It's always been a UM/MSU battle.
Tyriq Thompson - UM/MSU battle
Granted, though, I was under the impression that Sparty was firmly on top.
That's what she said.
Not Safe For Mrs Stephen R Kass. It's kind of a long story.
Not Safe for Mrs. Stephen R. Kass
I'm tempted to comment, but that would definitely go into the "TMI" category.
you DID comment.
I'm still somewhat new around here...and have figured out most of the inside jokes...
Is there a link to the thread that started the NSFMSRK meme?
I looked and couldnt find it - largely cause I cant remember what StevenR titled it. Basically it was him asking the board to be more careful with the posting of various pics of women in states of undress out of respect for his wife. And then hilarity ensued as Stephen's request prompted all kinds of responses exactly the opposite of what he was hoping for.
To this day I'm pissed I missed it. I went to bed about five minutes (if memory serves) before he posted it. I remember reading it in the morning and just about pissing myself laughing. It was truly one of hte epic threads of all time.
Not as good as the RDT "outing" by OMG Shirtless but it was close. For my money - THAT was the greatest thread of all time.
The original Lloyd Brady Photoshop thread is my personal favorite, but your two are strong contenders.
Was the dude who made a thread about his dogs' leaking anal glands, that was amazing.
From what I am reading over on the Scout boards, MSU is presumed to be the clear leader at this point. This is coming from Josh Newkirk their UM Football/Basketball Recruiting reporter. Take it for what its worth but at this point I don't see us being neck & neck.
He's a legacy recruit and the type of kid that UM shouldn't have trouble landing.
I think Big Mike's point is that, from a talent perspective, not landing him wouldn't be a huge loss.
you mean from an "early scouting perspective on talent" he's not much of a loss. Meaning you only think based on the number of stars in front of his name at this point. If the coaches have identified him as a player they want, it doesn't matter if he's 3, 4, or 5 stars or if he's a legacy or not.
But we don't know how the coaches rate him. He maybe the #1 target or maybe a plan c.
I agree that the coaches have a better idea of what they want than I do. I also think that he's not a make-or-break recruit for this class. I don't think it would be a big deal if UM didn't land him, regardless of how many stars he ends up with. Hopefully he goes to UM and proves me wrong.
Like Ed Davis? A local kid with 3/4 stars who destroyed UM last year and OSU in the Big 10 championship game as a backup. Who now becomes a starter and will probably soar. Last thing you want to see is a Thompson flying around making plays for MSU against UM in 3-4 years.
I liked Ed Davis coming out of high school. I wish we could have pulled him in.
Ace linked to the eleven warriors article on assholery. You need to go there now. Given your post, it is on your required reading list.
What did I say that was "assholery?" That based on his offer list, scouting reports, and my opinion of him as a prospect, I wouldn't consider it a huge loss if he chose MSU? What's "assholery" about that?
So, maybe the reason they are having trouble landing him is because he realizes that Michigan isn't that interested in him for his talent, whereas Dantonio has such a sick, twisted obsession with one-upping Michigan that he probably recruits this kid harder than anybody despite the fact he's likely a career backup just so he can say on signing day "we got one of Michigan's legacies hur hur, har har"?
Good thing the McCray's don't subscribe to your opinion.
I've never understood why everyone assumes legacy picks must go to their parent's school or it's an abject failure of said institution. What if he has different preferences from his dad? What if he wants to make a name for himself? What if he'd like to play in the NFL and noted that MSU develops talent a helluva lot better than Michigan does right now? He can make his own choices
This comes up a lot. I don't see MSU churning out an exceptional number of successful NFL players. They have a lot of successful college players who don't seem to translate that success to the NFL. It seems to me like MSU has a successful college defensive scheme and develops players well to fit that college scheme. However, those players tend to do 'meh' in the NFL. There are a few MSU players showing flashes in the NFL, but there aren't that many. Data points please?
If you re-read, you'll note that I didn't directly make the connection. MSU develops players a lot better than Michigan. Neither team is churning out NFL players regularly, but give me an Average Joe 3*, clone him, send one to MSU and one to Michigan, and it's a good bet he's going to be a much better player after 4 years at MSU than at Michigan
Because this low rated kid with a "meh" offer sheet is the typical player to end up in East Lansing and goes on to beat us 5 times out of the past 6 years.
Also, Sam Webb is reporting that Michigan is "moving up" on Mike Weber's list. Ill take it.
Thompson, Weber, Clark, Wheatley, a WR, and a DE and this class DONE!!!!!!
Bates is an intriguing prospect at DE. I've heard we've moved up on his list. Anyone have anymore info?
