Return to Recruiting Dominance
just awesome. Love how all the statues have the recruits names on them...didn't notice it at first.
That is the best I've seen in a long long while!
Washed his hands.
We landed on the moon!
Not trying to be a hater but this subject is pretty redundant
But at this point, I'm still enjoying it so I don't mind.
At this point, I'd like to see more player development. Recruiting was good in 2008 and 2009, not too great in 2010, and a little better in 2011.
Getting players on campus, keeping them at the same position and in the same scheme, and getting some good old development in will work wonders for the program.
the pincher bug metaphor, development is a snap.
Recruiting is half the battle, the other half is knowing.... I mean getting the product right on the field.
However, player development is not something that can occur overnight. It is unfortunately, more of a long term goal. That being said, it appears we are heading in the right direction.
chicken ... eggs ... hatch
.....is the metaphorical essence of my somewhat weird avatar.
It's the most glorious poo I've ever seen.
I did not know this before and this will surely change my entire life, or at least my lunch plans for tomorrow. Thank you good sir.
i agree, there are schools like clemson who are awesome at recruiting, but well, they're still clemson. i think it's great to talk about positive news, especially since we really haven't had too much great news in the last couple of years, but let's be honest, having solid recruiting for one class that doesn't even become freshman until 2012
The big thing is going to be winning, especially against msu and ohio in the new couple years. If we do that we should be solid in both player development and recruitment, but we need to get there before we crown hoke best coach ever
Is the team that has been "Returning to Glory Since 1989", then Clemson must be "The Team of the Future and Always Will Be".
Has Hoke's recruiting been that good?
of true recruiting for UM has been good, but not great YET. It's only May...Long way to go. I will put this recruiting class in the GREAT catergory after I see some of the DT and OL he brings in by Feb. If BleacherReport already has us #8 in the country (it is BleacherReport after all so take FWIW) then we are on the right track. I just want to see the Line addressed with some Studs this year.
We get Jordan Diamond, Sheldon Day, Chris Wormley, Ondre Pipkins, and Erik Magnuson .. this will turn into an elite class.
Your sig (Carpe....) is eleven kinds of awesome. Bravo.
Enthooziasm is infektshus!!!
Assuming RR's 2008 class would roughly equal Hokes 2011 (very first albeit rushed recruiting class)
RR's 2008 Michigan #10 overall class vs. Hoke's 2011 #21 overall class
RR's 2009 Michigan #8 overall class vs. Hoke's 2012 (yet to be determined).
Don't let facts get in the way of your wonderful argument though.
Bang that drum.
Adjust for players who transferred out or those who did not qualify, the RR numbers drop significantly. Also, during. RR's 2008 recruiting season, Michigan was still consider to be up there with he OSU, Alabama and Oregon type teams from a recruiting standpoint. Now, we are in a serous rebuilding job from a recruiting standpoint. Not a criticism of RR but your numbers fail to take into account so many facts that they are sort of meaningless.
As meaningless as over valuing true freshmen that won't see the field (if they don't transfer out or not qualify) until two or three years from now?
We are in a recruiting rebuild because we had poor records or a few years and we have a new coach, not because RR sux and Hoke rulz. Just pointing that out. #8 overall > #21 overall and #10 overall is in all probability > yet to be determind. I hope we do have a top ten recruiting class this year, but this post only tells head to head battles with Michigan State and Ohio State when we all know RR moved his recruiting base to Florida... so the "facts" of this original post are not exactly genuine either.
I am not saying that Hoke rules or RR sucks. Just saying that your numbers are worthless (no insult intended) since you are comparing apples to oranges. Right now, in the minds of many recruits we are a somewhat damaged program looking to rebuild. In 2008 and 2009 that was not the perception. Those kids remember Michigan as a perennially great or at least very good program. For many of today's recruits, the last time we were good was when they were in middle school. Again, no criticism to RR - just saying that you can't compare the 2008/9 numbers to today in a vacuum. Also, Hoke had all of like 11 days to recruit this last class. I would say that this is his first class coming up.
Well then your facts are assuming bias. Ok. I agree with that.
I don't think comparing rivals overall class rankings to rivals overall class rankings is "comparing apples to oranges" exactly, but whatever makes you smile, man.
I really didn;t want to get too far into this, because I am NOT trying to make any negative points about RR, but let's dig into the numbers a bit.
Let's look at the 4* and higher players (since those are the ones that contribute to a solid ranking) that make up that top 10 2008 class: Booboo, Smith, Koger, McGuffie, Fitzgerald, Wermers, Martin, O'Neill, 'Spoon, T-Rob, Mealer, Shaw, Cox, Odoms.
If you look at the committment dates, all but Smith, T-Rob, Shaw and Odoms committed well before Lloyd even announced his retirement. That's right - 9 of our 13 4* recruits and our only 5* (Booboo) committed to Lloyd.
With the exception of these 4 players, the rest of RR's recruits were 3* players, and the 2* Justin Feagin.
