Another 2013 OL offer: Cameron Hunt

Submitted by dnak438 on November 28th, 2012 at 12:32 PM

According to the Twitters (a Sam Webb RT among them). He's from Corona, CA (Centennial High School, Vontaze Burfict's school).

  • Rivals: 4 star (#31 OL), 6'4", 255 lbs
  • Scout: 4 star (#13 OG), 6'4", 255 lbs
  • 247: 3 star (#54 OT), 6'5", 275lbs
  • ESPN: 4 star (#13 OT, #220 overall), 6'4", 267 lbs

(Edited to clarify rankings from various services).


Young John Beilein

November 28th, 2012 at 12:41 PM ^

This is great.  Despite the fact that I know nothing about technical aspects of football, I will say I like him better than Lacy after watching highlights of both.  He appears to be more coordinated and lighter on his feet.


November 28th, 2012 at 12:49 PM ^

Cali should be good HUNTing ground with Kiffin's implosion, Kelly NFL exodus and Tedford's exit. Mora will boost UCLA, but we should push hard for 2014 targets.

Not easy but better than Texas with TAMU's battling UT and Florida with Urban/Will/Nick/Jimbo battling.


November 28th, 2012 at 12:55 PM ^

At the Oakland NFTC he dominated, won every matchup, and won the Lineman MVP as a Tackle.

At the Opening he was matched up against the much bigger DTs, and while he didn't dominate every snap he was able to use his technique and aggression to overcome the 30lb size mismatch from switching to the powerful DTs from the rush ends, and they said he never  had a bad rep.

Blue boy johnson

November 28th, 2012 at 12:59 PM ^

I have never seen the kid play but here is my scouting report:

Needs to play with better pad level

Plays with some nastiness but needs to become more Conrad Dobler like

Doesn't use his hands well but has an excellent first punch

Needs a redshirt year to get bigger and stronger

His technique needs work

If all goes well he could start as an upper classman and possibly make the media's all BIG team, but only HM from the coaches.


November 28th, 2012 at 1:12 PM ^

It's funny that that's almost always true, but this kid reminds me more of Patrick Kugler in that he was a lesser known kid who already has fantastic everything, except size right now. He's really a step or two or three ahead of other top high school prospects in technique. Kid is very technical player, loves to fight and finish, too. Plus he was going to Cal Berkley for the business school. Could end up playing Tackle, Guard, or Center. Really can't see why he's not rated much higher.

Section 1

November 28th, 2012 at 1:30 PM ^

If, by the end of today, all of the 2013 players currently holding serious offers by Michigan -- indeed, having been given  those offers within the last 60 days or so -- accepted their offers and committed, we'd have no scholarships left to even offer to Treadwell and Green.  Right?  What am I missing?  Because this seems so elementary I presume that I am missing something.

Is it safe to presume that the main subject of the coaches' recent in-home meetings and/or calls to Treadwell, Green and Isaac were all probably along those lines?  That is, when Michigan will no longer have anything to offer them?

Section 1

November 28th, 2012 at 1:59 PM ^

So if, notwithstanding offers already made, the Michigan coaches still want to take visits to other (high) schools, to visit other kids, they can do that and there could be many more offers made...

lol.  Just kidding.  That was too easy.

Actually, I get the committable offer part, and the part wherein the coaches tell recruits that they are only taking four linebackers total, or one more offensive lineman in addition to the current commits, etc.

What I didn't get was where we were, right now, with the total number of scholarhips availiable, and with other players at other positions, not WR or RB, still getting 2013 offers.


November 28th, 2012 at 1:46 PM ^

The coaches probably wouldn't accept commitments from both Lacy and Hunt; the first one to commit would likely get the spot.

If they get any indication that Green or Treadwell or McQuay will commit, they'll likely save a spot.  Or they'll take the first two of the three.  

Things are always fluid.


November 28th, 2012 at 1:48 PM ^

Just the first one to accept. They've offered a couple (or few?) lineman, to take Dawson's slot. The first one to commit gets it, then the rest are "sorry, we've filled the position." They're not going to take 2 more linemen. With a DB offer, it's to go to Conley slot.  Someone takes it, the spot is filled. Then the remainders are for the best available.  And if none of them take it, one of the other guys can have it.

I mean, if in Spring they offer 200 kids, and they all accepted, they'd be oversigning by about 175.  But that doesn't happen. Now if two linemen simulataneously call different coaches to accept at the exact same second, I guess they have a problem.


November 28th, 2012 at 1:56 PM ^

We have, probably, three spots left. One will go to an OL. One will go to a DB. One will go to an offensive player like Green, Treadwell or Isaac.

If somehow Treadwell and Green/Isaac wanted in, I bet we figure that out, and it might mean saying no to an OL or DB who hasn't committed yet. But, it's also possible we get the necessary attrition to get to 26, in which case we're all good.


November 28th, 2012 at 1:30 PM ^

I am more than happy about how our recriuting has been since Hoke et al. came aboard.  We have had a track record for landing quality recruits early.  However, as is the plight of a Michigan fan we must always compare ourselves to OSU.  And, while we dominate early, Meyer has been just as dominant late.  Last year he pulled in Washington and Shcutt late and this year it could be Conley and Trey Johnson.  At the beginning of the year this didn't concern me, however it now seems possible for the second straight year OSU could very well leap from us in the rankings.  


My hopes get high early thinking our classes can only get better if they land a few more guys.  But, inevitably we don't seem to land high rated guys late, only lose them.  So, instead of only getting better, it seems they only get worse.  Granted, we could still land a Green, Isaac, or Treadwill which would probably lock in our ranking ahead of them, but if we don't and OSU gets any number of guys still on their board they will likely finish ahead of us.  


