.
I have had zero doubt whatsoever that negative recruting is alive and well ever since Coach Rodriguez mentioned it.
But what I still don't understand is why this story would be so hard to report. Recruiting involves lots of guys, talking to lots of other guys, and in the end there is one "coupling" (coach/recruiter and player) and a dozen or so jilted suitors. One would think that somebody would talk, with all of those breakups.
I'm really curious about this. Why doesn't negative recruiting get outed, on a daily basis?
Danny Hope is tired of Tressel trashing the 'stache...
recruiting Dunn today at school, right. If he was "negative recruiting", by telling him he wouldn't be playing for Tressel if he went to OSU, then I've got no problem with it. Guy is good as gone. Actually, OSU's best case scenario is that he is gone, cause if they can somehow keep him, and do, they won't be playing in a bowl game for at least 2 or 3 years.
I sort of doubt it was us doing the negative recruiting. It doesn't seem like what Hoke would want his guys to do.
I've seen comments (from other fanbases) that Mattison is a huge negative recruiter. Take it with a grain of salt.
Honestly, I think that anybody who is a good recruiter will get a reputation as a negative recruiter. And, honestly, it is probably deserved. Also, there may be subtle hints about the stability of programs in the future, and then there's Les Miles level (rumored) negative recruiting about Parkinson's.
The top recruiter at auburn is considered a good recruiter but other fan bases consider him a dirty recruiter.
In all fairness, the best recruiter at one of the dirtiest programs in the country probably is a dirty recruiter.
The transitive property of college recruiting.
Haven't seen any, just saw that it was his reputation to some.
is the main one you'll hear about from Domers.
Any recruiter who doesn't point out the Tressel situation to 5* tOSU recruits is simply incompetent. I doubt that Mattison is incompetent.
Oh I totally agree. He'd be totally remiss not to discuss it with Dun (or whomever).
Not to be naive or anything, but is it necessarily such a bad thing to do negative recruiting? I mean, would it be awful for Mattison to meet with Dunn and say something like, "You never know what will happen to OSU down the road, with coaches and sanctions etc. Sooooo... come to Michigan" ?
That's a minefield for recruiters. These players develop relationships with the coaches that recruit them. Say Mattison says something about Coach X's job security, but Recruit Y really likes Coach X. That may be off-putting to a 17 year-old.
I certainly hope it wasn't us.. I feel like Hoke and Mattison are beyond that and can just sell UofM to kids without having to resort to bashing other schools.
whether it was all that bad, right? :) In truth, I don't think it gets Mattison anywhere even to say something like, "You'll want to make sure you get a good fix on how the (OSU) investigation is going to play out." (Scenario I contemplated as I asked myself the same question about neg. recruiting.) Because unless the kid and his parents are Martians they are anxious as h about it already.
There is no need for negative talk about other schools. If you want them to think about the situation at tosu, all you have to do is talk about how things are trending upwards at UM, and mention "we had that little issue with stretching that was blown all out of proportion, but we got right on top of it and did a full and imemdiate disclosure and, as you will recall, the NCAA appreciated our honesty and saw there was nothing to it. That's the way we handle things.' Go on to discuss the tradition etc. Draw your own conclusions, kid.
That kinda happened with Cullen. At least that's what he said. I'm sure getting buried on the depth chart factored in slightly as well.
It's been said to many of our recruits. It has been a repetitive meme throughout the last few years, especially during our NCAA related unpleasantness. It was also a long running theme after the Fab Five troubles hit the fan, first with the banm, then recruits were simply told "they don't get to the NCAA."
I imagine now the story is "What kind of a coach is Hoke? What's he ever won?" Luckily it seems like recruits aren't buying that line. Dantonio.
Sad that coaches have to result to speaking negatively about other teams instead of giving the kids valid reasons to join their team and the university they represent.
It's a picture clue
Purdue for 1000? Pssh.
200. Tops. It's just too obvious.
Who is...Coach Tiller?