Now let's dig a bit deeper into the 2011 class: Sadly, we only had 5 players rated at 4* (and no 5* players): Beyer, Jones, Poole, Hayes and Countess. Of those, Jones Poole and Countess committed to Hoke, not RR. (Note: I am assigning ZERO blame to RR for only having 2 highly ranked players, because even Nick Saban and his bag of cash couldn't have recruited under the conditions that RR was facing). In his 2 weeks on the job, Hoke reeled in 3 players ranked as 4*, and 9 players ranked 3*. The class was about evenly split between RR and Hoke recuited players.
So, if the point that you were making is that Lloyd Carr's 2008 class was better than RR and Hoke's combined 2011 class, I would agree. RR, even in his latter years, was still a good recruiter. But to say that "RR's first class" was better than Hoke's first class, I think that statement is incomplete. RR's first class was 2009, which was a great class. Hoke's first class is going to be 2012, and that class will not be known for 9 months. If I had to guess, I would assume that Hoke's first class (2012) will be ranked right around where RR's first class (2009) was ranked.
A few caveats:
1. Some of the 3* guys that RR picked up in the end of the 2008 recruiting period are awesome players (Roundtree and Demens). I am not trying to comment on RR's recruiting ability, his ability to spot talent or on any other RR hot button issue - I am merely attacking the credibility of simply comparing 2008 to 2011.
2. RR came into a situation where he was announced as the coach before the team even played the bowl, so he had almost 2 months to (a) retain Lloyd's recruits (which he did a great job of), and (b) fill out the class (which he also did a great job of. Hoke, I think we can all agree, was put in the insane position of having to come in and retain RR's recruits - many of whom left because of the process or because of the 2010 defense - and then fill out the class, all in 2 weeks.
A couple points I find funny:
You saying his dudeness's numbers are worthless when he was comparing RichRod's rivals class rankings vs hoke's rivals class rankings and saying he was comparing apples to oranges.
You saying his dudeness's numbers are worthless when the point of the OP was to compare how Michigan recruiting is amazing 9 months before signing day because we turned around in-state recruiting and have 1 recruting win against OSU instead of the 0 we had last year.
The while idea that comparing RichRod's classes to hoke's is ridiculous because 2 years ago the people we were recruiting knew a national title and amazing Michigan brand name while today's recruits, those 2 years older, only know a shitty and not good Michigan football name. This, by the way, was the funniest part of your ridiculous posts.
Just the overall ridiculousness of not only your post, but the entire thought process that hoke is turning around recruiting because he is taking all MSU's recruits and has 1 OSU recruit. I think Hoke is doing really well recruiting, but is it really necessary to compare it to RR? We have 9 months until signing day and RR had a top 10 class his first full class. It's ok to say RR recruited well because he did. Hoke can do well all on his own...because he is. Comparing the last regime's recruiting to this one is ridiculous considering they are going after a different type of kid. Although we better hope RichRod recruited really well.....considering the entire team is made up of his recruits. How do you think the current players like hearing our recruiting has been down the past 3 years....when they were recruited and joined the team.
I am not going to respond to all of the nonsensical blathering that made up your post. The points that I think you were trying to make have all been responded to above and below.
One point that I will respond to: "but is it really necessary to compare it to RR?"
Reading comprehension, my friend. The OP did not make any comparison of the sort. His Dudeness did, and it was to His Dudeness' comparison that I responded. In fact (again, reading comprehension) if you look at my comments, the entire point is that you CANNOT make any comparison between 2008 and 2011.
As to recruiting having been down for the past 2-3 years, I don't think that any RATIONAL person will argue that 2010 was not a great year or that 2011 was on its way to being worse. Again, I am NOT assigning blame to any one individual - most of the issue was simply not winning and having a local and national media that loves to run stories about a coach being on the hot seat.
Ah yes, reading comprehension. Like when you read the OP and see direct comparisons from RichRod's recruiting and hoke's (number of head to head battles won against MSU and OSU from last year to this year, 9 months before national signing day) and saying that we aren't competing against Pitt and Illinois for recruits anymore. But I guess you are right, there are no comparisons anywhere in the OP.
How do you think the current players like hearing our recruiting has been down the past 3 years....when they were recruited and joined the team.
Because I'm sure you've never referred to "bare cupboard" or "decimated defense" at any time over the last 3 years...and have called out everyone who has.
"We are in a recruiting rebuild because we had poor records [f]or a few years and we have a new coach, not because RR sux and Hoke rulz."
I'm no RR basher, but something about this sentence doesn't compute and definitely doesn't support your argument. All the OP said was that 2012 recruiting is going better than last year which I take to mean 2011. I don't think he had any intention of mistreating RR as you and Section 1 would want to believe. Most people understand the difficulties RR and Hoke had last year and think both did an admirable job given the circumstances. I'm not even sure how you make the leap from that to comparing this class to 2008/2009.
The OP's wonderful (although redundant) argument is still intact. Carry on.
Michigan named Rodriguez as coach earlier (before the bowl game), and Carr was not put in limbo in the same way that Rodriguez was. All in all, the transition to RR was smooth as silk when compared to the transition to Hoke. RR had lots of advantages in salvaging his first rushed class when compared to Hoke.
