to play football, not to play trumpet
It's so empty :(
Sigh. OP made me work for this...lame.
http://www.wbbl.com/ - Click Listen Live link
with your avatar, it's like you knew you were going to have to facepalm.
I am well-prepared. Facepalm ready.
730 am in lansing not sure about the other affiliate stations
We have a good chance to get Green and Treadwell, but you never know when a kid takes visits after a visit to Michigan. Rapping up 2013 helps with 2014. He said that Dennis Finley helps MSU recruit CT in the future, but Michigan will still have an advantage.
He said that Dennis Finley helps MSU recruit CT in the future....
TY? Touchy yodelers?
I doubt it has much of an effect. Illinois and Iowa (and even MSU) have taken 3-star types from Cass Tech before this year, and it hasn't helped them with the kids Michigan wants.
Sounds like he did a nice job sumarizing the MGoBlog recruiting analysis of the past few weeks.
If only Sam Webb hosted The Huge Show everyday. My life would be a little bit better.
He has filled in the past, but not in the last couple years.
mentions Miller Lite and Brann's ad nauseum.
My god, Huge sucks. And he's a Michigan homer, which makes it even worse. I've never heard Valenti - is he as bad?
So......Sam has a spartan guy on to talk about sparty and boise st. Apparently after about 2 games Maxwell should be able to throw for 300 yds a game if needed.
I mean honestly 2 good yrs and suddenly they are national powers? Am i missing something? Is beating an average Georgia team in a bowl game now equal to beating Bama/LSU?
They've built a team on solid coaching, won 11 games two years in a row, and they only lost a couple of starters from last year (whom they're replacing quite well). Not only that, but they are primed to only lost 2 or 3 starters next year, as they will play lots of sophomores and juniors. I think in a couple of years Michigan will be good enough that we don't really care, but for the time being at least they're not going anywhere..
How do you know they are replacing quite well? According to who beat writers or their fans?
Dude.. "Lost a couple starters" doesn't convey losing your programs best quarterback, your top 2 wr and dt who was drafted early.
They return a lot on defense, but their offense is guaranteed to struggle at the very lest early
I'm no expert on Sparty's team but I can't help but agree with this. They do have a solid coaching staff, at least defensively, and should be able to rely on their running game this season (depth chart says they have two seniors, two juniors, and a sophomore on their offensive line). Hopefully, that doesn't happen though and they'll look like Texas these last two seasons...
BSU has lost a lot more than Sparty. They have a hideously weak schedule, as usual, and should win eight or nine games. MSU, however, won't be one of those wins. A lot of people expect BSU to reload, but they could be dangerously close to "tomato can" territory this year against legitimate BCS conference teams.
If Maxwell throws for 300 against BSU, I won't be surprised. That doesn't mean he can do it against Big Ten teams on a regular basis, though.
There is no doubt that BSU lost a crap-ton of players from last year. They do, however, have a few things going for them:
1) They still have a lot of players with significant playing time. Lots of blowouts meant that a lot of backups got lots of playing time over the last few seasons.
2) Reports here in Boise have indicated that the BSU defense has been playing very well. Since MSU might struggle to get their offense going, the BSU D could keep them in the game.
3) Coach Pete. If there is one coach that I would bet money on getting more out of his players than expected, it would not be Dantonio. It would be Coach Perersen. For all of the talk about how MSU spins lead into gold, they signed five times more 4-star (or better) players in 2010 (5) than BSU did from 2008-2011 (5). BSU really does seem to get a lot out of their guys, regardless of which guys they have.
The good news is for BSU is that they have nothing to lose in this game. They are the underdog on the road, and they are not expected to accomplish much because of all of the players that they lost. If they lose, it won't mean all that much in a transition season, and if they win, they keep up their streak of being the giant-killers. Just ask Oklahoma how much fun it is being the prohibitive favorite against BSU.
Georgia was not all that great last year. Who did they beat? The benefited greatly from a very down SEC East.
please name a good team UGA beat last year. ill give you a hint...there isn't one.
I watch plenty of college football. Georgia was good last year but far from the juggernaut MSU fans like to think they were. A victory at home over Cam-less, 8-4 Auburn does not a powerhouse make (if you were wondering why I used that game, it's because it was the only good victory they had last year).
ratings, Georgia was #19, fwiw. Their wins were over teams rated 98, 47, 57, 45, 44, 109, 66, 88, 43, and Coastal Carolina (FBS). Their losses were 8, 13, 1, and 11.
