People worried about having too many WRs
You're dumb. Having too many good WR's, particularly in the 2010 class is great. A lot of the top QB's like Devin Gardner, Christian Green, etc. will definitely look at Michigan already having 3 top 250 WR's as a positive. This should be one of the last things to bitch about.
February 9th, 2009 at 8:21 AM ^
You know every sales pitch will include "have you heard we already have the top(ish) receivers from Florida, Michigan and Ohio already signed on?"
Plus, the type of WR athletes we recruit can be moved around if need be. We aren't recruiting lumbering tall guys that will languish if too many WRs were in the mix.
February 9th, 2009 at 8:24 AM ^
Have we ever had three recruits for the next year's class this early? I know Campbell was early last year, but don't know if there were others...
February 9th, 2009 at 8:28 AM ^
between WRs and DTs, people seem to have this odd feeling that depth is a bad thing and we'll be okay starting true freshman year in and year out.
Adding 3 WRs next year will allow us to redshirt and give us some options in case some guys don't pan out.
February 9th, 2009 at 8:28 AM ^
I don't care about having too many WR's.
However, I sincerely doubt that these three WR's will still be committed a year from now. Maybe I'm cynical due to all of last year's decommits, but that's my gut feeling.
February 9th, 2009 at 8:39 AM ^
i'm confident that at least ricardo and jj will be here still. really it doesn't matter if we lose the newest commit 6 months from now if by then we have already got a top QB.
February 9th, 2009 at 9:06 AM ^
Jackson is the #1 receiver in Michigan, Miller most likely the #1 receiver in Florida, and Robinson the #1 receiver in Ohio, and people have the nerve to complain? I am estastic about our WR haul as all three are highly rated and fit the spread offense perfectly.
I wouldn't be so sure about Jackson being 100% committed; yeah he's Fred's son, but he said that Notre Dame was his dream school and he talked about possibly leaving Michigan during his recruitment.
February 9th, 2009 at 9:19 AM ^
I agree completely. The number one receiver out of our rival's state is a big get. We got the number one player out of the state this signing class and now we get the number one receiver. If you listen to this kid talk he sounds like he is Michigan all the way. If he doesn't pan out here or decommits or whatever else happens I'll wish him well. I think there is something else we need to consider in all this decommit hub-bub. TomVH said that RR was applying pressure on the kids that did decommit. Because he felt the pressure. He also said that RR is no longer doing that and is now comfortable in his skin here so the kids that committed did so because they want to play for Maize and Blue not because they think the schollie will be pulled in a month after it has been offered.
February 9th, 2009 at 9:22 AM ^
i wen't to the same hs as jackson and just being from ann arbor there is a lot of pressure to goto michigan. he'll be getting it from his friends, parents, teachers, etc. i guess there is some worry he decommits but i'm confident that we get him.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:00 AM ^
so how was it having your high school mascot be a river rat?
February 9th, 2009 at 10:03 AM ^
unique
February 9th, 2009 at 10:10 AM ^
the sec has some "unique" mascots if you ask me-river rat, kicking mules, maple leafs, dreadnaught, and the pioneer pioneers. i was an indian so i feel like i was able to get one of the better ones
February 9th, 2009 at 11:56 AM ^
My mascot was the Chix. However, the painting of the baby chicken on our gym was was pretty intimidating. It was ripped and carried a lightning bolt. It struck fear in the hearts of our opponents.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:41 AM ^
I went to Huron the opening year, and voted for River Rat. The other choices were so bad that River Rat sorta won by default.
Nice of them to let us vote, though.
I'm sure the adults would have chosen something different.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:16 PM ^
Didn't they make you vote again?
Meanwhile, our mascot was so amazing, they decided to name the school after it. . .
February 9th, 2009 at 11:15 AM ^
when JJ gave his verbal. I thouhgt, "here's a kid who lives in A2 and knows the program inside and out and most likely would want to see other programs." I would have thought his Dad would have also told him to look around too to make an informed decision. But obviously he loves the program and wants to be a wolverine. See, I like to be wrong!
February 9th, 2009 at 9:34 AM ^
And think this will also help in drawing a couple of those quality DB's that we are in the running for. And a winning season, well hell...who knows what that will do for recruiting.
