Perhaps the no. 1 reason for such tremendous success in recruiting
Who among us has ever witnessed a coach that seemingly hates their job more than any other person than one Mark Dantonio who resides in a city somewhere in Michigan. It appears, based on the words of an MSU alum, he approaches recruiting in the same manner he does gamedays. Following are his words:
¨Brady Hoke walks into the school and acts like he's your buddy,¨ a high school coach recently told us.¨He will put his arm around you, act like he's known you forever: he's just a very personable guy. When Mark Dantonio walks into your school, on the other hand, it feels like your players are being recruited by a graphic calculator.¨
-Unnamed MSU Alum/athlete, current high school football coach-
I can name two other coaches who recruited in the manner Brady does and their names are Bo and Woody. The separation has, obviously, begun in earnest and the results will mirror those after the MSU timekeeper gave Smoker an opportunity to go into overtime without the benefit of a time game and not allowing UM to do the same.
January 27th, 2013 at 10:22 AM ^
that Dantonio wanted to coach at Michigan?
January 27th, 2013 at 12:01 PM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 2:11 PM ^
I think it's far from self-evident. Dantonio was an assistant at MSU under Saban for six seasons, and prior to that was a GA at OSU under Earle Bruce and an assistant at Youngstown State with Tressel, and later DC at OSU under Tressel. Dantonio has spent a huge portion of his coaching life at institutions that are rabidly anti-Michigan, and on top of that he's a close personal friend of Tressel's and admires him greatly:
http://spartannation.com/2010/07/04/jim-tressel-and-mark-dantonio-share…
There is no evidence anywhere that indicates Mark Dantonio has any respect or regard for the University of Michigan, which is in direct contrast to Bo, who openly admitted that when he was young he admired Michigan, even though he'd grown up in Buckeye country.
Does this mean that Dantonio would have turned down the UM job if it had been offered to him? No, but that doesn't mean Dantonio was coveting the UM job and is bitter about not being considered. That's a huge leap on your part with no basis of support anywhere in Dantonio's record or statements that I can find. I have no doubt that he hates Michigan, but there is no evidence that that is a product of anything other than his coaching experience and his personality.
January 27th, 2013 at 4:44 PM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 10:51 AM ^
I'm so happy that you're not our AD.
January 27th, 2013 at 11:03 AM ^
Would not have minded Dantonio? I'm speechless, really, just speechless.
January 27th, 2013 at 4:08 PM ^
This post may be filled with more nonsense than any post in the history of this blog.
1) Our history has not been to take a rib from OSU. If you take a rib from OSU, they drool all over you, and it's hard to get the barbecue sauce off of your clothes.
2) We took a coach with OSU roots twice. Hardly our history. Michigan takes the best, because excellence is our first and foremeost tradition. Yost, Crisler, Oosterbaan and Carr had no ties to OSU.
3) Anything tied to Tressel will never and should never see the light of day in this great university. We achieve victory and excellence with honor and integrity.
4) If you like the way Dantonio's teams play, then you are not a fan of class, and you should switch your allegiance. Right or wrong is pretty important and should not be dismissed.
5) Tressel beat us on a regular basis because he was blatantly cheating. Oh yeah, you don't care about right or wrong.
January 27th, 2013 at 4:50 PM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 10:20 AM ^
power, (some) prestige, future opportunities and lots of money may have something to do with it!
January 27th, 2013 at 4:50 AM ^
Survey says: Dantonio is a douche
January 27th, 2013 at 6:14 AM ^
Dantonio sucks but that's not why we're recruiting well. We're recruiting well because Hoke, Mattison and co are great recruiters and because Michigan is Michigan.
Michigan is on a different level of recruiting now. Save a few in-state recruits with MSU ties, UM isn't really competing with MSU for anything. We're competing with Bama, OSU, ND, USC, Georgia, Florida, Oklahoma etc etc etc.
/wheresthethreat?
January 27th, 2013 at 10:33 AM ^
...We are Michigan fergodsakes. Direct quote from the Oracle of Ann Arbor.