Also, most of that first RR class was secured by Carr, most of that first Hoke class was secured by RR. Not sure that helps your "argument."
But don't let facts get in the way of your wonderful rebuttal.
Bang that drum.
When comparing stats sometimes you have to make assumptions. I think assuming Hoke's 2011 class is roughly comparable to RR's 2008 class is a reasonable assumption. Hoke had certain disadvantages, but to call RR's transition "as smooth as silk" calls out your bias pretty clearly.
My description of "smooth as silk: was comparative, not absolute, and referenced recruiting only. Nice try.
Oh, and calling it reasonable to assume Hoke' 2011 class and RR's 2008 class were comparable is, um, dumb. See all the post in response that clearly explain why that is not reasonable.
This is marked flamebait? It's a fact.
Your last two lines make it flamebait.
It's a "fact" that doesn't relate to anything the OP said.
Head to head battles don't tell the whole story. Overall recruiting class rankings by a recruiting site (not by some blog plagiarised by a junior high school football coach) is another way of measuring recruiting success. I didn't think you were brighter than that, but I at least thought you could make basic logical connections. I guess I learned something today so thank you.
Even the musings of a junior high school football coach would be more useful than your incessant ravings.
Even after you explained the reasoning behind your post, it STILL has nothing to do with what the OP put in his post.
I don't really understand how you can't see that comparing RR's recruiting to Hoke's is exactly like comparing RR's recruiting to Hoke's. I see it.
It wasn't a comparison of RR's recruits to Hoke's. The OP wasn't saying that this class is higher ranked.
It was a comparison between who we were/are battling for recruits. He's stating - albeit redundantly - that we're beating out teams like MSU and OSU for recruits, which didn't happen a whole lot last year.
That's a valid point, and it has nothing to do with pitting the 2011 class vs. the 2008 class. You basically hijacked the thread by turning it into a Hoke 2011 vs. Rodriguez 2008 thing, which isn't what the thread was about.
The title is "A Return to Recruiting Dominance" which implies that we haven't been dominant in recruiting over the last few years.
I showed data proving that we were, in fact, dominant (top 10) in recruiting over the last few years.
My overall point was not pitting 2008 class vs. 2011 class. It was that the "roughly similar albeit rushed first year" of recruiting by each coach roundly rejects the OP's presumptuion that we were ever not dominant in recruiting.
If you can't see the connection then I can't help you.
While we obviously disagree on the subject matter, I can't see why either of our comments up and back would be marked as flamebait. Seems like a pretty reasonable discussion without much name calling or attempts to start a pro-RR / anti-RR fight. I think that perhaps people are way too sensitive to ANY discussion that involves the name RR and that the "flamebait" tag is being used way too liberally.
Looking at the other choices for a neg, I guess this is probably the best default. Perhaps there should be a choice for "general suckiness of comment" on the drop down.
"Redundant" is another possibility.
This thread was not just a "hey, our recruiting is going well" thread. That can be a tiny one line statement on any one of the numerous recruiting threads. The OP directly compared recruiting under hoke to recruiting under RR. It was meant to start a flame war
Last night I, in all sincerity, told my girlfriend that I was going to be really busy in early June working on a business I'm trying to start and probably wouldn't be able to tag along with her on a moderately long interstate road trip. This obviously led to an argument about how I wasn't making time for her and haven't been putting as much effort into the relationship as before. She reads too much into things too.
So you are seriously trying to say that a post stating recruiting is on its way back up after a shitty year last year was not going to start a RR vs Hoke discussion? I don't see what good a rehashed argument about the last 3 years of recruiting vs a class that has 9 months before signing day is going to do.
As to your first sentence, I wouldn't disrespect the 2011 signees by saying last year was shitty. Only that there were some, ahem, challenges that both RR and Hoke had to deal with. How this should spark a RR vs Hoke discussion, I'll leave that up to you, His Dudeness and Section 1 to decide.
As to your second sentence, please show me where in the OP's post he rehashes the last 3 years of recruiting vs. this year's recruiting. Can't? Well then, just like my girlfriend, you're reading into things that aren't there.
So when the title of the post is "returning to recruiting dominance," do you think he was talking about how Lloyd recruited 4 years ago, or do you think he was talking about RichRod (considering he only used last year's head-to-head numbers in his analysis)?
And when the author states that he is really excited about this class and says it is a complete 180 from last year's class, what would you imply? Maybe he wasn't happy about that class?
And do you notice the author hasn't said anything since he posted the OP? No, this post wasn't supposed to bring about a flame war at all, right?
Unlike you, I'm not trying to imply anything. The OP titled his thread "Return to Recruiting Dominance" then went on to discuss a 180 from last year (and did not discuss any other previous year). Last year, we went through the NCAA infractions, the RR hotseat, beatdowns by our rivals, a stomping in our bowl game, the RR firing, the Process, etc. Our recruiting class turned out good but we didn't exactly dominate MSU or compete with OSU as we have so far this year, and for good reason...our program was in a state of flux. This is all I took from the OP based on his plain language.