Are we still doing this? Granted, I don't know what the guy said on the radio, but can we not acknowledge that MSU has a solid program? I don't think Maxwell is the second coming of Jesus, but there's no reason to think he can't be a solid Big Ten QB. Even with all that they lost, and they lost a fair amount of good players, they are one of the top threats to win the Big Ten.
If you can't see that, it's cause you are wearing maize-colored glasses.
It sucks to admit that Sparty is good. But it's the truth.
They have had nice back to back seasons. 2 really good seasons doesn't qualify you as a national program power who reloads. How much longer can they live on guys that RR completely passed on is my question.
Dantonio has done a hell of a job in EL and anyone who remotely watches college football can see it had a lot to do with Michigan's sudden 3 yr recruiting run of avoiding the midwest's top talent and going into florida.
I keep hearing coach them up and all that crap with dantonio what about Coach Hoke coaching up guys who RR couldn't even get to play decent defense to a top 20 unit last season.
To me Sparty right now is Iowa in the early 2000's where everything seemed to fall into place for them at once and they had a nice run.
Sorry if I can't continue to listen to this national talk after a win over an average georgia team who won a division that might have been worst than the entire big east.
Agreed. MSU is as much a national power as Oklahoma State or Stanford, probably less so since those teams actually won BCS bowls during their run. In terms of program strength, they're still 4th in the Big Ten at best, probably 5th, and that's only because PSU went kerplooey.
Iowa won 10+ games a few times not that long ago, and didn't turn into a national power who could relaod, no prob.
I'm filing this in the "I missed something" category. I don't know of anyone calling MSU a national power. I agree with all of your points. MSU is not LSU or USC. Neither is U-M. But MSU is a good team. In fact, I'd say they are a very good team that has a very good shot at winning the Big Ten. But they aren't a national contender. Neither is U-M.
OK - there is a difference between a national contender in 2012, and a national power. Michigan is as much a national power as anyone, USC and LSU included. The discussion was about MSU as a program, and their ability to reload and be a great team year in and year out.
through down periods. Even the great ones. Alabama recently had a span of a few years where they went 30-31. Yes...Alabama. It doesn't somehow mean they're not a national power. They just weren't a contender in those particular years. They always were a power though.
I understand you're an MSU fan, so you're probably very delusional, but in the BCS era we've played in 5 BCS bowls, which is a better total than all but 8 or so programs. Don't forget that the BCS began after one of our best decades of football, that included 2 Heisman winners and a national championship. So although the 3 years of RR are very fresh in everyone's mind, Michigan has easily been a top-10, possibly top-5 program over the last quarter century.
So yeah, I think we've won some games.
know that 2008-2010 erases all of that? Seriously though, just to piggyback on that, here are the Top 10 programs by wins over the past 25 years:
1. Nebraska 242
2. Florida 237
3. Florida State 233
4. Miami 231
5. Oklahoma 220
T6. Michigan 219
T6. Tennessee 219
8. Ohio State 217
9. Texas 213
10. BYU 212
MSU, by the way, is at 162.
Wait, this list can't be correct. Where is Notre Dame? Based on their recruiting, they have to be a Top 10 program, right? Right?
is at 202.
I don't think anyone said he can't, just that he likely won't.
Hoke and Dantonio are different for two main reasons:
1. Hoke is taking over an historic program, with a long winning tradition. Since Michigan has been at the top for long periods in the recent and not-so-recent history, it's much more likely they get back (and probably are already).
2. In very little time, Hoke has been getting commitments from the top recruits in the country. The teams with the top recruits win almost always. Dantonio is well established in EL, and he still can't recruit with the top-20 or so teams in the country.
I have ever done any research on this or anything, but I'd guess long term success coorelates stronger to future success than short term success does.
are you disregarding the statistics? It looks like that. No one here is saying that MSU hasn't been good the last two years, they're saying it's been TWO YEARS. The teams on that list get the right to call themselves national powers and they get the right to talk about it.
Call back in 23 years and let me know what your record is. I'll be waiting by the phone
Ah sparty trolls. Any mention of Dantonio not being a god gets them all riled up. Make sure not to mention that Hoke has as many bowl victories in 1 year at UM as Dantonio does at MSU in 5 years either. They don't like hearing that.
more BCS (and including before they were called that) bowl wins in one year than Sparty has after my randomly picked date of Jan 2, 1988
How did the discussion move from a traditional national power to a single bowl game played at the end of last season?