February 9th, 2009 at 9:42 AM ^
I'm of the same opinion as Magnus, too early in recruting to commit. You're telling me these kids aren't going to get the itch to look around? My daughter changed her outfit 4 times yesterday. Kids just get bored and change their minds. Even if these three commit to enroll early, that still leaves a year. It's just not realistic to keep everyone.
February 9th, 2009 at 11:15 AM ^
from Tommy Bowden on ESPN during signing day coverage. He said that when a kid commits early that puts him on other schools radar as a "target". That when he verbals, he then gets inundated with contacts from schools he hadn't yet heard from with offers because it was early. So the real recruiting often begins with a verbal. We'll see if he stays as firm as a 17 year old.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:12 AM ^
The only concern I have about having three WRs this early is the lack of exposure. I mean at this stage of the game we could target someone down the road that may be better than J Rob. It just seems risky to totally finish a position in recruiting this early unless the kids are all in your backyard and you know who the best is already without a doubt like Texas does. Where is everyone getting that J Rob is the best WR in Ohio? Same thing for Jackson about MI?
February 9th, 2009 at 10:18 AM ^
I'm not entirely pacified. If RR is done getting WR's, then great. Three would be about par for the course given RR's previous recruiting patterns here. But if you look at the offers that are out according to Rivals, there are more of them to WRs than any other position by far, and they don't even list the Jerald Robinson offer.
I'm perfectly happy with getting what's likely to be three of the best receivers in the country, but the sheer number of offers seems way imbalanced toward WR, and it's weird. Meanwhile there's two offers out to linebackers, one of which is committed to Penn State. No doubt more are on the way, but still. People have been saying we can move them to other positions because they're athletic, but really the only other option is DB. Not like they can be dropped just anywhere.
February 12th, 2009 at 5:17 PM ^
Read the Diary "whence all the WR's" or something like that.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:31 AM ^
It's 50 degrees, sunny, warm and the snow has melted.
I am pissed and complaining its not at 60 degrees.
That's kinda how I feel about folks already complaining about the next recruiting class.....makes no sense.
Sounds like we're off to an early, and excellent start for the next recruiting season.....let it grow, people, let it grow.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:48 AM ^
Love all the WRs. Can I love those guys and still wish that we have a surfiet of LBs? I have a burning desire for a PSU-style class of LBs. I would have traded Stokes and Gallon and a WR to be named later for Jelani Jenkins.
February 9th, 2009 at 10:49 AM ^
AFAIC, RR can recruit all the WR's he wants. I am betting he can develop some great CB's and safeties if there really end up being too many there.
Remember, though, that to RR, a commit isn't a commit until he faxes in his LOI. And he knows that a lot of "commits" just commit to reserve a spot while they look around.
I am guessing he takes any verbal he can right now, but with a grain of salt, and isn't really counting on any of them to follow through until much later in the process.
Like any contract, a verbal committment is as good as the paper it is written on.
February 9th, 2009 at 11:16 AM ^
On the contrary, I bet Rodriguez would prefer that verbals be solid at this point. After losing 7 (or 8?) commits last year, I doubt he's looking for guys who are going to be wishy-washy.
February 9th, 2009 at 11:19 AM ^
rivals, i believe, just had an article on decommitments. it wasn't just us that lost a boat load of commits. and i was amazed to see how many decommits there were all over the country at places like USC and florida. so it showed even the premier programs were getting poached very easily. over the last few years it has become common practice.
February 9th, 2009 at 11:24 AM ^
True, but Michigan was hit especially hard and suffered a lot of negative press because of it.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:36 PM ^
Every recruit we sign is at the expense of another potential scholly. Give me some freakin DLineman and someone who is a true LB instead of a hybrid.
I just don't get excited about a WR who is not a top 50 athlete.
We will not have as many schollies next year as the last two as projected and we need D!!!!! and i'm talking about some big timers.
February 9th, 2009 at 1:49 PM ^
We have three commitments! We're running out of room!
PANIC!!!
February 9th, 2009 at 2:16 PM ^
I think we've got 2 WRs the past 10 years that have been top 50 athletes. Manningham and Stonum. I could be wrong though.
February 9th, 2009 at 2:12 PM ^
this is college not pro football. once we get an effective qb rolling, who's going to be able to cover our 5 receiver set???