He is planning to take an official.
LSU (no offer) is considered the early favorite for his services, but Bates made note that Michigan is currently "one of my favorites" and that he was recently visited by members of the Michigan staff in the visitation period.
Where UM has had 2 coaching changes and 2 overhauls to its roster?
I know, excuses and a**holes and all that, but a little perspective is nice.
The good news is when UM comes back to consistency, there will be plenty of room on the bandwagon for all you diehards out there who knew Hoke would do it all along!
This argument literally makes no sense.
"2 roster overhauls and 2 coaching changes" is not a valid excuse. The reason we've had those coaching changes is because the previous teams weren't that great. Maybe if we were beating MSU and OSU consistently we wouldn't have had those coaching changes.
As long as we continue to struggle to beat MSU and OSU, 2 in 6 years will become 3 in 9 and 4 in 13. Is that still a valid excuse then?
The 1st coaching change was due to a retirement, not poor performance. The 2nd change was due to poor performance. And that is why I bring it up because I don't want a third coaching change due to lack of patience.
actually the second we were getting better. say what you want but Rodriguez would have won with his guys, maybe not as many hoke did, but the offense would have set even more records.
Yep if you ask me we dont know what this kid will be and state has been doing just fine with guys of this caliber
68-33-5. That trumps "5 times out of the last 6 years."
1) We need an OLB in this class;
2) He is an in-state kid (which, as we know, is important to current and future recruiting);
3) He's a legit recruit and not a "sleeper" or unknown (which would more support your point);
4) It is never good to lose a MSU/UM, OSU/UM, and maybe even a PSU/UM battle with any recruit;
5) The legacy thing is important .... but not as important as 1, 2, 3, and 4.
I always considered his recruitment a no-brainer and consider him a "must get" (and no, the sky won't implode upon us if he choses a different path... but in the world of recruiting he is a "must get."
National Championships you have the best chance if you take the best player you can get who fits your system. That trumps all.
100% agree. Has anyone said that Thompson doesn't fit UM's system? He's an OLB that can fit at WLB or even SLB depending on Over/Under and various packages.
Point is... he's a legit recruit. Anyone sounding alarms and claiming the staff is only recruiting him because he's legacy is way off base. (See Braylon's brother in a Gopher uniform)
If having Michigan, Michigan State, Wisconsin & Nebraska lead your offer list makes it "meh" then I need to re-evaluate what I consider a good offer.
If Nebraska is mediocre, then so are we. Historically great program with a few middling years in the rearview mirror...
Michigan and Nebraska have both been mediocre for the past decade.
Just because everyone in the 48 other states (and half of Michigan) says it's true doesn't mean it is.....
Not true. We scare the shit out of the Wyoming and South Dakota schools.
therefore, you are wrong
He didn't say UM wasn't mediocre, he listed UM as one of the "2 in-state schools". His point (not saying if I agree or disagree) was that while the "names" are there, there are circumstances why he has those offers.
So we see it from you at least a few times a week, and each time you say it you make it apparent that you don't really get it.
First, Michigan does recruit those states, just like other states. But by the nature of the beast they don't recruit them as hard as elsewhere, because they don't have the connections and they aren't local. Recruiting isn't just about getting in contact with certain recruits, it's about getting prospects to commit to your school. Without great connections in the area, you're less likely to recruit players to the caliber that you desire, both athletically and personality-wise. Without great connections, you're less likely to know about the good recruits in those areas. Without great connections, you're less likely to land them even when you do know them.
So with all that, you end up with a high variance method of recruiting. You take a bunch of kids that don't work out for the few less sought after recruits that do work out. That some how the dozens of local schools, not to mention the dozens of other schools closer than Michigan to the area that dip their hand in the pool, some how didn't find.
Rich Rod dipped heavy into Florida and got a lot of 3-star Florida kids. Some where pretty good, some were busts. God bless V. Smith, but just because he was a 3-star from FL doesn't mean he was good. Iowa made a living taking farm kids and risks on some FL kids that others didn't want to touch, and they had some success with it, and also some real struggles with it.
On top of that, while we can all agree that the talent is deeper and in ways better in those areas, that is reflected in the top-xxx lists and the offers that go out. Scouts/coaches are accounting for it already. What you're asking is that they put too heavy of an emphasis on region than is realistically good. Not to mention your lifeblood will always be more local, which is important for the program. Not to mention that you can't just dip your hand in random areas far away from you and start pulling all these good recruits that others want.