If anything, it shows how amazingly relevant and resilient Michigan was nationally, even after a recent downturn in program success. Most of the posters here are posing no argument that MSU has been a good team - of late. The larger point many here are attempting to make (and that you yourself pointed out above) is that many MSU fans have decided that only the past four years (an arbitrary number, don't you think?) are relevant in any discussion. Has MSU been a stronger program over the past five years? Yup, I'd say so. Has Michigan been the stronger program over the majority of history? Yes, I'd say so. Those two things are barely debatable. We can have a debate or discussion on whether long or short-term success is a better predictor of future success, but to try and have an argument debating the which program has been historically stronger over history, while only referencing the past five years, is absolutely asinine.
Hi sparty, let me sum it up for you:
When it comes to elite football programs in this country, MSU is not even in the conversation and it will always be that way. Sorry, but it's true.
That is all.
Regardless of whether or not Michigan or VT deserved to be chosen over Boise State, the simple fact is that MSU WASN'T EVEN ELIGIBLE to be selected. They played UGA because they couldn't be chosen to play VT.
I guess you can argue that your 3-point win in a non-BCS bowl over a team that had few quality wins is better than our 3-point win in a BCS bowl over a team that had few quality wins, but that is pretty subjective.
I will grant you that MSU has been less implode-y under Dantonio than in previous years but, as others have pointed out, it helps when you primary competition in recruiting and on the field spent three out of those five years shooting itself in the foot. With Hoke putting a serious dent in MSU's recruiting and doing a better job of coaching up our guys, it is not altogether unlikely that the two teams return to their relative historical positions.
I would submit it is less insecurity than it is general and overriding annoyance with MSU fans and these discussions. Those who reside in this state being more sensitive to the subject.
I don't think you can claim Michigan being as much as a national power as anyone. The fact is we have a single national title in the last 64 years. That really isn't close to what USC and LSU have....
MSU got good because Jim Tressel and Lloyd Carr didn't recruit guys like Jerel Worthy, Kirk Cousins, Johnny Adams, Keyshawn Martin, Trenton Robinson, Joel Foreman, BJ Cunningham, Greg Jones, etc. all of whom committed to State before Rich Rodriguez got hired.
In RR's first full recruiting class (2009), he passed on Andrew Maxwell (hasn't really seen the field yet) and instead signed Denard Robinson (I don't think I need to list his accomplishments). State got Edwin Baker (had a very good sophomore season but fell off last year and is no longer with their program) and Larry Caper (<800 yards in his career w/ 9 TD). Michigan got Fitz (1,000 yard season last year) and Vincent Smith (>1,100 yards in his career and 8 TD, plus another 361 through the air with 6 more TD).
On the lines, MSU took 4-star David Barrent from Iowa (left the program due to back problems without making a start), Henry Conway (played in 4 games on OL, never started, 2nd string going into this season), Denzel Drone (28 tackles, 5 TFL at DE, moved to TE in the offseason where he is 2nd string going into this season), Dan France (started last year at OT, getting some 2nd team all-conference buzz this preseason), Corey Freeman (11 tackles, 3.5 TFL, never started, projected backup this season), Jeremy Gainer (never started and not expected to this year, 11 career tackles at DE), Nate Klatt (never started, projected backup this year), Micajah Reynolds (hasn't started, flipped between offense/defense, projected backup next year at DT), and Blake Treadwell (dad was on MSU staff so not someone we had a shot with, started 5 games on defense, 3 on offense, projected starter at guard next year). So, one guy who has had a quality season as a starter and two guys expected to start this year as seniors or RS juniors on the offensive line.
