So you think hed be so petulant to refuse the top job in the mation because he coached at rivals? That is incredibly naive
Perhaps the no. 1 reason for such tremendous success in recruiting
I'm so happy that you're not our AD.
Would not have minded Dantonio? I'm speechless, really, just speechless.
This post may be filled with more nonsense than any post in the history of this blog.
1) Our history has not been to take a rib from OSU. If you take a rib from OSU, they drool all over you, and it's hard to get the barbecue sauce off of your clothes.
2) We took a coach with OSU roots twice. Hardly our history. Michigan takes the best, because excellence is our first and foremeost tradition. Yost, Crisler, Oosterbaan and Carr had no ties to OSU.
3) Anything tied to Tressel will never and should never see the light of day in this great university. We achieve victory and excellence with honor and integrity.
4) If you like the way Dantonio's teams play, then you are not a fan of class, and you should switch your allegiance. Right or wrong is pretty important and should not be dismissed.
5) Tressel beat us on a regular basis because he was blatantly cheating. Oh yeah, you don't care about right or wrong.
The fourth item i wasnt aware of. And thought it was more due to hate or wishful thinking iin the rivalry. I do appreciate your post because its changing my view
power, (some) prestige, future opportunities and lots of money may have something to do with it!
Survey says: Dantonio is a douche
Dantonio sucks but that's not why we're recruiting well. We're recruiting well because Hoke, Mattison and co are great recruiters and because Michigan is Michigan.
Michigan is on a different level of recruiting now. Save a few in-state recruits with MSU ties, UM isn't really competing with MSU for anything. We're competing with Bama, OSU, ND, USC, Georgia, Florida, Oklahoma etc etc etc.
...We are Michigan fergodsakes. Direct quote from the Oracle of Ann Arbor.
EDIT: My bad, didnt see two posts below this, didnt mean to steal their thunder. Damn Iphones. Forward my mail to Bolivia. Apologies.
I think Dantonio's culture is too much We-Hate-Michigan and not enough MSU is a great place to play. It will work only if he finds a like-minded recruit.
Also, your quote attributed to Voltaire was never uttered or written by him. A popular misconception. Just trying to maintain the superior intellectual quality of this thread and blog.
Your quote attributed to Craig Roh was never uttered or written by him. A popular misconception. In truth, the quote is from Mr. Roh's eyebrows. Just trying to maintain the superior intellectual quality of this thread and blog.
According to wikipedia:
The most oft-cited Voltaire quotation is apocryphal. He is incorrectly credited with writing, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” These were not his words, but rather those of , written under the pseudonym S. G. Tallentyre in her 1906 biographical book The Friends of Voltaire.
Good point. Michigan's not even competing head-to-head with State for most of the recruits, so to make the OP about Dantonio is rather silly.
The number one reason for our recruiting success against MSU is that this is Michigan.
Last couple of classes have been good, Michigan classes, but we're still a step behind the likes of Alabama, ND, USC, OSU etc in terms of bringing in top shelf talent, and the only way to change that is to win big 10 championships.
Maybe at a few of the skill positions, but in the trenches we're doing as well or better than any of those schools. Doing well in the trenches allows you to completely roll inferior competition, which in our case equates to 10/11 win seasons. Once recruits see that, getting great skill position guys is sure to follow.
Agreed. Scout has us as the #1 class for 2013. http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=14&yr=2013
Hooray! Another meme that needs to die in a fire! First, when it comes to recruiting, lets be honest, it's #1: Alabama, #2 Everybody else. We're not going to match Bama I believe; as will no one else on a consistent basis. As for the rest of your statement, what data really backs up your opinion? There are complaints one can have with the last two classes on specific positions, like lack of top -shelf WR, but the last two classes have been deep with very solid talent. Scout has us as the #1 in the nation with 4 5 stars. ND was ranked below us pretty much everywhere last year. We're I'm the top 5 on 247's composite rankings. I just don't think these meme had a whole lot of merit to it. If you're expecting to become Alabama on recruiting, then well, I think you're going to be dissappointed. But we are NOT a step behind the others you listed.
Well yeah, the class looks better if you look at the recruiting site that rates Michigan's class best, 247 gives no 5 stars, and the highest rated player that was even close to coming to M was no 28. And to be honest, the bulk of our class was brought in when OSU were coming off a terrible year and notre dame were still notre dame. And those were Midwest recruits almost exclusively.
How many players in the top 25 were Michigan considered by compared to SC, OSU and ND?