EDIT: My bad, didnt see two posts below this, didnt mean to steal their thunder. Damn Iphones. Forward my mail to Bolivia. Apologies.
January 27th, 2013 at 10:43 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 11:53 AM ^
Your quote attributed to Craig Roh was never uttered or written by him. A popular misconception. In truth, the quote is from Mr. Roh's eyebrows. Just trying to maintain the superior intellectual quality of this thread and blog.
January 27th, 2013 at 4:13 PM ^
According to wikipedia:
The most oft-cited Voltaire quotation is apocryphal. He is incorrectly credited with writing, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” These were not his words, but rather those of Evelyn Beatrice Hall, written under the pseudonym S. G. Tallentyre in her 1906 biographical book The Friends of Voltaire.
January 27th, 2013 at 11:00 AM ^
Good point. Michigan's not even competing head-to-head with State for most of the recruits, so to make the OP about Dantonio is rather silly.
January 27th, 2013 at 7:37 AM ^
The number one reason for our recruiting success against MSU is that this is Michigan.
January 27th, 2013 at 7:59 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 8:07 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 8:28 AM ^
Maybe at a few of the skill positions, but in the trenches we're doing as well or better than any of those schools. Doing well in the trenches allows you to completely roll inferior competition, which in our case equates to 10/11 win seasons. Once recruits see that, getting great skill position guys is sure to follow.
January 27th, 2013 at 9:11 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 8:37 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 9:18 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 10:03 AM ^
My specific complaints about our recruiting so far: lack of elite WR (although Darboh and Chesson have measurables be be great, something I don't really see in this year's WRs), lack of elite edge rusher, and lack of large, fast corner (Conley was this, so ouch).
January 27th, 2013 at 10:08 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 1:05 PM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 10:40 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 10:41 AM ^
The whole point was cherrypicking data points, my entire thing was that we aren't interesting the top talent in the country. This is a very good recruiting class, with a huge number of high quality commits at a number of key positions, they're just not getting in on these kids who will be impact playmakers from their freshman year most likely.
The wider point is: this is Michigan, we should be able to attract a lot of 4-stars when they can come in and play but to have great classes year in year out you need to be able to get the guy who doesn't give a damn about depth because he's that good.
January 27th, 2013 at 10:58 AM ^
This post seems ill-timed. Maybe you missed Derrick Green's commitment yesterday?
January 27th, 2013 at 11:00 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 12:03 PM ^
About the "lack of a large, fast corner" - doesn't Channing Stribling match that description? He had a very good year at DB from what I've read, and he plays against excellent competition. He'll need to add muscle, of course, but the measureables seem to be there.
January 27th, 2013 at 12:56 PM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 11:12 AM ^
Do you follow recruiting at all? You might want to take a look before posting.
January 27th, 2013 at 10:13 AM ^
but let's not lose sight of the fact that recruiting success is not an end in itself, simply a means to a larger end, winning games and championships. The two do not always go together, as evidenced by teams like Texas and USC, who recruit lights-out, but have had fairly mediocre on-field performance lately.
Now the job is to start putting these pieces together on the field. This year will be key in developing guys into star caliber players who will be the cogs in a championship-level team. Looking forward to what comes out of spring practice.
January 27th, 2013 at 8:18 AM ^
How the shitting hell did this get down voted.. Trolling spartans get the hell out of here and know your place
January 27th, 2013 at 8:46 AM ^
Completely disagree with this post. First and foremost it would imply that basically we go "head up" against MSU on every kid and Dantonio's lack of personality when compared to Hoke is the #1 variable kids are considering when choosing Michigan. Green, for example, never even considered MSU so Dantonio had zero impact on his decision.
Also, outside of the RR years Michigan usually didnt lose a kid to State that they really, really wanted UNLESS State was able to promise early playing time or he was an MSU legacy of some sort. Head up we usually won the recrutiing battle and that goes way, way back to the end of the Duffy Daugherty days at State.
