david from wyoming

January 21st, 2010 at 4:13 PM ^

See, now you will get negged here too. You were a mostly rational poster before the nukes started falling, no one will hold one bad day against you. Just take a break for a few days.

Joined: 03/15/2009

MGoPoints: 2981

ken725

January 21st, 2010 at 3:00 PM ^

I really really hope that this is not true. Also when did Scout actually get people to design their website? It gives me less of a headache now.

Joined: 10/26/2008

MGoPoints: 32857

bluebrains98

January 21st, 2010 at 3:10 PM ^

I'm sure this has been posted a million times here and elsewhere, but can someone please explain the lure of a school about to be slammed with sanctions (this is public knowledge) that is coached by a guy with a career losing record as a HC?

Joined: 01/14/2009

MGoPoints: 7020

Magnus

January 21st, 2010 at 5:30 PM ^

You mean what's the lure of a school that has produced 1st round pick after 1st round pick, several national championships and Heisman winners in the last decade, a pipeline to the NFL, and the hottest cheerleaders in the country? I couldn't tell you... But seriously, until those sanctions are handed down, I'm going to take the threat of sanctions with a grain of salt. If all they lose is 2 scholarships a year or they're banned from the postseason for one year, then it's really not going to have a huge effect.

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 165915

dundee

January 21st, 2010 at 6:12 PM ^

except that it isn't the "school" that produces 1st round talent after 1st round talent. i believe that that has to be put in some part(ok mostly) on the coaches. those coaches are gone(sneaky pete). while lane so far has not shown that same ability as a HC to get the talent to the next level. Tenn IMO under-achieved for the talent level he had.

Joined: 03/29/2009

MGoPoints: 29

Magnus

January 21st, 2010 at 6:51 PM ^

You're right. He didn't show the ability to get the talent to the next level in his one season at Tennessee. He is a monumental failure at producing NFL talent, unless you consider the fact that Eric Berry is going to be a top 5 or top 10 pick in the NFL draft. He was going to be a top 10 pick regardless of who the coach was? Oh. Then I guess your point doesn't really have any value. The biggest and best thing that produces NFL talent is good high school talent. USC still has a ton of talent remaining and will probably pull in a very good recruiting class this year (unless mondo sanctions come down prior to NSD).

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 165915

Jon Benke

January 21st, 2010 at 3:12 PM ^

If you go down the list, they pick the school that makes the most sense to them, I am interested in seeing where most of those kids actually go, especially Sean Parker. I have always been nervous, going heads up with USC for a recruit, though I am sitll holding out hope that Sean Parker picks Michigan. I guess we'll all find out soon.

Joined: 01/04/2010

MGoPoints: 1453

stankoniaks

January 21st, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^

I'm not sure how accurate or updated the predictions are. Cal, Michigan, and SC are listed as his finalists, but UW is not, even though it was revealed this week that he's taking an official to Seattle and it's also one of his finalists. Scout posted a free story about the details of his USC trip. Sounds like it was a decent trip but he wasn't necessarily wowed. I could be wrong though b/c Parker is playing this one close to the vest. http://usc.scout.com/2/939390.html

Joined: 02/04/2009

MGoPoints: 1766

Crime Reporter

January 21st, 2010 at 3:14 PM ^

I still think we have a good shot, regardless. They said the same thing when D. Warren was deciding, and we stole him away. Here's to hoping we get him, and if not, we better land Knight.

Joined: 12/19/2008

MGoPoints: 21705

kriegers

January 21st, 2010 at 3:26 PM ^

Tell me what Scout thinks then. Also, as an aside, I think Sam Webb's gut feelings should be interpreted as "M leads for player X today" instead of what I thought used to be a 100% gaurantee (based on "gut feelings" about Grimes/Murphy and now Parker). Though, again, maybe I should reserve judgment until signing day - afterall, it's all about signing day.

Joined: 05/23/2009

MGoPoints: 217

MGoObes

January 21st, 2010 at 3:30 PM ^

he doesn't give the gut feeling unless the kid is a silent. that's a double edged sword though. when a kid is a silent he'll usually continue taking trips which ups the likelihood of him changing his mind. the coaching staff could also decide they don't want the kid who made that silent commitment.