I'm not the OP, don't know who he is, what his mission was for this original post or what he's up to today to not have posted again. What I do believe is that most people wouldn't objectively say his post was meant to incite a flame war, regardless of what the OP was actually trying to accomplish. But go ahead and keep placing whatever meaning you want on whatever you want to. I mean, obviously a flame war is intended when three singular posters out of the masses are the only ones getting themselves all worked up.
This recruiting class isn't unique in comparison to last year, its unique in comparison to any year in the past 40 years. There was no reason to point to just last year's class...he basically said "look, hoke is doing better then RichRod based on one data point that won't even be complete for another 9 months."
And did us 3 people who think this is stupid and ridiculous give the OP the -15 points, or do you think more people have a problem with it? Considering it has more negative votes than positive, I'd say you have no clue what you're talking about. I'm sure us 3 singular posters are the only ones who think it is stupid though...you're probably right.
This recruiting class isn't unique in comparison to last year, it's unique in comparison to any year in the past 40 years.
You know this for a fact? We have historically dominated Sparty in head-to-head recruiting, and held our own against OSU.
Anyway, If the OP's intention was to argue that Hoke is recruiting better than RR, why does that offend you? Isn't it a good thing if our current coach is improving our level of recruiting?
We have the possibility of getting the top 10 players in the state....name the last time that happened. That is all I was getting at.
And I don't really care if Hoke is recruiting better than RR 9 months before signing day (which he probably is). I don't even care if he said Hoke is a way better recruitier than RR because, quite simply, we have no clue if this is correct (unless the OP only wants to base his argument on dominating in-state recruiting and taking 1 guy from OSU, which is great, but really tells us very little). I just think this small point could have been put on one of the million TomVH update posts or the billion other recruiting posts as all this does is start a flame war...which is exactly what I stated.
Before speaking for everyone negging him, you should probably read the initial replies on this thread before you three started your pissing match. I suspect they have different reasons for negging than you. Even I was going to neg him for what amounts to an obvious, redundant, cool-story-bro post. Useless post? Probably. Insidious? Only if you have a subjective agenda as your first paragraph above clearly points to.
Oh, and someone simply negging him (even if it were because they think the OP is slighting RR) is not the same as getting worked up and starting an unnecessary flame war.
So I shouldn't speak for the rest of the board and why they are negging him, but you are free to speculate as to what people think and why he is being negged?
This board is quickly becoming MLive-esque. I think I will come up with a post stating all of the reasons I love RichRod and then be amazed when it turns into a big argument.
Ah the MLive routine. When all else is going wrong for you in an argument, it's a great go to!
All the best to you my man, you clearly have some Richrod issues you need to work through regardless of how appropriate they are in a given forum. You may continue your unreasonableness and wild speculations without the obstacle of my rationality. I can do no more and must be moving on.
Logan, I loved the comment about people pulling the MLive card. You need to post more often.
I don't know how those "facts" refute the OP's argument, which is unrelated to anything you've said.
But RR's #10 overall class was put together over two months, while Hoke had about three weeks.
Furthermore, Michigan was coming off a three year record of 27-11 in 2008 (if I remember the three previous seasons correctly). Meanwhile, Michigan is coming off a three year record of 15-22 here in 2011 with some recent NCAA sanctions/probation hanging over their heads.
So a #21 recruiting class might actually be a better achievement for Hoke than a #10 recruiting class was for Rodriguez, considering the circumstances.
But you can keep carrying on like someone takes a daily piss in your cereal. It's kind of fun to watch you post on here these days.
Do the final 2 sentences make this flamebait? I guess not. This board is fucked.
Oh no! The posters on this board tend to have an optimistic view for the program's future which can't be reconciled with your "facts" and anger issues! The board is fucked! How will the program survive with a fucked up message board?!?!
Hate to see you feel that way. I don't follow every thread to know what everyone is saying, but I get that some still feel RR was mistreated.
When I started following the board though, I really enjoyed your contributions. What I struggle with nowdays is this: why does every thread get sucked back into the RR debate black hole? It's over...let's get behind the team.
The OP starts a positive thread...clearly recruiting IS looking good right now. As you say, time will tell. For now though, the Hoke train is leaving the station. I'm hoping you (and others) eventually jump on it with us.
Huh? Really? Why would anybody NOT think that RR was mistreated? What has changed? Is he now being treated fairly? Has the record been corrected somehow?
I can understand that low-level fandom ("My team, right or wrong") might demand that some say, let's just forget about the past. We've got a new coach to root for now, Yay!
But a guy is not "forgetting about the past" if he is going out of his way to say that "things are so much better, now that Rodriguez is gone."
I recall exceedingly well that the Detroit Free Press' Publisher, Paul Anger, came out swinging against the harsh critics of Rosenberg and Snyder; Anger wrote off the critics as "passionate Michigan fans." As if their good sense had somehow been blinded by rooting for their favorite team, and failing to see the rightness of the Free Press' reporting. Which was complete bullshit from Anger and the Free Press. I hate that paper and its staff because they are awful, not because I think Michigan is infallible and I'm a Michigan fan. If Paul Anger were right, and I was somehow blinded by my passion for Michigan, I'd be on the Hoke bandwagon now. I certainly wish Hoke and the team well, but I'm not changing my mind one iota about how the Detroit Free Press led the region's and the nation's press in treating Rich Rodriguez unfairly.
