This weeks Solid Verbal podcast worth a listen
If you're starved for content, Solid Verbal is still doing 2 podcasts per week. Yesterday there was an episode with Ari Wasserman, where the concept of the episode was Ari making predictions for the year that they will revisit after the season. The show opens about Texas and Ari predicting they'll make the playoffs and why.
Next there is an extended conversation on Michigan and Ohio St and a brief mention of Penn State being unlikely to overcome the big 2. For those who don't know, Ari used to be an Ohio State beat writer. There was a debate on whether Ohio State's talent gap is significant or not, and that while they are more likely to win a National Title than Michigan, Michigan is more likely to win the conference.
Overall, worth a listen if you've got 90 minutes.
Ari is a huge db and the only time I listen to him is to hear him cry in disbelief about how Michigan could beat OSU with all of our three stars.
He wasn't really OSU slanted in this, like I was expecting him to be. It was good and honest and a little good back and forth but interesting nonetheless.
Michigan just pasted his team two years in a row, so at some point he has to give a little. He's still an OSU flunky
I don’t think he’s that bad, especially now that he’s seen composite 247 ratings are not the sole factor in determining who wins. He’s not especially insightful but I do find him entertaining. He’s not humble but he did pick Michigan to beat OSU again.
An obvious reverse jinx. It’s the oldest trick in the book.
Agreed, Wasserman is terrible.
I'm an Athletic subscriber and supporter. Ari is one of their national CFB writers, focusing on recruiting. His schtick is basically saying 'Stars Matter!!!' over and over again and just reiterating ad nauseum that the team with more paper talent based on recruiting rankings will win.
Not a lot of depth or analysis from him, though to be fair, he isn't paid to analyze game film or matchups.
I could tell...I know he was an OSU guy back in the day so I don't really listen to him otherwise. He continued discussing the huge talent gap between the two teams, which is why he believes Michigan can't win a national title, but simultaneously feels like OSU has a serious Michigan problem.
There is clearly a huge talent gap...if you measure talent by 247/On3/ESPN star ratings handed out the year before each team's players entered college. And while those stars are not exactly objective, there have been countless threads and articles about how they are a pretty reasonable indicator. What we don't have are metrics for development -- i.e., how that talent changes after recruits enter their respective programs -- other than perhaps fancystats...and scoreboard.
SO I think the thing that I was thinking about when Ari was talking about the huge gap...how many of those 4/5 stars are playing. Let's say there are 2 freshman getting significant playing time, does that really matter in the grand scheme of things that you have those additional 4/5 star guys? No, they don't contribute to a teams success. Look at OSU's defense, full of blue chippers, but how many are draftable? Having the talent is a requisite, but one of Dan's points was that once you hit the threshold, the disbursement of talent is less important.
I would think that having more talent on the practice field, in the weight room, etc. would be very helpful in preparing and motivating the guys who get on the field.
One could also make an inverse argument about the threshold -- the JJ vs. McNamara argument last year -- where superior athletic ability trumps knowledge/experience/decision-making once a certain threshold is achieved.
I certainly wish we always had recruits who project to be potential top ten 10 draft choices on the dline, and at CB, WR, and QB.
I mean, but stars DO matter. Obviously not the end-all, be-all, but there is plenty of data out there that the more blue chip recruits you have (that high 4-5 star type players), the more likely you are to win games and championships. In the major recruiting era since we've been tracking these things I don't think there has been a national champion that has been below like a top-5 recruiting blue chip ratio (as someone defined in some analysis). Saying stars DON'T matter is like saying smoking doesn't increase your risk of lung cancer because you had an uncle that smoked 2 PPD his entire life and died when he was 95 in relatively good health.
Of course they do. No reasonable person would say otherwise. I just don't find much value-add in someone saying that over and over again as their answer to every question. Just seems shallow and pedantic (yes...that is a Family Guy reference!).
At a macro level...of course better recruiting matters and likely leads to better on field results. But at a micro-level, and specifically when looking at individual games / matchups, player development, scheme, coaching, etc. also matter. Ari tends to ignore or gloss over that aspect of college football.
I never listen to these types of guys when they talk stars, predictions and what not.
Many don't know how to analyze film, don't know how to evaluate recruits and regurgitate what they have heard someone else say. I am by no means a coach/expert but have been to coaching clinics and watched film breakdown of scheme and player as well as spoken to coaches about player breakdown and evaluation. And once you have heard a few different coaches speak and then watch what their players do on the field, you see who has it and who doesn't. Who they recruit and how they perform.
The foolishness of fans that wanted this coach gone or that coach gone and to hire this guy they just don't know. Player development, fundamentals, scheme this staff has done an awesome job. And for a writer to say stars matter is an easy out without any depth to their words.
That's my take as well. He is more invested in his recruiting mantras more than any single program (including OSU). The thing is that having Stars Matter (tm) as your bit is a bit like having a "Shooting Matters" if you're covering the NBA; sure it's not completely predictive and you will have some arguments but on it's face it's kind of self-evident.