(I swear to god they're the same person)
Perhaps Tom was making a tongue in cheek comment because Mattison got Dunn to switch today and OSU fans would claim that's the only way it could happen.
Negative recruiting is going to hurt us less. The anxiety over RR's future hurt more than anything. Let them all flame as much as they want.
Larry Johnson Sr at Penn State. He's well known for it.
Actually, I like this quote from Bill Greene:
"Negative recruiting is just a term that gets thrown around when a school gets their butt whipped in recruiting. It means your school got waxed."
Yup. That's the guy.
Is this the Larry Johnson who has a son that has been arrested four times since 2003 for sexual assault charges? What could he possibly tell the recruit's family? "I'll make sure your boy grows up to be a well-rounded, professional man. Just like my own boy."
Although I am sure JoePa is well in touch with today's young black male.
Haterz gonna hate.
The SEC I guess. There will be another thread once the actual news gets out.
If that's right, my guess would be O'Brien.
It could possibly be us I mean think about the lines we could use:
OSU: how do you feel about playing in a bowl game in your college career... well you wont be able to if you go down there.
PSU: just because joe has you in his will doesn't mean you have to go.
MSU: if you have under two felonies, you won't be able to start.
Indiana: Do they still have a team after chappell and doss left?
Purdue: I hear there making it a requirement to grow the worse possible mustache.
ND: Notre Dame is a french name but they are named the Irish: If they ask you to film practice on a crappy looking tower, make sure you take out a new life insurance plan.
Minnesota: I heard mustard is the new green.
Wisconsin: we won't throw touchdown passes while up 60 (maybe 55 though)
Nebraska: I hear college life is great there if you like being surrounded by corn fields.
Iowa: Do you like the Idea of pissing brown? Me neither.
Illinois: Ron Zook couldn't even win at florida.
Northwestern: The only guy I know that wears purple kisses other guys.
OMG. That's too funny. The Iowa one was my favorite.
I liked the Illinois line.
But I imagine that it isn't effective as it was last year. Dantonio really used the coaching uncertainty to his advantage last year to get instate prospects. I think this year he's going back to his old pitch, "Hey do you like burning furniture, showing zero class during games, and beating up innnocent citizens? Yes? Than east lansing is the perfect place for you."
My favorite is when they bastardize their own fight song: "see their team is weakkkkkkk" instead of "weakening". I mean, we all already know it's a complete travesty of a song with no semblance of a meter, but they could at least pretend to be proud of it.
Also, I just wikipedia'd it and (everyone else probably knows this already) but the original fight song when they were M.A.C. not only directly called them farmers, but had two direct references to U.M. More evidence of little-brother syndrome, if you ask me.
Objects to this thread.
could it be in reference to Mattison / Dunn? Considering Tom's connections and the alleged visit today, it kinda makes sense.
Not trying to be negative on our recruiting tactics! Just throwing that out there as a possibility.
Edit: Sorry, didn't see someone else arlready postulated the idea.
Personally, I don't have a problem with negative recruiting, as long as it's done honestly. If someone says, "You don't want to go to Ohio State because they might get a bowl ban and Tressel might get fired," then that's just being honest.
If someone says, "You don't want to go to Iowa, because Kirk Ferentz teaches his players how to cook crystal meth," then that's crossing the line.
In the SEC that's called "work study".
Sounds odd to describe it this way, but negative recruiting can often be less clear-cut than it sounds.
Well how do you think all those kids ended up in the hospital back in January? From working out too much? Yeah right....
**Insert photo of Kirk's face on the Breaking Bad poster**
Ferentz's crystal meth labs ARE over the line.
Its got to be Sparty! Warden D'antonio is shadier than most of the merry band of felons that make up his chain gan...I mean team.
I hope it was Tressel. I like irony a lot.
I heard a rumor that in an attempt to avoid negative recruiting, that the SEC has decided to adopt a policy which allows for in-state recruits to be auctioned off. In strict compliance with NCAA regulations, SEC universities will only be able to buy 45 players every year.
