it's a major award
Sure... A generic "Florida problem." Not at all related to leadership. (Is Muschamp really the type of man to clean up that culture - that's a serious question. I don't think so)
Urban Meyer wins a lot of games. That is his top priority. Priority #2, whatever that is, is way off in the distance.
I love you, Turd.
And they've subsequently folded in the following two games...
I think we take it to them this year
Michigan by 14, with a predicate of the OL gelling and the overall 'D' being more consistent.
To be fair, we also folded after the OSU game and both teams that beat OSU we're significantly better than KSU
I like our chances against KState a lot better if DG had been the QB.
Probably true, but the team didn't even appear to be trying. Gardner would've been a better option at quarterback, but if the majority of the team couldn't be bothered to show up, I don't think it would've made a difference.
Let the idiot have his recruits with the pretty stars next to their names.
You don't need to have high ranked players to win.
Really? A team that just won the Rose Bowl doesn't pull in these high ranked recruitz.
And yet, they've won two division titles, a conference title, a Rose Bowl and whipped urban's ass in the title game to top it off.
Coaching is what matters. Go ask John Beilein about recruiting rankings.
Here are the top 10 recruiting classes from 2011 according to Rivals (guys who will be seniors this season): Alabama, Florida State, Texas, USC, Georgia, LSU, Auburn, Clemson, Oregon, Notre Dame
Here are the bottom 10: UMass, Miami OH, EMU, Army, Buffalo, UTEP, Florida Atlantic, Ball State, Louisiana-Monroe, Troy
How about I take the top 10, you take the bottom 10, and then we compare which teams were better at the end of the season?
You're right that getting elite talent doesn't guarantee success, but it sure makes it easier to get there. I admit those top 10 teams also have better coaches, facilities, etc., but the big, obvious difference is player talent.
Texas, Georgia, USC, Clemson and Notre Dame are consistently up there and they consistently do nothing. At best they don't live up to expectations. Could say the same thing about FSU prior to last year.
Okay, let me add two schools to my list. Ohio State was #11 and Florida was #12.
Those 12 schools have combined to win all 12 of the national championships since 2002. Talent matters. It doesn't guarantee anything, but there's no reasonable argument that talent doesn't matter.
While Michigan State is hot right now, they've had longer down periods than Michigan now AND ND, USC, Alabama and the rest of those schools when they were down in recent history.
You have to develop guys, like most things...the answer is in the middle. However, undoubtedly you need talent to compete on the national level. Sure a handful of schools can do it without, but take out those schools that play in shitty conferences or run gimmicky offenses and who do you have left? Probably just MSU right now, maybe TCU? Boise, NIU and Baylor are out.
I'm sure I'm forgetting someone, but the point is, if you want to win National Championships. You're better off in the Top 12 than the middle 12 or the bottom 12.
So every time we lose a recruit or take a blow like this, people should REALLY stop downplaying it with the "we have to develop" argument. Or talent is overrated vs. development.
They're both important.
Plus it's such a cop out. Take the loss or the blow, don't sugarcoat it with "well, it really doesn't matter" to make us all feel better. No losing out on Da'Shawn Hand sucks.
Does one guy make a class? No. Never. But it's usually those same people all over Dymonte Thomas or Derrick Green for not being world-beaters as freshman. It's just one guy.
Nonethless, losses ad up. So let's get out on the recruiting trail and win some of these battles, because yes...you DO need talent. I'd rather have players at Texas and USC than Minnesota. They all had basically the same season, but I like my chances better with the highly rated kids. As proven, that can win you National Championships. I like those.
By the way, I'm not so sure MSU even hangs on to this momentum once PSU gets rolling and when Michigan gets back. It'll be interesting to see if all that "development" can still win Rose Bowl's or if they capitalized off of timing. I'm not sure, probably in the middle, but MSU is not some golden standard for a great football team.
I see your logic based on history.....BUT, I don't see MSU's defense going away. Dantonio has laid the foundation with supposedly inferior recruits. I'm guessing, unfortunately, they are here to stay. At the very least it'll be a DOGFIGHT. He has instilled a hatred of Michigan upon his players better than anyone I've seen in a while. (This will be an interesting year for msu....I'm curious to see how they do after departures of key players). I personally hope they lose every game (except against Ohio).
Unless they go on probation or Dantonio leaves and they do something to blow up the roster or local recruiting relationships like we had during the Carr/Rich Rod transition.
But if we're just expecting to walk back to the top without a fight, we're mistaken. I just think in the end, Michigan is going to reclaim their space, OSU is much closer than Michigan is, and if Franklin can walk half as good as he can talk...PSU won't be far behind.
Not to mention any of the schools on the West side of the B1G.
We'll see, but I just think MSU struck at the right time with Michigan, OSU and PSU all being down for different reasons. And in the end, they haven't really done THAT much. It feels like it because we've done less. But that just speaks to how bad we've been. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Michigan and MSU have 1 BCS win between them since Hoke has been here? Hell, since Dantonio has been here?
