- Member for
- 3 years 15 weeks
- View recent blog entries
- The belief that "everybody does it" to some extent, so there is a norm that has been established. They don't want to hurt friends in college football (fellow recruits, former high school friends, work friends for the coaching staffs) if everything is relative anyway.
- The potential blowback from recruits/coaches as "trouble makers" if they squeal. People don't want to burn professional or social bridges.
- Administratively, the NCAA doesn't want to open a can of worms related to paying players for such a lucrative sport revenue-wise. Don't mess with the cash cow. Same with most of the sports media--they want the coverage rights to the games & to the locker room/coaches interviews. Local reporters & ESPN, SEC Network, etc. don't want to get blackballed & kill their golden goose.
- Even if somebody were motivated at the administrative level, they don't have subpoena power or investigative tools to get this out into the public.
Some idealistic, highly ambitious reporter from a major national level news outlet wants to break this open. If it worked it would earn him/her a pulitzer and put them on the fast track as one of the nation's foremost investigative journalists. This reporter would have to either be a NON sports reporter, or a respected sports journalist that is at the end of their career and have zero qualms about becoming a pariah to college football and to the NCAA generally. The journalist would also probably have to not come from or live in a hotbed of college football generally.
This journalist would have to somehow stumble upon not one, not two, but a good 6-10 cooperating people who would be willing to partake in sting operations like wire taps, secret on-camera interviews, etc. Maybe a misture of 4-5 top recruits plus another 3-5 assistant coaches or boosters who are right in the mix and for some reason want to blow the whistle even if it's implicating themselves too. All of whom are willing to completely end their careers in the world of football and all of whom are willing to become pariahs to their circle of friends, coaches, and often families. And all of whom would have to be ready to face an unmitigated shit-storm of hate, vitriol & character assassination once the story broke.
This journalist & their 6-10 sources would have to do an exhaustive, fully documented, long-form undercover investigation over the period of not just one recruiting cycle or transaction, but over a good 4-7 years covering a half dozen different powerhouse schools across the country, catching people absolutely red-handed.
Once all of the data is exhaustively compiled and documented, that news outlet would then do a several part front-page top of fold series on the project, and at the same time launch a very comprehensive online movie documentary that ends up going viral. The reporter would have to get 100% firm backing from their senior editors and the owners/shareholders of the news outlet for this, due to the massive blowback it would receive. So it wouldn't just be ESPN breaking this. It'd be the NYT, or the WaPo, or the Christian Science Monitor or WSJ or some non-sports related entity. The story would have to be so damning, so air-tight, so wide in scope & pervastive, that it would be impossible to ignore.
- Then, after the story broke, the outrage would have to be very strong to the point where it became a "political winner" for politicians--governors, attorney generals, congress, the justice department, the president--to actually crack down on this stuff. Good luck finding a presidential candidate who is willing to write off Ohio or Florida if OSU or FSU/Florida gets caught up in this mess.
|1 week 1 day ago||On a more practical point on||
On a more practical point on all of the damned videos--even if they aren't auto-play, a lot of readers online are doing so at work during the day. It's one thing to surfe a message board & post up a few messages. It's something else to actualy roll a video and disrupt the workplace.
Isn't very conductive for stealthy media consumption.
|1 week 2 days ago||Players can always be invited||
Players can always be invited to individual team workouts. It's also a snowball effect. If he gets on the radar of 2-3 teams, another few are sure to perk up & notice.
|1 week 4 days ago||Dumb question, but when does||
Dumb question, but when does the full 2019 class get ranked? I looked up Michael Johnson Jr. on some of the recruiting sites & it doesn't seem like there's any ranking system in place yet.
|3 weeks 3 days ago||It also seems to me that not||
It also seems to me that not all 5 stars are created equal in terms of position groups. Totally a guess here, but my bet is certain groups can be projected more reliably than others. So a recruiting class w a gaggle of 5 star linebackers and wide receivers is different than one with a bunch of 5 star OL prospects. Our 2013 class was heavily reliant on high rated kids who came from position groups difficult to project.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||Why? Again, if both sides||
Why? Again, if both sides have unclean hands, each side assumes that the other won't go running to the authorities to rat the other dude out. They could beat you up, break your knee if you're an athlete, etc. The assumption is that kid isn't going to say, "they broke my knee because I took $100K from the bagmen but committed to a different school." It'd be implicating themselves too. So if that ever happened & the bagmen got rough and, say, tore up the kid's ACL, the kid is likely to say he messed it up playing basketball, or was skateboarding, or some other made up story.
