November 22nd, 2012 at 1:04 PM ^

And it bugs me when players do this. It is one thing if there is a big change going on at a school, but what has changed at either Michigan or OSU since he committed to us? Take your time at first before you make this decision because all you are doing is screwing someone else who would have wanted to come here.


November 22nd, 2012 at 1:11 PM ^

What has changed is he now has an Ohio offer. That's huge for an Ohio kid. Every selfish prick in this state thinks it's their job to get Ohio HS football players to commit to tOSU. I have seen it first hand and usually to kids who would be infinitely better off in A2. Sad, ridiculous and totally to be expected.


November 22nd, 2012 at 5:13 PM ^

Statistics have shown nationwide that only 1 out of 10 college students don't change their major and see their college path through from start to finish. That means 90% of kids already in college change their minds, switch programs, or schools, or don't even finish. It's not unreasonable for a high school student to do so too. He has to chart his next 4+ years before it happens in one lump decision, and once he's enrolled he's basically stuck with it no matter how differently he might feel in a couple years. Tons of pressure, tons of people pulling him in different directions, and lots of tough decisions. If 90% of American college students do it, then 17 year olds should be able to as well without being villified.


November 23rd, 2012 at 2:28 PM ^

Changing a major as a "student" effects only the student, no other people have  been "committed" to. Really, what one chooses to major in is not a "commitment". One can commit to it, but they would really be the only one effected by changing it. It would be my hope, that if my son ever had the privilege of being in this position, that he would be a man of his word... regardless of the end result. 




November 22nd, 2012 at 1:36 PM ^

I'd disagree and say for the most part people on this Board have applauded Green and Treadwell in taking their time to make informed decisions.

Obviously I'd love for them to commit but understand it is a major decision considering there is no going back once you have committed to us. Therefore want them to take all the time they need so we have as few Conley situations as possible.


November 22nd, 2012 at 1:46 PM ^

First of all I think a lot of people are fine with Green and Treadwell taking their time. Second of all Green and Treadwell have been everywhere multiple times so some people feel like there is no point in them waiting anymore. If Conley would have took his time in the beginning then people wouldn't have any beef with it.


November 22nd, 2012 at 1:43 PM ^

Conley is a 3* prospect, not nationally ranked and barely Top-50 in the State. When we offered him in March, he only had offers from Marshall and Northwestern.

He had no idea he was going to blow up, and jumped on what was the biggest opportunity of his life (so far). You say he should have "taken his time, so he doesn't screw someone else who wants to be here". For all he knew, if he had "taken his time", then someone else would have filled that spot. Remember, this was when we had that 8 recruit weekend, and our class was filling fast, he had no clue if he would be left behind in all the shuffle


November 22nd, 2012 at 2:19 PM ^

We're not being a "placeholder" for anybody. It's not like he's a 5* recruit who committed somewhere so people would leave him alone. We were his only big offer, of course he was gonna commit. Not committing would have been stupid

And now that's he's been blowing up in the last few months, he wants to reconsider his options, which he didn't have back in March.

It's disappointing for us, but he's not doing anything dishonest here, or using UM as a placeholder


November 22nd, 2012 at 5:15 PM ^

Very true, when he committed it was basicallly Michigan or nothing. Easy choice. Now it's been a while and it's Michigan, or a lot of other top schools blowing his phone up and promising him the world. That's a brand new decision to make, and he needs to make the best one that suits him, not us.

Section 1

November 22nd, 2012 at 1:12 PM ^

...is just the mirror-image of what one sees on the Ohio State message boards.  That is, it is presumed on both sides that Brady Hoke's policy is like a loyalty oath, and anyone who violates it is a traitor.  Like Michigan is a special case, not just applying its own policy.  Michigan fans seem to love it, and Ohio State fans loathe it.

Not that I care greatly one way or another (I'd prefer to see Conley at Michigan, rather than OSU), but I am really looking forward to the day that somebody gives Michigan an oral commit, then takes a competing visit (losing his "spot," such as it is) and then recommits to Michigan either before or even after National Signing Day, when the shcolarship numbers shake out favorably, just to undermine all of this mythical 19th century "loyalty" stuff.


November 22nd, 2012 at 1:46 PM ^

Section 1, I'm not on board with the juvenile flaming of Conley that's going on here, but why is it so reprehensible for a coaching staff to protect itself in recruiting? This isn't 1972 in the unlimited scholarships era—there's only so many at a position that any coaching staff can give out, and accepting a verbal commitment from a particular kid logically means they have one less to give to some other potential recruit, who will very likely turn to another school in response. If the original kid then starts looking at other schools again, then the coaching staff is in danger of not having any suitable fallback options. The message from the beginning has been "Don't give us a commitment unless you're damn sure this is where you want to be, because we'll be counting on you if you do. If you're not sure, then don't commit." What you seem to regard as a 1950s-McCarthy-era "Loyalty Oath" is nothing more than a coaching staff having reasonable expectations about the decisions of these high school kids.

Section 1

November 22nd, 2012 at 2:07 PM ^

I actually don't mind Hoke's policy.  I am perfectly fine with him running things they way he has.

But I don't think it is about some exalted notion of loyalty.  It is about managing shcolarship numbers and expectations, in the highly regulated and artificial world of collegiate recruiting.  Essentially, it is all about getting to the best class of 22 or 23 or 24 or whatever-number.   And how you do that, the best way possible.  Nothing to do with "Michigan fergodssakes," which is how I think our rivals view the policy.

Just to be totally clear:  The Hoke policy, as near as it has been formalized, is that if Gareon Conely takes a visit to OSU, his scholarship will no longer be held based on his oral commitment.  His scholarship will be shopped around.  As far as I am aware, most recruiting gurus interpret the situation to mean that "that ship has sailed, sunk, whatever" in the immortal words of Thomas Wilcher.  But the formal Hoke policy is NOT that Conley is kicked out in any real sense.  And if, perchance, by February, Michigan strikes out on McQuay, Treadwell and every other quality WR/DB to rival Gareon Conley, it seems to me that there's no reason not to reoffer Conley if he isn't already a Buckeye by then.


November 22nd, 2012 at 8:09 PM ^

This is exactly right. There is a fine distinction that many seem to be missing re: the Hoke policy. When a committed recruit takes visits, we don't pull his offer. We just consider him uncommitted, like any otter offered recruit. A commit has a guaranteed spot held for them. Once you start taking offers, you no longer do and if another kid with a committable offer chooses to commit, as an uncommitted kid without a spot held, you run the risk of getting closed out.