Joined: 07/05/2008

MGoPoints: 1122

Mr. Maize

January 21st, 2010 at 3:56 PM ^

I'm so sick of this argument. "Tell me what X thinks (on signing day)." The entertaining aspect of recruiting is following it through the whole process. No, you don't close the book on anyone until they sign. That's pretty obvious at this point. If you are going to have the mentality that none of this means anything at all, then don't follow it, go into hibernation and we will wake you up on February 3. Yes, there was a time when we thought Michigan had a great chance at Seantrel Henderson or Latwan Anderson, or Corey Nelson for example. The thought of any of those is laughable now. But that makes the recruiting process fun to follow. My point is, it isn't "all about signing day."

Joined: 09/23/2009

MGoPoints: 583

kriegers

January 21st, 2010 at 4:16 PM ^

People can have differing opinions. I only care about recruiting to the extent it directly impacts M football. Similar to the RR position of I only talk about players who play for M, I don't care about recruiting unless it directly impacts our team (while others follow all recruits b/c they enjoy the story and process). Since that's my position, it is all about siging day for me, which is why I like the early signing period idea (though, the board clearly disagrees for an undisclosed reason)

Joined: 05/23/2009

MGoPoints: 217

Mr. Maize

January 21st, 2010 at 4:24 PM ^

The reason I am against an early signing period is the culture of coaching changes in this business. Kids should have every right to wait it out to see who is or isn't going to bail on them. Take Dillon Baxter for example. He was committed to USC for like, 3 years or something outrageous like that. An article on Rivals was posted saying how he wishes there was an early signing period. Then BOOM! a week later, Carroll ups and leaves and Baxter waivers. If he's already locked in, he's SOL. Because he hadn't signed an NLI yet though, he could have moved on to another school (had Lane Kiffin not come in and did God knows what to keep him there). Hopefully you see my point though.

Joined: 09/23/2009

MGoPoints: 583

kriegers

January 21st, 2010 at 4:39 PM ^

I totally agree that the scenario you described is problematic. However, I think the NCAA could (and may currently) allow recruits to transfer without losing eligibility or having to sit out a year if such a change occurs. Plus, recruits are not required to sign during the earlier period - it's simply an option for coaches and players. +1 to you for substantive discussion Edit: "An institution may release a student from his or her NLI obligation by selecting the “Complete Release” option on the NLI Release Request Form." So, while an early signee may be bound if the coach leaves, the school can release the recruit.

Joined: 05/23/2009

MGoPoints: 217

dundee

January 21st, 2010 at 6:21 PM ^

all the ncaa(well i'm sure not all) would have to institute is "that if a school where said recruit has previously signed a NLI early. if that school then changes head coaches before the normal NLI day. then recruit can request out of the early NLI with-out penalty. if coaching changes after normal NLI day then all previous rules about recruiting still apply" thank you for your cooperation. sincerely the NCAA

Joined: 03/29/2009

MGoPoints: 29

Don

January 21st, 2010 at 3:28 PM ^

You are taking a gigantic leap of faith that the NCAA is going to do anything other than tap USC gently on the wrist, lisp out a faint "Tut, tut" and sashay away.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 148237

Wolv77

January 21st, 2010 at 3:36 PM ^

Parker supposely loved meeting Monte Kiffin and they spent alot of time together talking football etc. He also has a very good friend on the USC team that hosted his visit. Unfortunately, Parker will be tough to pry away from USC.

Joined: 11/23/2009

MGoPoints: -1

Marcus818

January 21st, 2010 at 3:42 PM ^

Not sure if it's been mentioned before, but Parker's HS "recruiting coordinator" is Byron Moore Sr, who's son plays for SC and was Parker's host on his official visit last weekend. Also just read on rivals that SC is going hard after Latwan Anderson, who has said SC is his dream school. Hopefully if he goes to SC, that will sway Parker's decision.

Joined: 04/27/2009

MGoPoints: 190

mblood7

January 21st, 2010 at 3:56 PM ^

I really hope we get this kid, and I will e disappointed if we don't. On that note I don't see how RR and the staff can't pry Dorsey from Florida they have insane depth at safety (almost as deep as USC) especially with Elam, Dowling ,and Harden all coming in this year. Their sell: "Come to Florida and win a NC; while riding the bench." or Michigan's sell: " Come to the winningest program in history and be a part of the resurgence now." It's that whole little fish in big pond vs. big fish in small pond scenario.

Joined: 03/22/2009

MGoPoints: 1126