247 composite has us with me 5 star and Ohio with none. Ohio has gotten one consensus top-10 recruit the last few years; Noah Spence. It's not like they're being Alabama either. Basically I'm hearing you cherry pick data points to show UM behind our rivals. There are also data points showing us equal to or greater than our rivals. Sure, we haven't gotten the one consensus top-10 recruit that Ohio or ND has. But we also probably have the best O-line depth in the nation over the past two classes. I just think arguing that our fur stars are ranked like 30 spots below our rivals' four stars (just using Rivals as an example here) is such a tiny difference it's basically ignorable. And while ND has a slightly better class this year, their's last year was far below this year; even ND hasn't shown Bama consistency under Kelly yet. I think we're in the upper level of Everyone Else, and we won't get 'out-talented' by anyone except Bama in a few years (if everything stays at current levels). Coaching will be the determining factor going forward.
My specific complaints about our recruiting so far: lack of elite WR (although Darboh and Chesson have measurables be be great, something I don't really see in this year's WRs), lack of elite edge rusher, and lack of large, fast corner (Conley was this, so ouch).
Darboh was a 4 star recruit so until we see him play lets hold off on missing out on elite WR talent. As for pass rushers, Mario Death Stare and Taco would seem to fit that bill if they pan out. Once again we won't know until this year or next if they do.
None of those guys were 'elite' coming out of high school. If they become elite in college then they would have over-achieved to various degrees. I really hope they do. That would suggest this staff's coaching and IDing abilities are very good and would be a big positive for the future.
Don't forget that Noah Spence was most likely headed to PSU before their crazy shit, so there goes that top-10 recruit. You gotta use the same measure for both schools. Both benefitted from crazy stuff going on at another school.
The whole point was cherrypicking data points, my entire thing was that we aren't interesting the top talent in the country. This is a very good recruiting class, with a huge number of high quality commits at a number of key positions, they're just not getting in on these kids who will be impact playmakers from their freshman year most likely.
The wider point is: this is Michigan, we should be able to attract a lot of 4-stars when they can come in and play but to have great classes year in year out you need to be able to get the guy who doesn't give a damn about depth because he's that good.
This post seems ill-timed. Maybe you missed Derrick Green's commitment yesterday?
And my whole point was that our peer group (other than Bama) isn't getting 'top-shelf' talent at a rate any different than we are. This what I thought you were arguing in the first post.
About the "lack of a large, fast corner" - doesn't Channing Stribling match that description? He had a very good year at DB from what I've read, and he plays against excellent competition. He'll need to add muscle, of course, but the measureables seem to be there.
He has the size, but I don't see the fluidity and speed to be elite. Seems like a taller JT Floyd. I'm all for him proving me wrong though.
Do you follow recruiting at all? You might want to take a look before posting.
Completely disagree with this post. First and foremost it would imply that basically we go "head up" against MSU on every kid and Dantonio's lack of personality when compared to Hoke is the #1 variable kids are considering when choosing Michigan. Green, for example, never even considered MSU so Dantonio had zero impact on his decision.
Also, outside of the RR years Michigan usually didnt lose a kid to State that they really, really wanted UNLESS State was able to promise early playing time or he was an MSU legacy of some sort. Head up we usually won the recrutiing battle and that goes way, way back to the end of the Duffy Daugherty days at State.
Just to name a FEW "off the top of my head" built in advantadges Michigan has over State regardless of who's coaching:
1. Better facilities
2. More frequent national exposure
3. Better academics
4. Higher likelyhood of playing in a BCS game of some sort
And if I gave this more than 10 seconds of thought I could come up with a bunch more that have nothing whatsoever to do with whoever the present coaches are at State.
No, the #1 reason for Michigan's recent recruiting success on the national stage is most certainly NOT Mark Dantonio's outward appearance that he doesn't love his job. Hoke is simply a better recruiter than Dantonio and Michigan is simply a better overall school than State.
but I believe that for a brief period—basically defined by the RR era—MSU was in the position to start grabbing players, especially instate, that normally UM would have gotten. Whether Dantonio would have been able to truly capitalize on that opportunity over time we'll never know, but in any event Hoke's hiring effectively killed even the chance that MSU could put itself into an equal position recruiting-wise. If RR had been retained and we'd had another two or three disappointing years, who knows how MSU's recruiting might have gone. Kids want to play for a winner, even if the coach is a jackass.
It does seem to be the case that we are now back to the situation that has held since at least 1969, where UM routinely gets most of the best players instate, and holds its own in Ohio with OSU. It certainly doesn't hurt Michigan that we're not battling both MSU and OSU for the best Ohio kids; if Dantonio's personality was different, he'd be a better recruiter, and that wouldn't help us.
Wait, so we're not killing it in recruiting because of uniformz?
WHAT ELSE HAVEN'T YOU TOLD ME!?!?!?!?!
The OP touches on it a little, but one of the things about Hoke himself that is integral to building and keeping such classes together is that people are naturally drawn to him like that. It's hardly the sole reason, but it definitely helps us (as do facilities, academics, and so on).
It seems as if everywhere Hoke has been as a coach in his career, players and staff speak highly of him to the point where it is almost as much about playing for the school as it is about playing for Brady Hoke. That was especially apparent when he came here from SDSU but was still obviously very revered by Aztec personnel and they said as much.
