Sam Webb on the Huge Show talking recruiting
August 27th, 2012 at 3:32 PM ^
Link? Recap? Anything?
August 27th, 2012 at 3:33 PM ^
August 27th, 2012 at 3:37 PM ^
It's so empty :(
August 27th, 2012 at 3:41 PM ^
with your avatar, it's like you knew you were going to have to facepalm.
August 27th, 2012 at 3:45 PM ^
I am well-prepared. Facepalm ready.
August 27th, 2012 at 3:45 PM ^
730 am in lansing not sure about the other affiliate stations
August 27th, 2012 at 3:48 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 4:05 PM ^
He said that Dennis Finley helps MSU recruit CT in the future....
Connecticut?
August 27th, 2012 at 4:07 PM ^
Cass Tech
August 27th, 2012 at 4:10 PM ^
Thank you.
August 27th, 2012 at 9:03 PM ^
TY? Touchy yodelers?
August 27th, 2012 at 6:04 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 9:21 PM ^
Sounds like he did a nice job sumarizing the MGoBlog recruiting analysis of the past few weeks.
August 27th, 2012 at 4:12 PM ^
August 27th, 2012 at 4:26 PM ^
August 27th, 2012 at 6:21 PM ^
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?
August 27th, 2012 at 4:12 PM ^
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?
August 27th, 2012 at 4:18 PM ^
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..
August 27th, 2012 at 4:21 PM ^
How do you know they are replacing quite well? According to who beat writers or their fans?
August 27th, 2012 at 4:33 PM ^
They return a lot on defense, but their offense is guaranteed to struggle at the very lest early
August 27th, 2012 at 5:14 PM ^
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...
August 27th, 2012 at 4:34 PM ^
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.
August 28th, 2012 at 12:28 AM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 5:18 PM ^
An "average" Georgia team? Watch much college football?
August 27th, 2012 at 5:30 PM ^
Georgia was not all that great last year. Who did they beat? The benefited greatly from a very down SEC East.
August 27th, 2012 at 5:33 PM ^
August 27th, 2012 at 5:35 PM ^
August 27th, 2012 at 6:31 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 5:20 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 5:42 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 6:03 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 6:21 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 6:28 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 6:35 PM ^
When was the last time U-M played for the MNC? A long time. Talk about getting ahead of yourselves. Maybe you should wait until U-M has another 11-win season before you get too far along. I know, I know: you're really doing well on the recruiting trail. But you still have to win the games.
August 27th, 2012 at 6:46 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 6:50 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 6:56 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 7:26 PM ^
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?
August 27th, 2012 at 7:38 PM ^
is at 202.
August 27th, 2012 at 7:55 PM ^
I think Dantonio has been coaching at MSU for five years, right? We're supposed to think that Hoke is ushering in a new era at U-M, right? How come Dantonio can't be doing the same at MSU?
August 27th, 2012 at 8:06 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 8:06 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 8:27 PM ^
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
August 27th, 2012 at 8:36 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 8:53 PM ^
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
August 27th, 2012 at 9:45 PM ^
whose bowl victory was more impressive. It's MSU's. If you understand football you could see that Georgia had a very good team with lots of speed. Several national commentators mocked the BCS system because U-M and VaTech both got in. It suited the U-M faithful perfectly -- with their sense of entitlement.
August 27th, 2012 at 11:24 PM ^
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.
August 27th, 2012 at 11:32 PM ^
August 28th, 2012 at 12:48 AM ^
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.