The only way you could maybe protect yourself from them coming after you is if you somehow judged correctly that that particular bagman was a pushover & not very tough, or alternatively you have equally rough ways of getting them back that's also outside the law if the bagman does in fact come "collect" his $100K back one way or another.
Wash, rinse, repeat, and that's how you get gang wars.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||Yeah, I mean, that's the||
Yeah, I mean, that's the danger of operating outside the law. On the up side you can violate it yourself and possibly get away with a lot. On the other hand, if the other person decides to enforce a street-code or whatever, there's nobody there to protect you unless you get your own strongmen as well.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||Great thread topic. Most of||
Great thread topic. Most of the posts already have highlighted why it doesn't get exposed. In summary:
In my view, the ONLY way this would ever get blown wide open is if a series of very unlikley events were to take place:
So, the likelihood this will ever actually get blown out into the open? Basically zero. Occasionally boosters and isolated incidents will come to light through random chance. But the idea of having somebody blow this wide open in any sort of comprehensive or permanent way is basically crazy. There's just way too much invested in it. Until the economic model becomes destabalized generally, this system will stay in place, simply because the incentives are too much in line with keeping it going.
Bottom line is this system will never collapse due to outside pressure or whilstle-blowing. It'll come from some other type of economic model supplanting the current model--whether it's paying players a salary above-board, moving to a minor league system with the NFL, times change over another 50-100 years and football is no longer a popular sport etc.
|4 weeks 3 days ago||Exactly. Let's just say that||
Exactly. Let's just say that bagmen directly cost Michigan a one half (.5) "sure thing" big time recruit per year. Maybe it actually costs 1 or 1.5 recruits, but some of them end up being busts, but for my argument let's stipulate that it costs us .5 "non-bust" big time recruit per year. To the program that's an aggregate of only about 1.5-2 on the roster at any given time (considering if they're non-bust it means they may go pro after year #3 with us).
In and of itself it isn't terrible.
But the 4-8 schools that use bagmen with impunity are serializing this pattern. So while they might only poach .5 dude from Michigan, it's also likely they're poaching .5 from Notre Dame, .5 from Stanford, .5 from Texas, .5 from Washington, .5 from Tennessee, and .5 from Oklahoma (for example) for a total of maybe 3.5 big time non-bust kids per year.
Now compound that over just 3 years. When Michigan faces that particualar program on the field the differential will be a +12 kids in favor of the cheating program versus what it would have normally been otherwise (+10.5 from the kids they poached from other non-cheating progrms minus the 1.5 that Michigan was directly robbed of).
The only programs that a cheating program needs to be overly concerned about in terms of raw talent are OTHER cheating programs who would have a much more narrow talent gap.
|5 weeks 1 day ago||The argument about "kids need||
The argument about "kids need a break from their sport" is bogus. This isn't adding hours of practice time. It's just shifting the hours to spring break. In exchange, the students get a week or so additional time in the spring semester that won't have practice on campus (additional study time) and also get a bit of a spring break subsidized by the school because they'll have their flight and hotel paid for by the team.
|5 weeks 2 days ago||(No subject)||
|5 weeks 4 days ago||Jeez. And I hope a higher||
Jeez. And I hope a higher percentage of our top 100 this class end up being productive than the 2005 class.
|5 weeks 4 days ago||This assumes that whoever||
This assumes that whoever steps in as head coach at Cass is also Michigan friendly. Do we know if that's the case? Also, we assume that he's well regarded around Detroit. Is that the case too? I remember when Partidge came over, people said that actually due to his aggressive recruiting tactics that he wasn't well liked in NJ. It's a minor downside if this was the case but as long as he can coach and can ensure a Michigan friendly successor at CT then he's not a bad pick at all.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||It wouldn't be totally nuts.||
It wouldn't be totally nuts. What he did was bad, but it wasn't Brendan Gibbons bad. He was kicked off the team, apparently kept his nose clean for over a year, got his degree, continued playing football at Akron for a season, is apparently contrite, and was complimentary to the team despite what must have been a very frustrating time for him. He didn't lash out and blame others. He took his punishment like a man and by all accounts it hasn't been a repeated pattern.
And he fills a need.
Bottom line is I don't think what he did was irredeemable like a violent crime.