I think Hoke has also built a staff around him that can emulate a similar vibe as well, each in their own way. They are good at selling Michigan to recruits, but almost as importantly, they are able to get recruits to think, "This is the guy I want to play for, that I want to be coached by at my position, etc...". Michigan can get by well enough on its name, but the name is enhanced greatly by a head coach who takes time to develop relationships with these players.
There is something to be said about being able to make recruits feel "at home", if you will, with a program, or at least trying to do that, and I think the family atmosphere that Hoke and the staff have created probably is a huge advantage, at least if this is important to a given recruit.
With some people on this board who continue to make state relevant by bringing them up and comparing them all the time? Who cares about them! This is MGoBlog! We rarely even compete for the same players...why mention Dantonio?
Dantonio didn't go into medicine...
Recruiting is (usually) about relationships. You need to be able to build them it recruit successfully. I'm sure Dantonio is able to build them with several recruits, but being less personable makes it more difficult on a whole. Interestingly, I think part of the reason why they let go of the DL coach is because he didn't really recruit.
We are a fickle people
Basketball plays a role in football recruiting? This is demonstrably false, even in states that care about basketball more than football. Purdue and Notre Dame vs Indiana. Kansas State vs Kansas. NC State vs Duke and UNC. Louisville vs Kentucky. USC vs UCLA. All schools in close proximity and overall athletic dept revenues, whose football programs are more attractive to recruits despite having worse basketball programs.
You find me a quote from a single football-only recruit saying that they went to State in (any) part because of the basketball program, and I'll consider believing this.
That said, there seem to be more things pointing in the opposite direction. Take Drake Harris, for example. Here's a kid who clearly loves basketball and wanted to go to State to play both sports, and the instant he decides he's going to focus on football, State starts looking less attractive and the football powerhouse schools start looking a lot more interesting. Based on your suggestion, wouldn't he be the kind of guy who would still want to be at State because of their strong basketball program?
And while we're on the topic, why would this work for State, but no other school with a strong basketball program?
Finally, an explanation for why Kentucky, Kansas, UNC, Duke, Syracuse, and Temple, have such strong football programs -- they clearly get their success from being the winningest basketball programs in the country!
"I can name two other coaches who recruited in the manner Brady does and their names are Bo and Woody."
Um, let's not go all revisionist history here. Bo and Woody did not recruit like Hoke does. Times were very different. They would not sit for 2 seconds through a Hat Dance press conference by a 17 year old. They were not "player's coaches". They were more "parent's coaches" or "High School coaches' coaches" if anything.
Times have changed and I love the way Hoke, Mattison, and Borges can recruit. Let's appreciate them at face value. Not everything good that hapens is a throwback to the legacy of Bo or Woody.
A lot of interesting comments - some of which are influenced by a variety of other agendas.
Your point is exactly right. Bo and Woody were from a time when winning the kid's parents over was the most important thing and playing later on in the NFL was just an after thought. Charming mom and dad and assuring that their kid would get a good education and that someone would keep an eye on their lad were the big selling point. The coach as the ultimate loco parentis father figure was a major selling point back then.
Both of them (it could be confidently stated) would have pulled an offer from any kid who did a hat press conference thing. Neither really liked recruiting and would usually close the deal after a lot of leg work by their assistants. High school coaches I believe had longer tenures back then - so Bo and Woody could actually know the coaches of the top 25 big high school in Michigan and Ohio.
Today, some of the parents are the ones egging the kids on to think about which schools could help them get ready for the NFL. The role of non-traditional advisors also is huge now. There is now Twitter, Facebook, the Big Ten Network and the UM has its own video presence via the web and there are places like MGoBlog.com.
Different times, different styles and different methods!
and rub snake oil in the players' jock straps?
He rubs a hundred dollar bill across their hand.
Dantonio spends too much time laying in the weeds to be a good recruiter.
I see two main factors for a spike. First of all, there aren't any "Michigan men" telling HS coaches not to send their players to Michigan. Second, I think players perceive a great opportunity for playing time as Hoke retools the team for his style of football.
Ulitmately, though, the Michigan name is always going to be attractive; Michigan is one of the few schools capable of pulling in top ten classes on a regular basis without offering illegal perks. It's amazing what can happen when a coach has the full resources of the program.
Remember, he was the Defenisve Cooridinator at OSU during the Robert Reynolds choking Jim Sorgii incident. He refused to punish Reynolds and esentially condoned the play, which is still one of the most despicable and cowardly things I've ever seen done on a Div 1-A football field.
Dantonio has no class or integrity of any kind. He runs an undisciplined, "inmates run the asylum", WIN AT ALL COSTS program. He is the anthesis of what Michigan is. I'm hard pressed to come up with more than a handful of coaches I would want here LESS than him.