mgokev

February 8th, 2018 at 2:26 PM ^

I think I'm onto something here. I ran the analysis and you can get a better girlfriend if you're better looking, had more money, a nicer car, bigger house, better personality, more empathy, and cherished mother-daughter relationships. 

I'm going to make sure the data checks out because this was unexpected, but I will report back once I do. 

LSAClassOf2000

February 8th, 2018 at 2:52 PM ^

Out of curiosity, were you going to do this by taking the identities of progressively more well-off people throughout a long period of time, suddenly appearing and disappearing from lives and then writing a tell-all about the results? If so, I would like to be in line when these tracts are published, and feel free to include the juicier stuff. 

Arb lover

February 8th, 2018 at 4:48 PM ^

Somebody get this guy an introductory lesson into contract and buy-out strategy.

Edit: I'll do it. In this case it would cost more to cut them loose early, than it would to given them a different role and path forward. Regarding longer term contracts as opposed to one year, you won't get any real talent with a short term contract; there's real value in it for a potential coach if they have several years.

Additionally, structuring contracts longer term has been proven to increase long term results (especially in business) as you want coaches (or executives) to not focus simply on short term results, which they will otherwise do. For instance if Harbaugh was on a one year contract and didn't know if he was going to be extended, do you think he would have spent a ton of time recruiting top 100 '19 recruits?  In that scenario, coaches on short contracts will likely be a year or more behind for top recruits. 

MotownGoBlue

February 8th, 2018 at 2:53 PM ^

Negative recruiting tactics, $$$$$$$$, maintain relationships, $$$$$$$, winning, $$$$$$$, additional negative recruiting, lie to recruits (osu #1 tactic) $$$$$$$ and more $$$$$$.

Aside from being in a hotbed of talent that's how it's done. It's a dirty game if you want a top class year in and year out.

yossarians tree

February 8th, 2018 at 3:54 PM ^

Academics is a vastly underrated factor, in my opinion--and not in the way we think it is. We think that our academic reputation is a plus, and it is, for a percentage of kids. But for a great deal more I believe the academics are probably intimidating, if not outright undesireable. Compare it to what's going to be expected of them at so many other places where they see players who don't even have to go to class.

For many of the most highly rated recruits a rigorous academic program can probably be seen as an annoyance they'd rather not have to deal with. Most of them think they are going to the NFL and will be set for life. Of course that is incredibly shortsighted, but these are 17 year old kids who have 5,000 people following their every word on Twitter. 

jsquigg

February 8th, 2018 at 3:05 PM ^

Short of bag men, how about winning?  Michigan is a draw for academics, but the national/local narrative isn't helping them as everybody has tunnel vision when it comes to perception.  Next year is crucial, but the schedule is brutal.

readyourguard

February 8th, 2018 at 3:18 PM ^

Recruit locally. Bring kids in who have a passion about MSU and OSU.

While we're out trying to pry kids from the south and west, Wisconsin, MSU, Ohio State, Iowa, Penn State, and Northwestern are getting good linemen from right in our footprint.

Jim's starting to do that with a rash of recent offers, but this should have been a priority from Day 1. We used to kick Ohio State's ass with a bunch of Ohio kids.

CC

February 9th, 2018 at 8:11 AM ^

Osu didn’t get every kid from Ohio, there are 79 3*+ kids in Ohio.
Michigan got exactly 0.
Norte Dame, Clemson, FSU, MSU, PSU, Oklahoma, WVU, Wisconsin, MN, UK, Purdue, UVA, NW, Pitt and Iowa State all found time to get into Ohio. The fact that Michigan got 0 is mind boggling. They got 4 of the top 5 but there are 12 4*+ guys.

To ignore Ohio is a failing strategy for UM.

kurpit

February 9th, 2018 at 10:40 AM ^

It looks like one recruit in the state of Ohio was really pursued by OSU but chose to go elsewhere; Jackson Carman, who ended up at Clemson. Michigan could try to pick at Ohio State's scraps or look elsewhere. Obviously, the staff has chosen the latter.

BigWeb

February 8th, 2018 at 3:58 PM ^

Teenagers nowadays have no idea Michigan is any good. Its been a while since we were somewhat relevant. Living in the past doesnt help. We'll always be a draw academically and we can be in all sports when you win, year in and year out. Nothing to see here.

CLord

February 8th, 2018 at 4:31 PM ^

Yeah.  Soon as I saw MSU above Michigan and Bama I drove through.  My hot take is the revelation this year is the area we need to shore up isn't recruiting, it's coaching.  Sorry but Trace and Saquon (sp) aside, recruiting stars is not the reason Penn State bends us over and Sanduskies us like they did.  It's 100% coaching and scheme.  

I'm going with the thought that JH is realizing his focus needs to be less on recruit star power and more on shoring up scheme, now that he sees his schemes are finding themselves antiquated relative to rivals.

A good offensive coaching hire to me is the rough equivalent of 15 five star recruits.  That's really where our program's focus needs to be this year and for the future until we see scheme improvement.

Coldwater

February 8th, 2018 at 5:36 PM ^

Here's Michigan selling points: cool helmets, awesome city, great facilities, Super Bowl celebrity coach, puts guys in NFL, world class education, big budget, trips to Europe, etc.

Here's what Michigan can't sell: Championships, wins against rivals, hot girls, and upward trending team

mrawatson

February 8th, 2018 at 10:27 PM ^

The problem starts with Harbaugh - quirkiness may get you in with recruits - but not the parents. Its a journey - not a roadtrip to some funky destination. Or creepy sleepovers. Successful coaches are like father figures, not  frat buddies. Can you see Meyer, Saban, Swinney or Smart doing a sleepover or other gimmicky stuff like Harbaugh does? That is what success looks like.

Harbaugh may be a great coach but his recruiting needs to improve. At Stanford the school sells itself to a certain type of player and does not need the strong recruiting effort, so Harbaugh was able to focus more on coaching. And in the pros there was no need for him to recruit. Most schools are different - its a lot of work. Harbaugh needs to get on board and get serious.

mrawatson

February 8th, 2018 at 11:38 PM ^

Yeah, well he ain't winning and hasn't beaten OSU. He's 1-5 against OSU and MSU. 1-2 in bowl games. UM's top 2018 recruit would be #14 at OSU (look up the top 300 recruits for 2018). Should I continue? (drop the mike). Sure he's a "Michigan Man." But it takes more. Bo wasn't a "Michigan" Man - just a "kick ass" man (from Ohio).

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck - IT'S A DUCK!!!

Durham Blue

February 8th, 2018 at 11:10 PM ^

When Michigan was a power in the mid to late 1990's and early 2000's we were pulling Ohio's top recruits.  Hell, we were pulling top recruits out of lock down states like Louisiana.  Why?  We were winning.  Beating the crap out of OSU every year.  Winning a national championship and being in the B1G title hunt every season.  The Michigan brand was synonomous with winning.  No surprise we nabbed the best recruits.