Where are all the 3* Mafia types?
I was wondering where are all the 3* mafia types? During RR recruiting there was sooo much complaining about him not getting 4-5* types, even during his first year of recruiting. No I wonder WHY the complaining has stopped. Not trying to start anything just wondering.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:32 PM ^
Because just filling the class will be job in itself
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:34 PM ^
Lemming and all the scouts were saying that if he could get 10 of the commits to stay committed and add 5 or 6 new player then Hoke would of done a hell of a job. Well i believe he is well on his way! Plus Hoke has 1/2 the time to recruit as RR did!
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:00 PM ^
...that no one wants the kids that were current commits so he didn't have to worry about them too much. He's been very uncomplementary towards the commits Hoke inherited. He wears the douchebag hat very well.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:06 PM ^
I have never seen or heard a quote from lemming like that. Do you have an actual link?
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:26 PM ^
"He's got to come in and try to save the guys that's real important in the 12, and that's about six or seven of them," Lemming said. "Those other guys they don't have to worry about -- no one wants them.
I don't know how to send a link to the print version, but if someone could tell me how, I can post it. I feel dirty linking to their pages with ads.
So he was nice about six or seven of the guys and a total dick to the rest of them. Either way, it was a real asinine thing to say about some kids.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:58 PM ^
Not quite what I was expecting, he's not necessarily incorrect but could have certainly worded it better.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:27 PM ^
Its keeps giving me this error when i try to link it....Your submission has triggered the spam filter and will not be accepted.
I dont know what i am doing wrong. Either way it is in The Detroit Free Press from Jan 13 and it titled "Lemming: Good '11 recruiting class "impossible" for U-M" check it out and help me so i understand why i cant link it.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:36 PM ^
My thoughts exactly. Changing coaches this late in the process, I'll gladly take anyone who wants to be here and who the coaches see fit to be here.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:59 PM ^
...that Hoke's 3-stars are way better than RR's 3-stars.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:07 PM ^
Really? i disagree.
January 23rd, 2011 at 9:41 AM ^
January 23rd, 2011 at 12:46 PM ^
I think you replied before you read his next response to Firstbase's doublepost. Both of his responses were equally sarcastic.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:59 PM ^
...that Hoke's 3-stars are way better than RR's 3-stars.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:05 PM ^
Well, if you say so.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:36 PM ^
Or does someone not understand when sarcam's being used? Confused.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:53 PM ^
This reminds me of that MadTV skit, "Lowered Expectations."
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:34 PM ^
With a very low expectation that you get blown up.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:38 PM ^
lowering the expectations. Isn't it?
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:10 PM ^
You can now volunteer as official flag bearer for the Three Star Mafia.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:36 PM ^
I mean it's cute in all to get recruits but how about some actual big ten talent
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:56 PM ^
Ya, cuz the Iowa and Wisconsin recruiting classes consist of all 4/5 star kids, right? Geez....
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:51 PM ^
How would you go about doing that when you're hired with three weeks left until signing day?
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:01 PM ^
He might have a suggestion or two.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:03 PM ^
Jack Tabb didn't commit because he had no prior relationship with Hoke and co. which is exactly the point that I'm getting at.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:13 PM ^
Relationship or not, it's not a good idea to not call back a player at a position of need when they're about to make a decision.
How come Miami is pulling guys from Michigan with a new coaching staff? Those kids weren't familiar with Golden. Did you hear anyone say we beat out Temple for those guys? No.
Tennessee pulled a top recruiting class last year with Derek Dooley and he had a similar amount of time. And Dooley was not an internal hire or a "Tennessee Man". The Tabb thing was a mistake on our side. Even if we didn't want him or wanted him at a different position, then we should have called him back and told him so.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:37 PM ^
Tabb didn't leave a message or try to get in contact again. I doubt that was the difference maker. Crawford and Goudis grew up Miami fans. Basically the same reason we got Raymon Taylor. Tennessee had room for a 27 player class, which we never had room for. Along with a few four stars, Dooley had a number of two and three star guys that he had to sign in order to fill out the class. Credit to him on some of the guys he did get, but there were a number of guys that would never have been considered talented enough for Tennessee under better circumstances.