I think reasonable people can disagree on this one, but if the rules allow it and if Harbaugh was cool with it, this would not totally offend my sensibilities.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||This is a good point. A lot||
This is a good point. A lot depends on the mission statement of MGoBlog. If it's to remain a largely "analytical" site, then I agree that you don't want to have editorial conflict if you need to issue unfavorable opinionsi of the current coaching staff or AD.
Sam & other "insiders"--as well as journalists generally--have a difficult line they need to walk. On one hand, readers are loyal because they perceive that they're getting accurate information realtively quickly--at least quicker than the generic news sources. But on the other hand, in order to cultivate those relationships on the coaching staff/AD's office, a journalist needs to be seen as a sometimes ally of the staff. That is, being trusted not to release certain information, hold back key info temporarily if embargoed by the staff, etc.
Essentially, Same & his ilk might sometimes have to selectively play ball w/ the information source in order to not get totally frozen out.
Whether that's a problem for Brian, Ace & MGoBlog is really dependent on the mission statement of the blog.
|6 weeks 2 days ago||The other thing in addition||
The other thing in addition to the raw dollar amount of an offer is--what are the contingencies? Often times, an acquiring entity doing an asset purchase agreement will require the entity being acquired lock up key employees with new binding employment agreements & non-compete agreements.
So part of the diligence that the CBS M&A you'd assume would be already pre-planning what a post-merger 247/Scout would look like, and whether the underlying pieces are there to actually making that happen. If you're buying Scout for XYZ assets, but don't make sure that XYZ assets are there once the deal is done, you'd be catastrophically stupid.
|6 weeks 3 days ago||True, and I'm not a||
True, and I'm not a probability major, but my guess is the likelihood of running thorough that gauntlet of 2-4 close calls like Clemson did is NOT a 50/50 proposition.
Without looking it up, my bet is that every single year you get a cluster of maybe 3-5 additional teams that are "would-be" contenders who just weren't lucky enough to break their way on 100% of those 2-4 close call games. In this year, I'd say that Michigan was one of those teams.
One of the Clemson players in post-game was saying something about "controlling the inputs & letting the outputs take care of itself"--that is really, really good advice for sports & life in general. All you can control is the stuff you can control. The rest is up to random chance.
I have 100% confidence Harbaugh will be doing all he can to get us in a position where all that has to happen is for the breaks to hit the right way.
|6 weeks 3 days ago||I think a distinction can be||
I think a distinction can be made between Saban & elite college coaches versus pro coaches. More often than not, pro coaches are at the mercy of their owners/GMs to put together the roster. In the college game, recruiting is PART of their job.
Say that Saban, Urban & Dabo cheat & pay players--that's a legit criticism. And I suppose you can say, "anybody with a large powerful traditional fan base could recruit like that", but we know from experience that just isn't the case. Otherwise Mike Shula would have racked up insane recruiting classes too, and he didn't.
But to say "they're overrated because they have an edge in recruiting/talent"--well, they largely GAVE THEMSELVES that edge. Recruiting is part of their job description. You can't carve out one element of their job description. It comes with the package. Say that they cheat to crush it in that category, but you can't literally carve out that category as part of their coaching resume.
|6 weeks 3 days ago||This assumes you have a||
This assumes you have a really strong hit rate on your star recruits. The benefit of having a pile of 4/5 star guys on the roster is, some of them WON'T work out. They'll get injured, have off field issues, start to loaf or get a bad attitude if they lose a battle for playing time. The more bullets you have in the chamber, the greater chance you have of fielding 22 guys who are truly elite.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||I know Harbaugh had a||
I know Harbaugh had a relationship w/ him before, but this could totally be a template to poach future people for the coaching staff---
Look to the NFL for teams that are toxic or a tire fire. Find the 1-2 super solid people who happen to be on that staff (likely young up & comer types who took a spot in the toxic franchise because it was a step up in responsibility or allowed them to break into the NFL) & offer them an escape hatch.
The sales pitch would essentially be: "This is not a downward move. The way big time college programs run now, at worst this is a lateral move that allows you to get out of the toxic team you're currently in. Come on over and polish up your resume with a team that has a winning culture. Then either move up the college ranks, or lateral back to the NFL once you have the stink of Cleveland washed off of you."
|6 weeks 4 days ago||Yes, but every family is||
Yes, but every family is different. Sometimes they kids is so close to his parent & is not a "rebel" in that way, that pretty much if the parent likes a place, the kid's going to go there unless the kid absolutely HATES it.
Bottom line is sometimes if a parent likes a place, it only boosts it in the kid's eyes 10%. Sometimes it boosts a place 90%. And I suppose if a kid has a toxic relationship w/ a parent it could actually be a negative impact.