On the other hand, Michigan signed Taylor Lewan (two seasons as a starter, 2nd team all-conference, projected 1st round pick), Michael Schofield (started 10 games last year and will start this year), Craig Roh (three seasons as starter, honorable mention all-conference last year, 112 tackles, 6.5 sacks, 21 TFL, 3 FF and 1 INT in his career), Will Cambell and Quinton Washington (both projected starters this year)
One DB in MSU's class (Dana Dixon) just transferred to GVSU. The other (Jairus Jones) has yet to start, has made 28 tackles in his career and entered camp as a backup at safety, not nearly as productive as Thomas Gordon (returning starter) and Jordan Kovacs (entered the program at the same time as a walk-on). 2 of the 3 receivers in the class are no longer on the roster (Patrick White and Donald Spencer) while Bennie Fowler has amassed 195 receiving yards. Dion Sims has added another 232 yards in his career, but that still is less than Jeremy Gallon put up last season alone. The kicker they signed has made one field goal. The one we signed (from, OMG, Florida) just won the Sugar Bowl.
The only position they have an edge at is linebacker where Chris Norman (a Renaissance kid who RR offered) and Denicos Allen (an undersized 3-star from Ohio who no one was clamoring for at the time of his recruitment) have been good players, but we have gotten meaningful contributions from Cam Gordon (key INT against Indiana, fumble return for TD against Purdue, freshman all-american honors) and Brandin Hawthorne (key INT against Northwestern, big third down tackle against ND).
It's a little early to compare the 2010 class (RR's second and only other full class here) but I doubt even you would suggest that we've lost to MSU 4 years in a row because of guys who were RS freshmen last season.
Stop being dumb.
PurpleStuff is responding to an idiotic (IMO ... sorry) post by JT4104 that includes this gem:
"... anyone who remotely watches college football can see it had a lot to do with Michigan's sudden 3 yr recruiting run of avoiding the midwest's top talent and going into florida ..."
So simple, so NOT true (as shown above). Even the 'blog debunked the silly idea that Dantonio (a few cases in '09 excepted) tapped the mother lode of 4- and 5-star homegrown recruits to scoop up a bunch of midget Floridians.
It's almost as annoying as the idea that Time Of Possession edges are the cause, rather than the result, of wins.
...I was NOT on the Huge Show talking recruiting.
Can I get my own thread?
It has to be hard to be Sam Webb when you have to go on the radio every day to talk about recruiting even when there's essentially nothing happening with recruiting. Whenever I hear it, I'm impressed by how well he fills that segment on WTKA.
Wow the neggers are really out tonight in both my post and other people's random comments.
MSU is nowhere near us as a national title contender as long as they can't get 4 star guys.
MSU has had three good years in the last two decades. You had a losing season three years ago. You have no right to even raise your voice, none.
Many, many teams were better than us in the recent past, such as Toledo, Purdue, and Illinois. Does that mean all of those teams can talk about how they are national powers?
I also like how, in one sentance, you say MSU has been better than us in the recent past, and in the next say the past doesn't count for shit.
I also found that laughable. The past doesn't mean shit. The last few years, however, means everything.
If we win this fall, what sections of the past matter then?
I think the point isn't so much that you need X number of 4-star players to be a competitive team, but rather that teams that are consistent BCS contenders need to be able to win head-to-head recruiting battles against other elite teams. Coaching up underrated 3-stars is great, and it's something that I think Dantonio has done really well at. But relying on that type of talent to comprise an entire roster gives you a best-case scenario of an up-year Wisconsin/Iowa/Boise St/etc. If you want to compete consistently with the Oklahomas and Floridas and Alabamas of the world, you need elite talent, and Dantonio hasn't, in my opinion, shown any ability to recruit nationally at that level.
I take nothing away from MSU and Wisconsin who are primarily composed of 3* players. Both teams have had a lot of recent success. Wisconsin, has actually sustained success over an even longer period of time. Even though both of those schools have had some recent success, they are not national powers and never will be with their level of recruiting. I define a national power as a team that could actually win a MNC. If you look at team recruiting rankings since they have gone mainstream (maybe 10-12 years ago) the only teams that have won MNC's are the ones whose average recruiting classes rank in the top 10 nationally. Tennessee, Florida State, Florida , Ohio, Michigan, LSU, USC, Auburn, Alabama, Oklahoma, Miami, and Texas are all of the schools that have won MNC's since 1997. Other than maybe Tennessee and Miami (who were top 10 average national recruiters 10 years ago), all of the rest of these schools average top 10 ranked recruiting classes. So, as much as some fans like to talk about recruiting stars and rankings being a waste of time, it seems that over the past 15 years it is just about the only thing that matters as far as having a chance to win the MNC is concerned. Just about the only top 10 power recruiting school to not get a MNC in the last 15 years has been Georgia.