So no, a 3-star with a worse offer list from FL isn't likely to be better than a 4-star from Virginia with better offers, no matter how many times you say it. He may be, but a 3-star from Virginia may be better than a 4-star from FL too. There are advantages those FL kids get, they play better competition, they tend to get better coaching, things like that. That's reflected in all the things. That may make them better right from the get go in college. But that's why places like Michigan may offer the 5th best player in NJ but the 15th best player in FL. It's reflected. Just recruiting random kids (and likely not landing them) in those areas won't help. You can stop saying this in every recruiting thread.
might eventually read it? I have been commenting on this for a while with obviously no effect. I know you have commented before. Maybe this is long enough that he can't overlook it.
I thank you.
"Neck and neck"
I really feel like the trouble with how recruiting is reported on these days is that media outlets keep trying to quantify things that are not quantifiable.
Every kid should want to follow in his father's exact footsteps every time.
My dad grew up in Toledo so he liked Ohio St. When he moved to Detroit area in early 70s, he retained his hatred for UM and began his love of MSU.
I attended UM and he never liked the decision. He refers to Ann Arbor as 1 square mile surrounded by reality. So, not every kid wants to be just like dad.
PS, for the record, I do love my father, and enjoy our trash talk. I'm not saying you can't want to be your own person and love your dad at the same time.
my dad graduated from State and I go to Michigan. we have both made attempts on the other's life.
Glad to hear Michigan is in it with Thompson. I think most of the comments have already been made. I guess the thing I really would want is for Thompson to land in the best fit for him. This isn't rocket science, but it involves:
- How he meshes with coaches,
- How they plan to use him.
- The defensive scheme and how it fits (4 - 3, 3 - 4, other.)
- How he relates to his future fellow teammates
- How the depth chart is (within reason . . . you're only an injury away from starting,)
- How the academic programs meet his needs.
- How his family feels.
All of these things come together, and there isn't always a perfect match. One program is stronger in some areas, another program is stronger in others. Magnus has often commented on a prospective recruit that he is really good in a particular way, but not a good fit for what Michigan is doing.
Having followed recruiting at mgoblog for several years, it strikes me that there is a frenzy with the hunt, the chase, the courting of a recruit. Then, a recruit is signed, and in more than a few cases, is buried on the depth chart and the bench, rarely heard from again. Yes, I want Michigan to have the best players possible, and to win out against MSU and OSU all the time. But really, I want these players to go where they fit well, and have a place they can shine. That's where I want Tyriq Thompson to end up, and I hope he figures that out well.
How the fans of each school post on random message boards
isn't to point his child to his alma mater whether the kid likes it or not. and it's not to brainwash the kid into thinking Michigan is the greatest thing ever from birth. It's to point his kid into making the best possibile decision for himself and his own future.
and look at it solely by what you see on the field, MSU the last 5 years would clearly be the choice over Michigan and there is no question to that.
Clarence dad played at MSU, so it's not a sure thing
Can you understand it, if our staff isn't enamored with him, yet don't want to leave egg on his father's face? That is a real issue.
It's probably based on the same kind of reasoning that led GRIII to pick Michigan despite Big Dog being a Purdue legend. Obviously there's THJ too, but his dad probably didn't want him playing at UTEP anyway. So be thankful the whole legacy thing doesn't always pan out.
I understand people don't want MSU to get anyone, but I watched this kids tape and I'm just not impressed. Anyone have any camp notes on Tyriq?
You're not the only one. I'm not that impressed, either. He's surely an FBS guy, but I don't think we should worry if we don't get him.
Because they didn't want to completely fall behind for a pretty decent back up plan. I think there are better LBs on the board, and I think they've recruited better LBs recently. But he's a solid back-up plan that could turn out to be a pretty good college player. But Bilal, Hilliard, Masina, McMillon, Townsend I think are all better OLB prospects. But, because neither of thsoe individual is likely to commit to Michigan, I don't think it's a reach to want to get Thompson in the fold. I think there is also so perception with what it means to recruiting in the state.
I see him as a career back up who will fight for playing time on special teams. I see him as another Allen Gant another legacy who will never contribute much to the team, IMO we need players who can play and help this team get back to contending. I don't care about winning a recruiting battle for a in state legacy, I care about beating MSU on Game days.
If msu's nfl draft, or lack thereof this year, had any impact.
In Michigan with Kirkland not at Michigan
I call bullshit.... don't fall for it folks.... its apparent that he is sparty all the way, and this is Dantoni's way of trying to usurp us, making it appear as if he chose them over us... fact is, he isn't a high priority for us. Nice try sparty
Woe to the usurper
Based on some of the comments made here and elsewhere by respected recruiting guys, sounds like a nice "depth" guy but would probably sting more from a legacy standpoint than an on-the-field one.