I'm too lazy to do research. But we act like MSU is Stanford...they're not.
Three of those teams have played in BCS National Championships in the last ten years. The only non recruiting power to play for a national championship that I can think of off the top of my head is Oregon.
Reality is out there somewhere, I know you can find it if you look.
Edit: intended for Wolverine Devotee above.
EMU and UMass never let their fans down. I'll grant you that.
Strange "argument" being had. The differences are pretty nuanced. Not sure I agree player talent is the "big, obvious difference." It takes both. Decent to good players can become elite teams with great coaching the same way elite players can turn decent to good coaching into into elite teams.
MSU, Wisconsin, Stanford, Boise St, TCU, and Va Tech are consistently good (short history for Sparty, but...) despite only "decent" recruiting rankings. This is a much more useful comparison than the bottom-10 teams.
The other thing is that while "rankings" show general positive trends in predicting talent on a macro level, recruitniks focus mostly on the top-300ish kids each year when its obvious that there are a lot of very good (to great) players from 300 - 750 each year too.
The big, obvious thing is that most Championship teams will have a lot of talent that has been well coached and developed.
I don't think anyone is arguing that the only thing that determines success is the talent of a team's incoming players. I've been trying to stress that talent doesn't guarantee anything. All else equal, though, having more talented players is extremely helpful in building a contender. Arguments to the contrary rely on exceptions rather than rules. (And even your particular exceptions aren't very convincing -- Boise State and TCU have been out-recruiting their competition, Stanford is recruiting at a high level, etc.)
Coaching obviously matters. I've never disagreed with that. Player talent obviously matters, too, which is my point. The "stars don't matter" crowd doesn't seem to accept the idea that getting highly talented prospects is a big help.
Cool. I misunderstood. While I saw you acknowledge other factors, I thought you were putting significantly more emphasis on "talent" (as measured only through avg stars).
I agree with you. Stars do matter in a broad sense (as does coaching).
Alabama has won three national championships and had # 1 ranked recruiting classes each year. Every national champion has had a top 10 recruiting class. There's definitely some correlation. Now obviously it doesn't matter if someone goes from a 3 star to a 4 star to a 3 star, but if you have 20 5 stars that have been offered by everyone in the country they're going to be better than 20 3 stars with Purdue and Illinois offers. I don't expect a 4/5 star ranking to mean a player is going to do anything for our program and many will be overrated and bust but research has shown that players are much more likely to be drafted as you go from a 2 star to 3 star to 4 star to 5 star.
Urban had a lot of 5 stars his last year in Florida, they didn't really pan out for the best...
John Beilein recruits highly touted kids...
He's got 3 potential first round NBA draft picks this year and all 3 were top 100 kids. One of them was the #1 player in the country for awhile.
John Beilein didn't get to a National Championship game and back-to-back Elite 8's until he had highly ranked kids. No disrespect to Stu Douglas, Nik Stauskas is just a better basketball player. No disrespect to Kelvin Grady, Trey Burke was National Player of the Year. Blake McLimans was fun to watch on the bench, but he was no McGary.
Think his point was that guys like Burke and Hardaway were not sure things at all. Even Stauskas was pretty off from any sort of sure thing. Beilein and Michigan have recruited pretty well the last few years, but Michigan has definitely outperformed its recruiting. Even Stauskas' main competition for B1G POTY was a 5* in Gary Harris.
Plus, the year before Michigan made the title game, the team won the Big Ten with Douglass, Morgan, and Novak as starters. Your other 2 starters were 3* recruits in Burke and Hardaway. Maybe the team didn't go deep in the NCAA Tournament, but they were still a #4 seed, which is what they had in 2013 when they made the Final Four.
There was talent there, but Michigan has been more an example of the middle ground than a team that started winning when they got recruits.
John Beilein is such a good developer of talent that people falsely underrate his recruiting ability. To say Beilein does well without good recruits is false, and that's what Devotee was saying.
Anyway bball to fball comparisons are completely ridiculous.
That's not much of a stretch. They were both top 100 players.
Burke and Hardaway both jumped late in the recruiting cycle. Smotrycz was highly touted, McGary was, GRIII was, Irvin was, Walton was, Donnal was.
Yes he develops, but they were all pretty damn good to start. If anything it shows that he has an eye for talent and guys that are getting better because other than McGary, they all went up as the recruiting cycle went on.
Beilein can recruit...we weren't winning like we are now with Novak, Douglas and the rest of those 3* guys that he got to play tough, inspired basketball. We all love them. But there were no B1G or National POYs, not B1G Championships or Elite 8s.
It took his highly touted, top 100 level recruits to get us to this level.
We're recruiting a lot of the same players. Conceding those players is not the path to success. Your one counterexample is unconvincing. 2012 MSU was 7-6. Teams may have a few good seasons, but lackluster recruiting will never lead to sustained success in a major conference.