Haven't listened to the episode yet, but just here to say that I like the show and think Dan and Ty do good work! I heartily endorse it for other college football sickos.
Excellent for doing the dishes!
We Agreeeeeeeeee..........
Ty: "I'm curious to see if this week's podcast is good. We'll know more after listening to it."
Dan: "Yes, Ty. Because that is how time works."
Cool OP, way to tell everyone to check something out without providing a link or context.
For people's convenience:
most people know how to type "Solid Verbal" into google if they are interested.
You could have been helpful while not being passive-aggressive about it.
help me. i've never looked up a podcast before and have no idea where to start /s
OTOH, while I was out downloading Solid Verbal, I also note that this week’s Shutdown Fullcast is titled DIY Disasters, Part 1. I’m betting that’s worth a laugh or to.
Such a weak take by Ari. I got into it with him on Twitter yesterday. The idea that Ohio State is more talented than Michigan simply because of stars attributed to 16 and 17 year olds is crazy. Completely negates any development happening on campus. How anyone could watch the last two iterations of The Game and come anyway thinking OSU has an "ocean wide" (his term) talent advantage is beyond me.
great point. ricardo miller...george campbell...heck will campbell for that matter!
guys ANYONE who was ever in HS and evaluated teenagers when you were 16 knows that the 5-star girls in HS were NOT always 5 stars at 22.
and there sure were some that were 2 stars at 15 that were suddenly 5 stars by senior prom.
This has been a paid announcement by the That Sure Came Off Much Skeevier Than I intended.
gross.
What the f....?
Anyway, as to the point, I do think Ohio State has more talent, although the gap is not "ocean wide." I think Michigan's coaching staff is just absolutely nuking Day and company. Michigan has come out the last two years with a legit script to beat OSU and they don't waiver from it. OSU has looked more like "we will just do a bunch of stuff and it will be cool."
What I am learning more and more watching it is that while he is just an absolutely loathsome human being, Urban Meyer was really a great college football coach and I can (kind of) understand the lengths OSU went to keep him as long as possible despite him kind of being Satan.
Also, I am learning that it is a very very bad idea for other coaches to call out Harbaugh directly based on coaching acumen. The Harbaugh that I knew before 2017 returned after the "hang a hundred" comment.
Please send StateStreetApostle to Bolivia
I actually agree with him to, though not because of all his focus on blue chip players.
I think OSU is basically built for the playoff, and their achilles heel is smashmouth games, like UM plays.
I think last year was their best case scenario where they basically just gave up on The Game (and the B10 Title), still made the playoffs, and case infuriatingly close to potentially winning an NC. This could be their permanent gameplan once the playoff expands to 12 teams.
But I think everyone says that Georgia is Michigan on steroids, so why couldn't Georgia handle them the same way Michigan did? They couldn't have improved that much in a month. Last time Bama played OSU, they smoked them. Are they actually built for the playoff? Or is that something OSU fans say to feel better about losing to Michigan?
I do think UM & Georgia share a lot of similarities as a team, but I think the game context, expectations, and environments of the Game vs. the Playoff is very different.
In the game, all the pressure was on them, in front of their home crowd, and in the Playoff, they basically fell backwards in to it, and they were in a neutral field, and had all the excuses made for them already. They also clearly learned a ton from their hyper aggressive strategy against UM, and adapted against Georgia. I also think UM is better in one respect than georgia, and that's our hyper quick, shifty receivers, which ultimately was OSU's undoing.
Maybe it's mental, maybe it's an actual strategic difference, but they seem like a different team when they play us vs. when they play everyone else over the last two seasons.
we want ohio to think they are way, way better than our 3-star mafia, and that the last two years were total flukes. stars matter, no way ohio loses to michigan again. ohio can count on it....
(FYI, edwards just scored again)
Haskins too!
At what positions are they currently more "talented"
This narrative is exhausting. And a lot of OSU's most talented players the past few cycles have been receivers, skewing their ranking. They have unbalanced rosters that are not nearly as good "on paper" as Bama or UGA recruiting.
Compared to UM this year for example....
QB...not any longer - Stroud gone, JJ is a 5* that began to play that way last year and now goes into his 2nd year starting
RB...lol, UM has the 2 best in the conference.
TE...LOL, Harbaugh TE > born on 3rd TE
O-line....LOL
D-Line...LOL
Secondary...LOL, LOL, LOL @ OSU. Will Johnson may be the best CB in the country this year...as a sophomore.
WR...yes, they are loaded at WR, again
The OSU talent narrative is exhausting, but let them keep parrotting it and coming in over confident. Our 4 and 5 stars produce, theirs languish. Our 3 stars turn into David Ojabo.
Stacking a team together with absurdly good WR's, and high ceiling recruits does not a "superior talent" team make, nor does it build the foundation of a great program.
DJ Turner ran one of the fastest 40's ever at the combine last year, was a 3 star out of high school. -UM is killing it in development of it's players rn. Would you take any OSU safety rn over Rod Moore?
UM is not settling for scraps or random 3 stars...they are identifying the players they want, that fit their scheme, and landing many of their top targets.
The correct declarative should be....