Go away troll, and MSU has done worse than we did under Carr with Dantonio with those three stars. Carr could at least make a rose Bowl and win more than 1 BT Championship. Carr was a great coach, but he's not as good as Yost, Bo, Crisler, and possibly Kipke. I'd say we are a national power.
It is amazing how a blog known for insight and analysis has so many people spouting nonsense about how our former coach recruited and about how MSU built up its program under Dantonio. If you can explain how adding Odoms, Roundtree, Floyd, Omameh, and Barnum to the tail end of the 2008 class and totally kicking MSU's ass in recruiting in 2009 doomed us to 4 straight losses I'd be really impressed.
Until then, people need to get their facts straight before they regurgitate dumbass opinions/analysis.
If you think we are worse off because Rich Rodriguez signed a bunch of really good players from some other states (and some from Michigan) in 2009 while MSU signed a bunch of highly touted in-state guys who proved to be inferior football players, then you are smoking something I would like to try.
As for in-state recruiting, check out the list for 2007 and then continue to angrily blame a coach for delivering a fantastic squad to your favorite team.
I think that you are both right to a degree. Winning head to head battles does keep talent away from your competition. At the same time, MSU is not exactly full of 5* guys from Michigan. Part of the problem is that Michigan had been digging a huge hole at some key positions right around the time of Dantonio's arrival (Never Forget, etc.), meaning that we had many holes to fill before we could field a complete team. With all due respect to Kovacs, we were starting walk-ons at multiple positions during those years, and we had a year where Nick Sheridan was at times our best option. Recruiting may tell you the likely trajectory of the two teams, but it doesn't necessarily account for their relative starting points.
Is Taylor Lewan a "southern speedster?"
The reality, which even some Sparty fans can't see, is that Dantonio has made hay largely with the Midwestern 3-star run-off. With the exception of '09 he has won very few 4/5-star recruiting battles against UMich (even from '08 - '11).
A bunch of his players in the Rivals 5.5 - 5.7 range have become NFL draft picks.
It's an outstanding achievement really, almost BoiseState-esque. Too bad that he's coaching Sparty and that he's a jacka$$.
Dantonio did the same thing at Cincinnati as well. He put in the groundwork for three years and Brian Kelly walked into immediate success as a result. The guy knows how to find talent in places other people don't see it or aren't looking. That is why he will probably continue to be successful at MSU (though I doubt they win 11 games a season going forward).
Although I don't totally disagree with you, I don't think that is really a method for sustained success. He's been pretty lucky to have had a QB the last three years who far exceeded his recruiting level, so when you combine that with a handful of others guys he "dug up," you have a couple pretty good seasons back to back.
I'm sure MSU will continue to uncover Jerel Worthys Kirk Cousinses and Leveon Bells who the top teams in the Midwest pass on but end up being good-to-very good players, but not enough to win Big Ten titles. Every year they'll have around 2 starters who are guys we offered but picked MSU, 2-4 more who we didn't offer but end up being better than our guy at that spot, and 16-18 guys who are below our player at that position, either by a little of by a lot.
I'm not saying that's the case this year, but it will be going forward. Although you show how RR's recruiting wasn't so bad, it wasn't typical Michigan recruiting, and certainly not as good as Hoke is doing now.
Dantonio has done well, but nowhere near what BSU has done. BSU had one 4-star player on their entire roster last year. In 2010 MSU signed four 4* guys and one 5*. Not even remotely close.
Also, during their 4-game winning streak MSU has exactly one quality win over a Michigan team that wasn't also losing to the likes of Toledo, Illinois, Purdue, and/or which had a losing record in the B1G. That win came in a close game, on the road, played in a trash tornado, largely without Fitz, while our QB was dealing with an infection on his passing arm. That, and they did beat an OSU team without half of their starters, and they turned a hail mary into a win over Wisconsin. Meh. They have had a nice couple of seasons, and could be decent this season. I don't see this being the new normal.
I'm surprised that USC isn't on there even with their struggles before Caroll.
at 201. They only went 71-58 from 1991-2001 though. Plus they vacated an entire season in 2004. And they STILL ended up at 201.
We also have 2 heisman trophies since and 400 of our 900 wins have come since 1970. We're definitely in the top 5 as a program since 1950 even with only that one NT. We got unlucky a lot under Bo with the 1971 game and the horrible call in the USC game in the 70s.