That #2 ranked 2005 class sure did some great things.
Produced the all-time leading rusher who took Mike Hart's job in 2005.
Oh wait, none of that happened and the top player in that class did nothing....
Good Lord, I never thought anyone could make Tressel look good. For all his two-facedness, Tressel never badmouthed Carr/Rodriguez on the recruiting trail.
is that a fact?
Hell I can recall Woody being caught on candid camera more than a few times in that glorious decade that was the '70s. Bo didn't buy into his attempts to get him to act in the same manner. Instead he did what any great coach does. He sold the players on UM, the value of a degree from same and the "reality" of once they earned the right to be termed a UM Man, they would be a member of that very large family for life. These kids might buy into it while he speaks and this is simply based on my assumption that he is, indeed, a persuasive recruiter as evidenced by the talent he's assembled at both FL and in Columbus. But when the memory of any given speech begins to wane the players will conclude, rightfully so, that coaches at this level should not lower themselves to adolescent behavior and he should be espousing the virtues of OSU, not the temporary stalemate that the program is in at the present. It's also a good way to wake up a sleeping giant where even the poorest coach will put forth all his effort at proving him wrong and not just for a season. Bad, bad move on his part. ^Here is the correct way to recruit and it happened roughly thirty to thirty five years ago. With the exception of Miami, the other two FL schools were just beginning to approach elite status so manyt of that state's top athletes were fair game for all schools, especially those of the caliber of UM and ND at that respective time. There was a very good OLman by the name of Stephen Humpreys, now Dr. Steven Humpreys who was attending one of the Jesuit schools in one of many of Florida's hot beds for talent. It was a given he was going to ND, to the point that many sports writers of that day were on hand already knowing he was going to announce he would be playing for the Irish. You can enter a Lee Corso here because Bo wanted this kid badly and for all the right reasons. As he entered the school the Mother Superior or whatever they call females running catholics schools approached him and asked, "Now Bo you aren't going to begin coming down here and trying to persuade my boys from attending ND are you, the school she really loved. Bo was perfectly honest with her. He told her, and I'm sure he used the correct title," ___________ you have to understand that Stephen is a special young man. He has the grades, the intelligence and the work ethic to be accepted at UM and study(his field of interest that I cannot recall right now." Fully aware that ND did not offer such a program, and without mentioning their name once he continued, "It's not often that a special athlete and special student is given such an opportunity. Do you really want to deny him this once in a life-time opportunity?" As he was leaving, this special lady, as Bo referred to her said, "Now Bo if he does decide to attend your school, you will send me tickets, won't you?" Now this was long before the days of tweets, facebook, hell even PCs. So it was a very stunned group of sports reporters on hand, many of whom had already started their articles with headlines in the manner "Humpreys chooses ND," a few nights later when Stephen informed America that he would be attending and playing football at the University of Michigan. I am fully aware of the legendary status of this man and the places he walked are considered every bit as hallowed as the paths once walked by Crisler and Yost before him. But Bo recruited in this manner before he gained legendary status and continued to do so throughout his entire career. That type of recruiting, gentlemen, has one hell of a longer shelf life than the type portrayed by Urban in the referenced article. And aside from that, as he begins to experience more losses of the type MSU handed him when he was on the cusp of being in the NC game, especially those doled out by UM, he will experience another imaginary, albeit convenient medical problem that will force him to return to the broadcasting booth. This man, mi amigos, despite his accomplishments and inclusing among a very small group of "great coaches" simply cannot handle the realization that there is a better coach in the same conference as him. I don't know who that coach will be, but when it became clear to him that he was not the equal of Saban, and quite possibly even Les Miles, continuing and attempt to acquire what these two had was not even an option. The entire nation knew he was simply biding time until a ND or OSU job became available so that again he would instantly be a level above the coaches that he would face on an annual basis.
Did anyone read this?
Yes, I read and upvoted it. It's an excellent post.
Yes it was, just somewhat lacking in punctuation.
Needz Moar Wurdz
I love how JMFR looks at Braxton and then downfield like, "What happened?" Followed by a look back at Frank all like, "Oh, lol".
Is this the ONLY play you can show? Give me the scoreboard at the end of the game. We WILL beat you AGAIN in Columbus, and it WILL be more than ONE point next year. Quit crying about Urban our recriuting you. He IS a better recruiter than Hoke, and a better coach. You will SEE in Columbus this year. I BELIEVE Hoke will be FIRED after we spank you AGAIN. Semper Fi
It was the Semper Fi at the end that just killed me.
Just win. Put on your big boy pants and kick their ass.
That's the way to end the talk.
Like (allegedly) Franklin telling Peppers we were going on probation for the Gibbons case, Miles telling recruits Carr had Parkinson's, Urban(?) telling recruits Hoke was going to the NFL.
The Miles thing is a little funny
Just win baby!