Just to name a FEW "off the top of my head" built in advantadges Michigan has over State regardless of who's coaching:
1. Better facilities
2. More frequent national exposure
3. Better academics
4. Higher likelyhood of playing in a BCS game of some sort
And if I gave this more than 10 seconds of thought I could come up with a bunch more that have nothing whatsoever to do with whoever the present coaches are at State.
No, the #1 reason for Michigan's recent recruiting success on the national stage is most certainly NOT Mark Dantonio's outward appearance that he doesn't love his job. Hoke is simply a better recruiter than Dantonio and Michigan is simply a better overall school than State.
January 27th, 2013 at 11:33 AM ^
but I believe that for a brief period—basically defined by the RR era—MSU was in the position to start grabbing players, especially instate, that normally UM would have gotten. Whether Dantonio would have been able to truly capitalize on that opportunity over time we'll never know, but in any event Hoke's hiring effectively killed even the chance that MSU could put itself into an equal position recruiting-wise. If RR had been retained and we'd had another two or three disappointing years, who knows how MSU's recruiting might have gone. Kids want to play for a winner, even if the coach is a jackass.
It does seem to be the case that we are now back to the situation that has held since at least 1969, where UM routinely gets most of the best players instate, and holds its own in Ohio with OSU. It certainly doesn't hurt Michigan that we're not battling both MSU and OSU for the best Ohio kids; if Dantonio's personality was different, he'd be a better recruiter, and that wouldn't help us.
January 27th, 2013 at 8:31 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 8:32 AM ^
Wait, so we're not killing it in recruiting because of uniformz?
WHAT ELSE HAVEN'T YOU TOLD ME!?!?!?!?!
January 27th, 2013 at 8:47 AM ^
The OP touches on it a little, but one of the things about Hoke himself that is integral to building and keeping such classes together is that people are naturally drawn to him like that. It's hardly the sole reason, but it definitely helps us (as do facilities, academics, and so on).
It seems as if everywhere Hoke has been as a coach in his career, players and staff speak highly of him to the point where it is almost as much about playing for the school as it is about playing for Brady Hoke. That was especially apparent when he came here from SDSU but was still obviously very revered by Aztec personnel and they said as much.
I think Hoke has also built a staff around him that can emulate a similar vibe as well, each in their own way. They are good at selling Michigan to recruits, but almost as importantly, they are able to get recruits to think, "This is the guy I want to play for, that I want to be coached by at my position, etc...". Michigan can get by well enough on its name, but the name is enhanced greatly by a head coach who takes time to develop relationships with these players.
There is something to be said about being able to make recruits feel "at home", if you will, with a program, or at least trying to do that, and I think the family atmosphere that Hoke and the staff have created probably is a huge advantage, at least if this is important to a given recruit.
January 27th, 2013 at 9:32 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 9:14 AM ^
Dantonio didn't go into medicine...
January 27th, 2013 at 9:20 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 9:26 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 9:37 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 10:04 AM ^
State has a lot to offer recruits that Michigan doesnt necessarily have strengths in like tons of hot girls, party atmosphere, and an amazingly successful basketball program however, the basketball tide in the state is changing very rapidly but it will take a few years of domination and deep runs into the tournament, conference championships and even a national championship to change the perception of people in the state over who is the dominant school. Basketball does play a role in foot recruiting.
January 27th, 2013 at 10:38 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 11:53 AM ^
January 27th, 2013 at 11:59 AM ^
You find me a quote from a single football-only recruit saying that they went to State in (any) part because of the basketball program, and I'll consider believing this.
That said, there seem to be more things pointing in the opposite direction. Take Drake Harris, for example. Here's a kid who clearly loves basketball and wanted to go to State to play both sports, and the instant he decides he's going to focus on football, State starts looking less attractive and the football powerhouse schools start looking a lot more interesting. Based on your suggestion, wouldn't he be the kind of guy who would still want to be at State because of their strong basketball program?
January 27th, 2013 at 12:06 PM ^
And while we're on the topic, why would this work for State, but no other school with a strong basketball program?