On the Solomon front, it seems like the parental approval/preference does weight somewhat heavily. Even though he originally committed without her being on campus, he did call her up beforehand to get a preliminary blessing sight unseen.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||Yeah, that's what blows me||
Yeah, that's what blows me away too. You'd think at some point kids would shy away from the roster becasue even if they're awesome, they'd be possibly burried on the depth chart. If their true desire is to hit the NFL, it's important that scouts SEE them too. Honestly, if I was a blue chip kid, it'd be a major factor in my decision. If you are confident in the staff's development capabilities, the main thing is to just go to a Power 5 program where the NFL scouts will at least see you play.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||Maybe, but some of this is||
Maybe, but some of this is just physics. I can't crunch numbers for you, but if the average NFL defensive player is 20 lbs heavier and 10% faster--and you're also playing about 4 additional games per year--it's not hard to imagine the toll that would take on your body. Plus, it's been scientifically proven that our bodies are at peak potential at about age 25 years old.
You put in a mobile QB with those parameters & good luck keeping that dude healthy to the age of 30 of so.
I think it's reasonable & expected that the new breed of NFL QB we will see is MORE mobile than previous QBs, but it will be in the mold of burning defenses occasionally to pick up a first down, not a true dual threat kind of QB.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||We might crank up the maching||
We might crank up the maching in Ann Arbor where a lot of our guys are leaving every 3 years as well, but another way to do this is to--as you put it--get within striking distance in terms of average star rankings (but not beat them necessarily), BUT create a culture where you stay & get your degree.
In that case, what you're getting is a roster turnover every 4 years instead of every 3 years, and thus any modest gap in raw talent you can make up in experience/leadership. It's like a more mild version of the bifrucation you're seeing in NCAA basketball. You get the 1 and done schools like Kentucky, but then it's not rare where a more seasoned team beats the raw gaggle of freshmen too.
The other thing is--when you create such a high powered machine like an OSU where a ton of kids are 3 and out, it also puts a premium on not screwing up any given recruiting class. If your average players are staying just 3 years, and you screw up one of those seasons, you've got 1/3rd of your roster sub-par, whereas if the average is 4 years and you screw up a single class, you've got just 1/4th of your roster that's relatively weak. Powerful engines with high fuel demands are awesome. But if you run out of your fuel source, the engine dies a lot faster too.
|6 weeks 4 days ago||Yeah, this is true. You||
Yeah, this is true. You could have an NFL level 1st/2nd round talent leave you, but if you're particularly strong in that area of the roster on your college team, the drop off might not be that big.
Conversely, you could see a NFL 4th or 5th rounder go, but if back on your college roster you have bad depth, the differential could be very big.
|6 weeks 5 days ago||True. You could have Ruiz be||
True. You could have Ruiz be shoulder to shoulder with Cole learning line calls and then during garbage time sliding over to center.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||FWIW my hope is the NH shit||
FWIW my hope is the NH shit will die down quickly. Like a sugar high then a crash. Paysites starting to state their belief that it's over. He gone.
|6 weeks 6 days ago||He gone. Paywall sites are||
He gone. Paywall sites are starting to sound more confident that our long national is finally over.
|7 weeks 2 hours ago||To be fair, Harbaugh coming||
To be fair, Harbaugh coming to Michigan will end up having 1,000 times more impact on the trajectory of the program for the next decade than whether or not NH comes to Michigan. RB isn't even in our top 2 positions of need right now. He'd be an awesome luxury to get, but ultimately he's a luxury.
|7 weeks 15 hours ago||My theory is that there's a||
My theory is that there's a distinction to be made between "drama/attention" and "privacy". By all accounts he's been a quiet kid who likes his privacy for a few years. No way he was trolling for 2 years or suddenly changed temperament. Instead, my theory is that he values PRIVACY more than he values LACK OF DRAMA. When the recruit was early in the cycle, all he had to do was politely decline interview requests. Now that the media is more curious and is pressing harder, he's switching up his tactics. Rather than just come out and reveal his choice to end the drama, he's throwing up a ton of smoke screens to maintain his privacy. It's not unlike some private celebrities who use decoys to dodge photographers. Yeah, some celebrities court tabloids to boost their fame. But many don't and just want their privacy. I put HARRIS in category #2. The scrutiny increased and this is all just a reaction to that.
|7 weeks 19 hours ago||I don't know but OMG||
I don't know but OMG shirtless.