Sadly, I doubt it's all that difficult to negatively recruit against Michigan these days. 'They've won 6 conference game in the last 3 years', negative, but true.
But, on the bright side, it will be a lot more difficult to negatively recruit against UM in the coming years, and a helluva lot easier to do it to O$U.
It seems to me that (1) shouldn't be frowned upon too much, as long as it's honest. Telling a kid that he'd do much better in your system or pointing out that not many guys go pro from the opposing team's roster may not be the best way to land a recruit, but it's part of the game.
From the sound of Tom's tweet, it should be (2). Not to your extreme of course, but maybe questioning another coach's character or perpetuating rumors. It'd be pretty funny to hear a kid call a coach on that, though.
(1) is still prone to major grey areas. Rampant (and largely unsupportable) speculation around these parts suggested that other schools were negatively recruiting against Michigan in 2009, saying RR was on his way out. These turned out to be truthful and accurate representations, but they were still probably underhanded, particularly in 2009.
I would bet that it isn't us. I don't know if hoke can even talk about anything other than how much he loves U of M. Based on everything recruits have said about the family environment and the close knit group that this team has become everything seems positive coming out of schembechler.
Other than to stir the pot?
Name the culprit and give evidence.
It's us. We're recruiting negatively. Here's a sampling:
That guy in the vest you're considering sending your son to play for is a liar. Here's a transcript of his most recent lies. If, during his courtship of your son, he's told you he wasn't lying, he's lying again. How are you supposed to believe him when he says "he'll be there for the next 4 or 5 years" or "the NCAA isn't going to penalize us anymore" ?
I thought with the negative recruiting against UM(RR area) we nailed it down to Iowa/Purdue? As far as us doing it, I'm with Magnus, Just reinforce fact. "Have you seen the news on JT?". "Joe Pa is getting up there. Are you scared of Zombies?" I would think that the Big Programs wouldn't have to do it, but who knows
I would think that Sparty should be the last one to neg recruit considering everything going on in their program.
I guess that strategy is working by looking at their results. /s
I just might have to keep an eye on when recruits are going to be in spartyville and make sure sparty is wearing a new orange jump suit for all to see.
I chuckled at the various comments in this thread that basically said no way does Michigan 'negatively recruit'
Of course, we dont. Its always just the other people.
Head, meet Sand.
If you think anyone who is recruiting a kid looking at OSU hasn't mentioned the media shit-storm in Columbus - including Hoke - you're fooling yourself.
He is the undoubted star of this operation.
But what exactly is the point of that tweet ? You are basically saying:
"Somebody told somebody else something negative about a unnamed third entity".
Cmon Tom, you're better than that man.
recently heard an interview with a big time recruit from florida who said he doesnt want coaches to talk about another school while they are recruiting him. If you have to talk about another school, then maybe your school is not good enough or you are worried and makes your school look bad that you need to talk about other schools in an attempt to make yours look better. That is what i take to be negative recruiting...mentioning any other school but your own since there really is not other reason to. Things like "watch out for that school" may sound harmless but we all know it is a little jab that you intend to stick in the mind of the recruit and make it seem like they care.
Except that pretty much all coaches make it a point not to read blogs and aren't going to be encouraging players to read them, either. "Fans complain about own team" isn't good enough fodder. There'd have to be something really scandalous posted online - like, a revelation that Coach X is a closet racist - for coaches to take note and use it as recruiting ammunition.
Negative recruiting against us right now would be more along these lines:
-"Hoke's career record is below .500. Why go there if you want to win?"
-"Hoke's only produced [number] NFL players to date. He's not going to develop you."
-(For an offensive player) "Hoke's offense isn't going to be right for you. I heard that they're only going to run [plays that aren't suited for recruit's skills] and never run [plays that are suited for them]."
-[From an SEC coach] "Michigan's real far up north. I heard it snows all year. Don't you like wearing shorts to class?"
-[From PSU/ND] "Michigan clearly doesn't care about black athletes. Look at their graduation rate for black football players."