However you feel about Brady Hoke (I think he's a likable guy), there is no reason whatsoever for anybody to stop thinking that Rich Rodriguez was treated unfairly.
"...there is no reason whatsoever for anybody to stop thinking that Rich Rodriguez was treated unfairly. "
I don't need any reason, because I never STARTED thinking it. The man took the job, got paid well, and it didn't work out. I pulled for him the whole time, BTW, that's what fans of a program do. As far as I can tell, RR is a good man. He doesn't need your sympathy.
I don't like the Free Press either, but I think you overestimate their impact on the RR era. You're giving them FAR too much credit.
He's got a lot of tilting to do.
I've asked this a couple times but no one has answered it: if getting on the good side of the local media doesn't change much and doesn't affect wins and losses, why does everybody point to this as one of the great things Hoke has done?
It seems as though the same things people pointed to that they say had no effect on RichRod winning are the exact same things people are really excited that hoke is doing better. If it doesn't really change anything in the win column, why are we starting numerous threads on the subjects?
because we all were suffering and then RR got fired.
Not to mention, a top 10 class is meaninless if you can't get half of said class to ever step on the football field.
sounding like a much bigger jerk right now?
Or are you on break?
to take gratuitous shots at Rich Rodriguez.
I'd have been very happy to say that by all measures I know of, Brady Hoke and his staff are doing a very good job on the recruiting trail. I'd also be happy to say that Greg Mattison, our new $900,000 Defensive Coordinator, sems to be doing a remarkable job. And I wouldn't mind leaving it there.
But when people want to say that our recruting now is good, where before it was bad, then Dudeness is exactly right, and Sir Jack is back to his same old Rodriguez-flamebaiting. Sir Jack is a virtual troll on this subject. This week might just have proven once and for all that Eleven Warriors is FAR more charitable to Rich Rodriguez than is Sir Jack.
Brady Hoke is now recruiting with Michigan's NCAA investigation safely disposed of. Brady Hoke is now recruiting 2012 and 2013 h.s. classes in Michigan that look to have better talent, from more Michigan-favorable high schools than the outlier year of 2010. Brady Hoke has gotten some good kids from Ohio, but there is scant evidence that we have suddenly turned around our lack of success in recruiting head-to-head versus Ohio State. Rich Rodriguez seemed to be doing a good job, in fact, in recruiting kids against the likes of Florida (Denard) Alabama (Dee Hart) and Penn State. I'm not claiming any great superiority, just making the point that needs to be made, on the evidence.
There's no good reason to suggest that Brady Hoke has been doing anything less than a very good job recruting. But as Dudeness rightly says, there is also no good reason to suggest that we are somehow seeing a "turnaround," from years of bad recruting.
Thanks. I sincerely appreciate this comment.
His Dudeness - you are a very sucky poster.
Are you implying that RR was hampered in selecting his choice of DC (twice)?
Yes. Thanks for asking.
Jeff Casteel. It's well-documented.
This has been a problem since the late Carr era. See: English, Ron. RR tried to hire Casteel in 2008 and after 2010, but both times, the Michigan AD didn't pony up enough money to motivate Casteel to move from Morgantown to Ann Arbor. Now that we're willing to pay big bucks for a top DC, our on-field performance as well as recruiting should improve.
Even if Michigan has been "notoriously cheap," I haven't seen any documentation that money is what prevented Casteel from following Rodriguez to Michigan. AFAIK, that's pure speculation perpetuated by people on this board.
The "notoriously cheap" allegation applies more to basketball than football. The football program has never been skimped on. Carr asked for, and repeatedly got, pay raises for his assistants (not to mention himself). I'm not sure what Ron English has to do with anything. Carr didn't like to hire guys outside the program. There is no reason to believe that Carr wanted someone else and settled on English.
English was also the architect of The Horror and Safety Doom started up in earnest under his watch.
If you're saying that Lloyd made a bad hire in English, I agree. But I have absolutely no idea why you'd think Lloyd was forced to hire English. You're going to have to explain that one to me.
If Michigan is as storied and magnificent as we make it out to be, surely in the halcyon days of the program we could have made a better DC hire then Ron English. I just find the assumption that Ron English was high on Carr's list somewhat questionable.
If you know what kind of a person Lloyd Carr is, it shouldn't surprise you at all.
Carr, for better or worse, was extremely loyal to his guys. He never once went outside the program for a coordinator, even though he easily could have. This unfortunately contributed to his failure to develop a successor from within.
Rodriguez was never "prohibited" from hiring Casteel. It was Rodriguez's intent all along to hire Casteel. He said so when he arrived in Ann Arbor. It wasn't until January of 2008, several weeks into the Rodriguez hire, after Calvin Magee and the offensive guys were already moving, that Bruce Tall and Jeff Casteel decided. Tall decided to come to Ann Arbor.