Based on prior recruiting rankings, it appears OSU should have more talented rosters. However, outside the WR position group, the reality is that OSU's recruitment of high ceiling players with seemingly higher on field potential is not playing out on the field when playing top tier programs.
You forgot to say,
FIFY
after all of your complete statements!
They have had pretty damn elite college QBing as well for 15 years. This may be the first year in 15 we have an advantage (Unless JJ is going to the NFL as a 2nd pick overall) and we don't know what OSU will roll out yet as they seem to hatch elite QBs by game 4 of every year even if straight out of the box. I remember people here mocking Stroud when he didn't light up the world against Tulsa by game 3 of his first year starting, yet and he turned into a death machine by game 4. (yes he had elite WRs coming out his ears)
DL I disagree on as well - at best it's equal. One Bosa brother is possibly the 2nd best NFL defensive player as we speak, and the other was elite in college just hurt in NFL. Chase Young was also elite. We had Aidan at that level and then a lot of "very good but not Bosa types" like the Uches of the world.
OL edge UM now but just based on past 2 years, before then it was lean OSU for a long while while we were in the relative wilderness 6-7 years ago.
Appreciate the commentary but starting to hear alot of arrogance out of our fan base. We have the better roster this year it looks like but potentially could be losing about 2/3rds of our starters with an unknown quantity coming in at QB next year and a trip to the horseshoe in 24.
Talking this coming year, and the last 2.
Bosa and Chase Young long gone.
The point is, these are not Urban Meyer built squads that dominated the trenches AND beat you with skill on the outside.
Ryan Day has emphasized QB and WR play, and in doing so, built the best version of Texas Tech the world has ever seen.
4 tackle O-lines? Horrible, confused secondary play? These are just observations of what gets exposed when they play great teams, not arrogance.
You're not more "talented" if you run a 4.3 - 40 (in the wrong direction) as a corner (with horrible technique) vs. a 4.4 WR running crisp routes.
You can be a 6-6 290 pound weak side rusher that runs a 4.5 - 40, but doesn't help if you can't set the edge agains the run.
And for those that cite the UGA game last year as OSU being their equal...UGA literally played its worst game of the year for 3 quarters and still stayed in the game and eventually won.
TLDR, OSU is still good, still elite and the dropoff may seem marginal; but anyone who closely observes and watches football can see that Day's teams are not being developed mentally or physically like Meyer's teams were.
OSU is able to take much of the top ranked talent throughout their roster and win with it. It’s part of the born on 3rd base.
Michigan has shown to be elite level talent and character evaluators which has closed the gap with OSU. We are getting more than our share of high end ranked talent but we are also finding the guys with high end potential that aren’t getting all of the attention.
This has the added benefit of building a roster full of guys that have the grit to prove they belong and a culture that is contagious. It’s how Dantonio built such strong rosters at MSU but being MSU they had upside limitations.
Michigan and this staff doesn’t have those limitations which is what makes where we are now so exciting. This Michigan staff has the skill set find the best of the best and if they go all in on a 3* right now I would think other schools should notice.
Maybe the narrative should include come to Michigan and you will get coached and developed.
Someone on here equated recruiting stars to when a player physically matures. Meaning, the earlier a player physically matures correlates to higher star rankings. That's why stars don't really say much about how a kid will mature/grow after being on campus. That's not to belittle star rankings, they are a good indicator, but no the end-all/be-all.
"The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that stars exist."-- Verbal
Somebody give Keyser Soze a well earned Gif!!!
If we're just talking about osu having more talent at WR I 100% agree with this guy.
Michigan can't...
Michigan can only...
Michigan doesn't have the talent to score enough points to beat the SEC...
Michigan has a subpar passing game...
Getting all this JJ/Team?
I listened to it yesterday and thought it was pretty objective. Ari is a bit of a schmuck but it was a good back-and-forth and I can't say I disagreed with a lot of what he said. It did feel a little like OSU (at least last year) had a better shot at the NC despite what he called OSU's "Michigan problem" which he seems to accept is a structural thing, not a fluke.
His main point is strictly about the star talent of the rosters, nothing more.
The Solid Verbal has been part of my regular podcast rotation for several years now, I think it's most great. Sometimes they get a bit too cutesy during the offseason, but it's tough to be creative this time of year.
I just listened to that episode yesterday on my drive and I think Ari is spot on. He said that while he thinks OSU is the safest big ten bet to beat an Alabama or Georgia for a title, "they have a Michigan problem". That really hit me just right, I think it's spot on. Once OSU started dominating Michigan a while ago, they began to turn their sights towards the national stage and built their roster around that. This created a highly skilled, but softer team.
Conversely Harbaugh only knows one main style, and we've finally seen that come to fruition the last two years. And honestly I don't think OSU has the roster or more importantly coaching to solve this problem this November. I really do think it will be 3 in a row.
On a side note I do find it interesting that Michigan is now looking at the bigger national picture now (the recent Georgia practice stuff) that we've solved our OSU issue to some extent. That and with the expanded playoffs it only makes sense to start to tweak our goals a bit in this way.