We still have chances at McClure, Raven, Flowers and Willingham, who are coveted recruits.
January 22nd, 2011 at 8:35 PM ^
How in the world can Spurrier have 30 commits?? How is that ever allowed?
January 22nd, 2011 at 9:52 PM ^
One of them being Tanner McEvoy, a 6'5 QB/TE/WR former Michigan recruit. Sheldon Royster, a 4* safety prospect, also committed to them. The SEC gets away with murder.
January 23rd, 2011 at 9:47 AM ^
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:29 PM ^
Dooley recruited 13 guys for Tennessee's class, including (credit where it's due) a five-star and 5 four-stars. That's a great job by Dooley, no doubt.
He also recruited 3 3-stars and 4 2-stars.
That's an average of 3.23 stars per athlete. So far, we've got 3 3-stars and a 4-star. It's actually pretty much the same. We had a 5-star primadonna de-commit - and a near miss with a 5-star who we still may have a shot with.
It's a long couple weeks, man.
January 22nd, 2011 at 11:22 PM ^
Jeebus guy...
"there is some folks you just can't reach"
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:37 PM ^
flowing into today, my F5 key is getting a work out. At this point Hoke will have this class filled by Tuesday, then watch the bitchin start. "But theres no room for anybody else"
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:06 PM ^
As long as these are guys we should be offering. I'm not all into the whole star thing so I just want players we can develop because we don't have a lot of positions of immediate need now.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:37 PM ^
And there is not really a point in arguing this anymore. Hoke (I still think this is/ will end up being a bad hire) is the coach and if we start bitching about all of the points anti-RR people did we will come off as whiney posters.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:55 PM ^
People will complain about it if it happens next year. It's irrational to expect 4-5* guys with the situation that has been presented. Hoke's already surpassed the expectations of the recruiting sites, fwiw.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:58 PM ^
Yes, Hoke has already shown his powers. It looks like he'll continue to reel guys in until NSD. It's amazing what leadership will do! (That is not meant as a jab at RR, just saying...)
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:23 PM ^
if he holds onto Countess and pulls in a couple of guys like McClure and Willingham.
I think his strategy of filling the class with bodies is the right one, but I'm not going to get too impressed or excited about getting a guy like Taylor who has been a lifelong Michigan fan, or stealing guys from Minnesota and Vandy. Again, it's the right thing to do, but I'd still like to see him pull someone out of nowhere to have more confidence in his recruiting going into the next cycle.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:59 PM ^
I realize that your thoughts might not be appreciated by some and by expressing them you make yourself vulnerable to "negging", but would you mind explaining why it is you feel Hoke is a bad hire? I wasn't very excited myself initially, but have been favorably impressed by what he has accomplished so far. Just wondering if I am missing something.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:20 PM ^
so I'll take this:
Brady Hoke has a career 47-50 record coaching in the MAC and the MWC. Despite claims that he turned programs around, Ball State went 6-6 the year before he got there, and didn't have a winning record again until his 4th year with the program. He had lots of success with SDSU last year, but his team had the 91st toughest strength of schedule despite playing Missouri, Utah, Air Force and TCU.
The argument against Hoke is that his track record doesn't really suggest that he's an excellent coach, and he's 53, so it's not like he's a young up and comer. The argument against him is also that much of the argument for him is based on stuff that's pretty meaningless (Michigan Man, loves the school, hates Ohio State etc.)
The point isn't that Brady Hoke is necessarily destined to fail. There's too much uncertainty in all of this to ever say that. It's that, if you run a ton of trials with a guy with Hoke's resume, you probably won't be happy with the results. My view is that Michigan needs to get somewhat lucky for the hire to work out well. That can definitely happen, but I'd rather not rely on it.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:57 PM ^
Brady Hoke has a career 47-50 record coaching in the MAC and the MWC.
Brady Hoke has a 34-29 record in the MAC and MWC.