Casteel decided to stay in Morgantown. And he felt the need to issue a press release, to explain his decision. Casteel said all the right things; he had been given the chance to stay and to run his defense with his players under Bill Stewart. He and his family were happy in Morgantown. He was a well-paid DC by the standards of the Big East.
But, ya know, you could say all the same things about Rich Rodriguez. Happy, secure, well paid by Big East standards. In Morgantown. What Michigan did was to offer him about double the money, secured, on a far bigger stage. It was Michigan. It was financial security. It was the big time.
In 2009, Jeff Casteel was making about $370k at West Virginia, and Greg Robinson was making about $270k at Michigan. God only knows what Greg Mattison was making with the Ravens. Maybe $1m.
I say Michigan failed to make the right offer to Jeff Casteel, in 2007 (pre-Shafer), in 2009 (post-Shafer), and again in early January of 2011 (Post-bowl review meetings). Although I am led to believe that David Brandon discussed with Rich Rodriguez the need to offer more money for Coordinators, and they both agreed on the need. But that by that time, Casteel would not join the Rodrigeuz staff in Ann Arbor for any price, unless it was clear that Rodriguez would be secured through the end of his contract. If you think I am wrong, and if you know better, I'd love to hear about it. I'm a good listener. If you simply don't want to believe me or agree with my supposition, you are welcome to do that, too. I won't be critical. I'm just offering my view.
But here is Dave Brandon, writing in "Brandon's Blog" on the subject:
'SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT' is an item I will be including in my blog when there is an item that I hear is being discussed on the Internet or another media platform that needs some -- we'll call it clarification.
The first item is appropriate to bring up in this blog. Despite my remarks from day one that our compensation packages for football coaches at Michigan were not always as competitive as they could be, and there's a market out there and we need to pay for value and the marketplace dictates what those price tags are, I still hear there are some self-proclaimed experts who maintained we were not going to be competitive when it came to hiring our football coaching staff. Fact: we went after Greg Mattison and we convinced him to leave a highly successful NFL football franchise. An important part of making it happen involved us being prepared to pay for the talent and experience we needed. Fact: I understand the dynamics of the marketplace and we have and will pay for top talent to keep our programs successful.
Again, if you want to disagree with me, that's fine. I won't argue. If it is a book reference that you require, I would suggest that we mark a date to discuss it again, after the publication of Bacon's book.
btw, I exchanged email with the always-friendly Angelique Chengelis, who referred to Bacon as an "embed." I think she has very good reason to use that sort of shorthand. It is obviously not used in a wholly flattering sense -- journalists don't want to be "embedded" if they don't have to be. But of course there are "embeds." They get special access, which is good, and they get special attention on whether they can remain fair to their subjects despite getting privileged access and protection. Bacon, it is clear, has gotten special, unique, privileged access. People may doubt him; but he will, assuredly, have some major news to report.
Money was not the reason why Casteel decided to stay put in Morgantown in '07 and again after the '08 season. He had no desire to leave WVU except for a head coaching job. Money was also not the overriding factor as to why Coach Rod ended up settling for Greg Robinson, either. Allowing his position coaches (and best friends) to undermine a young, up and coming defensive coordinator by the name of Scott Schafer did not go over well at all in coaching circles. Bottom line, no defensive coordinator wanted to come work in an environment where they didn't have control of the scheme and authority over the assistants, who answered directly to the head coach.
You're actually being far more specific, without being any more definite, than I am.
I don't know exactly how the negotiations went. I haven't suggested that it was $100k that separated the parties. I haven't even discounted the fact that Jeff Casteel was being transparently candid, when he said that he and his family decided together to remain in Morgantown on Bill Stewart's staff. But I might also suggest that doubling Jeff's salary, with a fat guarantee provision (all of which would be less than what we are now paying Mattison in the Brandon Era) would also have been a very good thing, for Mrs. Casteel and the girls.
Now as for the history between you and me, sport; it wasn't so long ago -- just the beginning of this month -- that I had advanced the theory that the "Liar Liar" billboard, which had been put up by "Michigan fans," according to 1001 news sites on the 'web, was actually the work of the guys in the CBS Outdoor Sales Office. And you, in the thread that I started, wondered:
I heard that the billboard was paid for by someone from The Grassy Knoll.
So how did that one work out for the two of us?
You should really think about asking Tater to write for his tinfoilconspiracywhackjob.nutjob.blogspot.com site.
They are using the same proof you have used numerous times to say RichRod didn't try hard enough to keep manningham and arrington out of the draft and on the 08 team.
Yeah, exactly how again? Because Casteel didn't want to uproot his family? No one has any idea if it involves money, it's just some presumption based on Brandon's throwaway words at a presser.
And the idea that Bill Martin (a sacred subject to some still anyway) hampered assistant coach selection still wouldn't jive with hiring the program disaster that is Greg Robinson.
He hampered it by not giving RR the budget he needed to pay a top DC. Gurgh was a compromise that left no one happy.
Well even if we had a relatively cheap budget for coordinators (and I say relatively, because it's not like we were the 119th lowest paying school; these guys still got good money to coach football), it doesn't mean hiring Greg was purely because of money. You could have gotten a young, up and coming DC from a mid-level school, an assistant from your Alabamas, USCs, etc. Greg was an all-around disaster. The budget doesn't excuse his hiring.
Scheme, being required to work with RR's assistants, the roster, the 2008 record, and the radical shift from the 'old' Michigan philosophy might have discouraged those young up-and-comers from risking their reputations on a project that was already off to a bad start.
...After Michigan paid RR's salary and all that money to settle with WVU, we only had eight dollars left for a DC.
IMHO more evidence exists of RR undermining his DC's at M than budgetary constraints prohibiting RR getting a top flight DC. The 3-3-5 stuff gives me a headache
He hampered it by not giving RR the budget he needed to pay a top DC.
Except that this most likely never happened. Under Martin's watch, we paid our football staff (from RR on down) more money than ever before, spent over $1 million to renovate the weight room, spent in the neighborhood of $10 million to build a new indoor practice facility, and spent $226 million to renovate Michigan Stadium.
The idea that Martin would OK all that and then say, "No, I won't spend another $150K on a coordinator" is more than a little far-fetched.
He's been given multiple opportunities to support his assertion, and yet he's provided no evidence. I think we can only assume that Section 1's statement about Casteel-to-Michigan is pure guesswork on his part.
It's ironic that he rails against the Free Press for their journalistic integrity, but fails to have facts to back up his own assertions...
"Well documented" was not my phrase. I didn't use those words.
I've said what I think. I've told you why I think that way. I'm not paid to hunt down witnesses, sources, et cetera. I haven't misquoted anybody. I've done little more than say, It appears to me, that Rich Rodriguez clearly wanted Jeff Casteel, as the Number 1 Option (and probably the Number 2 and 3 Options) for DC at Michigan. We know what Casteel was making at WVU; we know what Schafer, Robinson and Magee and all made while at Michigan. We know that David Brandon has publicly acknowledged a problem with Michigan assistant coaching salaries, in attracting top-notch coordinators. At the end of all of that, what I say is that this is a story that I'd like to see reported in considerably more detail.
And what is particularly funny to me, as it so often is in similar situations, is that I'd wager that this blog's host and proprietor is much more aligned with my view on this, than with any of you. I don't suppose that that proves anything to anybody, or that it will win me any arguments. All that I'd suggest is that if I am some sort of strange outlier, then what is Brian Cook?
Perhaps you haven't been around for the past few months, which is when many (perhaps the majority) of posters on this site have rebuked Brian Cook for being, in your words, a "strange outlier."
So congratulations on being in line with Brian Cook. As you said, I don't think it's going to win you any arguments.
(Full disclosure: I have no idea why Casteel didn't come to Michigan. You very well might be correct. But without evidence, I think it needs to be made clear that your theory - and that of others - is 100% conjecture.)
I suppose the 'well documented' line was too much hyperbole. I cannot offer concrete proof of this version of events, but to me, it is the most convincing.
As for the 'outlier' bit, Brian was forced to recant his posting of "We are ND" in response to the hiring of Brady Hoke, so there's that.
It's not just that it isn't "well-documented." It isn't documented at all. No one outside this message board has ever suggested that money was the sticking point with Casteel. It's pure conjecture.
Why do you find Section 1's conspiracy theories more plausible than the notion that Casteel did not want to uproot his family for a lateral career move?
I would answer that being DC at Michigan is considerably more prestigious then being DC at WVU, as well as being in a considerably better college town with far superior schools and opportunities for one's children. But maybe Casteel's family considerations trumped all in the end and he chose to remain at WVU. I find it hard to believe that the AD would not have pulled out all the stops to bring RR's DC along with him when he hired, and especially after 3-9. Of course, RR "upgraded" from Scott Shafer to Gurgh after 2008, so the hiring decisions made during the RR era are already in question.
I believe there was some discourse on this issue on a WVU board a few months back, which sparked subsequent discussion on this board.
I find it hard to believe that the AD would not have pulled out all the stops to bring RR's DC along with him when he hired, and especially after 3-9.
If you find it hard to believe, why do you believe it? There is zero evidence that Bill Martin did anything but support RR to the fullest.
For whatever reason, RR's star DC did not come with him from WVU to Michigan. That is on the AD, because the AD has ultimate control over personnel decisions. Whatever Process was used to find Michigan's DC in 2008 and 2009 did not work out, to the detriment of the program.
The AD does not hire football assistants. Any responsibility he has there is purely of a rubber-stamp nature. It's the head coach's job to put the staff together. And it's simply crazy to believe that Bill Martin wouldn't have given RR all the support in the world. RR was his guy. Martin's legacy as an AD was on the line (and, since it didn't work out, in the eyes of many fans, Martin won't be viewed as a good AD). If Martin were still our AD, RR probably would still be here.