Before Brady got to BSU, the Cardinals beat the following teams in 2002: Eastern, Western, Central, Buffalo, UConn, Indiana State. They lost every other game by double-digit scores and some of them were clearly blow outs. That isn't to say he shouldn't have beaten those teams the next few years, but it's ridiculous to claim that BSU was some Nehlen-like entity as West Virginia was before Rodriguez got there.
January 22nd, 2011 at 8:12 PM ^
BUT HE'S A MICHIGAN MAN!!! AARON SHEA TOOK A DAY OFF WORK TO CHEER FOR HIM!!! THOSE GUYS HAVE MORE FOOTBALL KNOWLEDGE IN THEIR LITTLE FINGER THAN YOU HAVE IN YOUR PANCREAS!!!
/s
It *is* pretty simple. If Hoke were a recruit he'd be a low 3-star like the DE/TE UMich got earlier today. (Rodriguez probably would have been considered a 4-star ... in 2007. Now? Maybe a 2-star.) More often than not, an experiment of this type will not be a smashing success.
So far, though, I couldn't ask for any more out of Hoke. AFAICS he's doing a great job.
January 22nd, 2011 at 9:49 PM ^
Rodriguez probably would have been considered a five star in '07, but one that definitely did not fit the system. It's too bad that he was a bust here.
January 22nd, 2011 at 11:14 PM ^
I think you are missing one ingredient in your argument.
Ball State and San Diego State were both in the MAC and MWC respectively the years before Hoke got there, and they still sucked within their own spheres. They were the proverbial small fish in small ponds. Hoke was quite successful in turning each into THE big fish in their respective small ponds. Each of those successes needs to be compared with the lengthy failures of THAT school year over year to really see how good a job he did. The fallacy is trying to place the teams he built in the general pool of talented teams.
Now Hoke has moved to THE big pond and is tasked with turning a middle size fish back into THE big fish in its respective pond. So, yeah Michigan's pond is much bigger than the MAC and MWC ponds, but the available food (resources, exposure, recruiting power, etc.) is also much greater so there is just as much potential for him to be similarly successful at this level.
I guess what I'm saying is, considering what he had to work with and the boundaries within which he's had to work, he's done a helluva job so let's give him some credit and allow him prove otherwise before bagging on the success he has had.
January 22nd, 2011 at 7:28 PM ^
I think RR should have been allowed a 4th year, but that's a moot point. Hoke has never been in charge of a major program and other than one really great year at Ball State lacks not just a stellar résumé, but even a good one.
I know he has turned programs 'around' but there is nothing in his background that makes me want to say, 'zomg Hoke is our savior.'
I want him to succeed and the team to do well, but I just see M under Hoke as a program with a low ceiling overall.
Other than him using the key phrases that the M faithful know, love and have missed over the past three seasons during his presser, which we all lapped up, what is he really bringing in that is all that different? Yes, I know there is a new DC (we all know GERG was gone) but he probably would have come if RR was still here.
There are players on this team that have/ would have had the chance to be special over the next few seasons and switching back to a pro-style now is damning IME.
What is it other than bringing in a few average ranked recruits thus far that has knocked your socks off?
January 22nd, 2011 at 8:21 PM ^
Yes, I know there is a new DC (we all know GERG was gone) but he probably would have come if RR was still here.
Who, Mattison? You mean the guy that said, "I wouldn't have come for anyone but Brady Hoke." That guy?
January 23rd, 2011 at 2:47 PM ^
DB claiming that Hoke was always the first choice, right?
January 22nd, 2011 at 8:58 PM ^
Thank you for the well thought out reply.
The things that have impressed me thus far in his very short time at Michigan are the hire of Greg Mattison (I disagree that he was probably coming here if not for Hoke based on his most recent interview on Mgoblue.com), the retention of key players (Denard, Mike Martin) and the manner in which he represents the university. I am not sure what more we could ask of him in the time he has been here.
January 22nd, 2011 at 6:40 PM ^
That there are quite a few 4 star targets still, but so far three 3 stars (one a great kicker), and 1 4 star...still a good ratio. Plus, per the other comments, recruiting for depth as well..
January 23rd, 2011 at 10:22 AM ^
replied to wrong post :(