I don't know why you keep searching for some grand explanation here. It is normal for a head coach to not land every assistant he wants, especially when some of them are established at their jobs, as Casteel is. Casteel has reached a level of prominence at which he can expect a HC offer. He doesn't need to further make his name as an assistant.
RR's problem was not so much that he missed out on Casteel - which was understandable - but that he couldn't make it work with a different DC. He kept trying to turn his other DCs into Casteel.
It's documented that RR wanted Casteel. It is not documented that the reason Casteel turned us down twice (if not even three times) was money. That's just the hypothesis of some of our resident conspiracy theorists.
Your spirit of good fun can go fuck itself just to be clear.
I can't be the only one who knew he was going to come in here to whine some more, I just didn't realize Section 1 was going to come along for the ride as well.
Part of recruiting is finding good players. You say that Rodriguez did just fine in recruiting, but none of his recruits have been picked in the NFL Draft (although I realize all of his draft-eligible recruits were either juniors or redshirt sophomores and would have had to leave a year early). A bunch of them never made it to campus. They only won 15 games in three years. And not many of them look like top NFL picks in the near future (Lewan and Omameh look pretty good, but the jury's out on the rest).
Getting the #10 recruiting class in the country only matters if those players turn into good college athletes, and so far the results are mixed. Michigan has to go 10-3 this year just for that 2008 class to get to a .500 record in their careers.
I'll be the first to admit that Hoke hasn't proven anything yet because wins and losses are the ones that matter, but it's somewhat silly to sit here and argue that Rodriguez did a good job as a recruiter. He got highly rated players who turned into mediocre college players. Whoopee. Great job, coach.
seems we were in it for a lot of 5* by making their final 5, but never REALLy were serious contenders for any of them outside of Frost. I think Dee Hart would have left to Alabam even if RR had stayed
Yeah, that's another point I forgot to make. Section 1 said we did a good job recruiting against Alabama, but they took Ha'sean Clinton-Dix (whom we went after hard) and they convinced Demetrius Hart to decommit from Michigan even before Rodriguez was fired.
I'm not sure how that goes in the win column for Rodriguez, unless you also think that the Houston Oilers beat the Buffalo Bills just because they were up 35-3 in the third quarter.
as a concern in relation to Dee's commitment. Dee committed to Michigan, and decommitted when he thought that Roridguez might be on the slippery slope out of town. I think there were only about 12,459 articles in the press that week that Dee decommitted, about a coaching change at Michigan. That's not a stretch, for a family that was (by their own admission) concerned about the NCAA investigation of Michigan.
That, and the fact that Dee Hart was an early enrollee and could not wait for any Brandon "process."
Look, I can't rewrite history. What happened, happened. I am seeing a lot of complaints on this thread about how, "Rodriguez had a fair number of rated recruits who didn't pan out." Before we know how a single one of Brady Hoke's recruits pans out. We'll see. Very much unlike the people who feel the need to attack Rodriguez, I feel no need whatsoever to attack Hoke.
There are lots of Lloyd Carr successes and failures to debate. There are Rodriguez successes and failures to debate. So far, there are no Brady Hoke succeses and/or failures to debate, apart from a couple of months' worth of solid recruting in Michigan and Northern Ohio.
I agree in regards to projecting Hoke recruits too early. I'll be the first one to admit that he hasn't proven anything on the field yet.
However, Dee Hart COULD have waited for the "Process." He didn't announce his actual decision until just before Hoke was hired. He could have enrolled at U of M well after the Hoke hiring.
Hart was gone. He decommitted before Rodriguez was fired. If you're going to give Rodriguez credit for recruiting Hart (who also hasn't done a thing in college), then Lloyd Carr deserves credit for any player who ever decommitted from Michigan, too.
Just an fyi, Dee Hart spent New Year's Day in Orlando watching his future teammates crush Michigan State. There was still a fleeting chance for Coach Rod to save his job. The fact that he chose to attend Alabama's bowl game and not ours made it rather clear that he wasn't coming to Michigan.
It was in his hometown to be totally fair.
technically Cincinnati would be considered southern Ohio
That Dee's mother referenced. Was it a nit, yes in the bigger scheme of other major violations. However, he has bottom line just like a CFO who signs off audited financials for SOX compliance and has to take the bottom line if one of his accountants messes up. Everyone will say he needs better controls.
That's a good one. Another one you can take up with Brian Cook.
...to post is because he's really Brian's evil second personality?
I know I haven't been on this thread since I posted, and it's turned pretty damn messy. I did'nt meen for this to be a RR vs. Hoke in recruiting thread or a thread to bash RR in any way, shape or form. I know it's kind of a redudndant topic, but I just thought it would be interesting to share our recruiting records against our two main recruiting rivals. I understand the negging on redundancy, but please don't take this thread as a "This guy hates RR!" type of thread. That was not my intention.
There were others, not you, that provoked this.
Rest assured, the last guy who wants any form of this kind of division, is Brady Hoke. And Brady probably knows, better than any of us, that attacking Rich Rodriguez is counter-productive. What I can assue most people is that attacking Rich Rodriguez is an action that will produce and equal and opposing re-action.