I think most of agree from watching the game last week that OSU is already a notch above us in on-the-field talent right now.  If they are better than us now and they continue to sign classes better than ours how can we logically expect to become the better program?  This is really the concerning part for me.  I do not want to succeed that they are the better program again this decade.

Blue in Yarmouth

November 28th, 2012 at 1:49 PM ^

you worry too much. Take an ativan and call me in the morning. The only thing that worries me is our offense. Whatever the hell everyone else is doing is not much concern for me as I have complete faith in our entire defensive staff that they can develop talent far better than our rival programs. Now we just need Al and the offensive staff to rpove the same and I can sleep easy. I', hopeful that he will do this during the offseason to put my concerns to rest.


November 28th, 2012 at 1:52 PM ^

And ours is rated #5, it means four years of domination by them?

Or conversely if we sign the #2 class and they sign the #4, we're going to kick their ass for years?

The difference between 3 and 8 is completely arbitrary. Or else all the ranking bodies would have the same rankings. The difference is when you're signing the #5 class or the number #15...or 25...or 45. Then there's a real difference.


November 28th, 2012 at 2:25 PM ^

First off, I have no idea if of any of these kids are any good as I am totally reliant on rating services because I have never seen any of them acutally play.  But, yes, logic would state if they are better than us now and continue to sign classes better than us, then they will continue to be better than us.  In order to close a gap or overtake them we must be significantly better in recruiting for a string of years, not slightly worse and not the same...significantly better.  And, we have yet to do that.  I mean Meyer has show an ability to flip guys late.  When is the last time we flipped an OSU commit?  It seems our only tool to get guys they also offer outside of Michigan is to offer them first.  We rarely seem to get guys we both offer outside of MI.  Now, maybe I'm dismissing development, but I don't really know how to judge that.  But, I do know rankings and product I see on the field and right now their recruiting AND product on the field is better.  


Does that mean they will be dominant for a that is a little bit of sensationalization.  But, they dominated us in the 2000s and although Hoke has closed the gap I don't see anything YET that leads me to believe we can take over the dominant position.  So far we have proven they we can keep up with Jones' so to speak.  We beat them at home and they beat us at home.  But, at the same time Meyer is 1-0 in games and looks like he'll be 2-0 in recruiting classes.  So, does that mean they will dominate us for a decade, no.  But, I don't YET see any evidence that we can win more 50% of our games with them at best.  And, the slight pesimist in me from having to watch them have a winning percentage over 50% aginst us frustrates me and so far it seems that is a likely course, that's all.


November 28th, 2012 at 2:39 PM ^

You're overreacting. Last year, our class and OSU's class were virtually even. This year looks to be about the same. So in a couple years, both teams will have nearly identical talent levels. Don't freak out.


November 28th, 2012 at 2:49 PM ^

You're thinking it's like this:

If they have $100,000, and we have $50,000, and they get another $100,000, and we get a $100,000, then they have $200,000, and we have $150,000, and they're still ahead of us. But it doesn't work like that. You don't get to keep that $100k.  After 4 years, it graduates. So if they both get $100k over four years, they're both going to have $400k.  That's equal footing.

And my point wasn't that you can't follow recruiting rankings. Just that if you're freaking out over one or two positions, that's silly. Rivals said the classes last year were 4 and 7. Scout 3 and 4. 247 6 and 8. Who do you believe?  If it can vary that much, I'm not sure why you worry about the difference between 2 and 3 between the two teams as being large, but have completely accept that one person can think we were 4 and another thinks we were 8. If they could be wrong about the latter, why not the former? This is not an exact science.

If you think we're going to go back to the Cooper years, then you're just dreaming. It's not what the rivalry is supposed to be about. And it's not going to happen with Meyer down there. 50% is good. You win your home games in the rivalry, then try and steal more on the road than they do. 

And how soon we all forget Kyle Kalis, eh?  Frankly every kid in Ohio who doesn't flip back to the home school is a victory down there. Who have they flipped from us? Have they gotten Conley yet?  Even if they do, of the two players I named, who would you rather have? Perspective.


November 28th, 2012 at 3:22 PM ^

I see your logic and we are basically saying the same thing.  You're saying the glass is half full and I'm sayint it's half empty.  Either way half of it's contents remain.  I envy your positive outlook, but it's not in my DNA to be positive about something that is trending downards.  In regards to Kalis, yes we got him.  But, I'm guessing we only got him because of the loss of Tressel and the sanctions, and he didn't flip...did he?  I actually can't remember, but I don't believe he did.  Conley may not land at OSU, but it sure looks like he could.  Losing out on Dawson, an instate kid also hurts.  Granted he's not going to OSU but it hurts.  I don't remember when we've ever flipped an OSU commit or gotten a highly rated guy that we didn't offer first.  Ultimately this comes down to two points in my opinion.  OH ahs has more in state talent than MI which means he will likely get more of the share of OH and he appears to recruit better outside of the region.  Maybe that's a wash or not even true.  Hoke seems to do better in region and is good in CA, but Meyer seems to be better in the South and East, so overall I'd still give him the edge.  Anyways all I'm saying is things have gotten better since Hoke arrived.  Yes, I'm happy with that.  But, sorry...I grew up in the 90's so to me that is baseline.  The 2000s saw that flip.  Now we seem to be slightly leaning towards OSU as the better team.  Yes, that's a step up from the Tressel era, but from my perspective it is and will be an uphill struggle of which I feel we will be on the short end more than not.  I will never be satisfied and I will continue to be nervous, concerned, whatever unless we have a winning record against them....and not overall from the 1920's but modern day.  Is it too much to ask to have a winning record against OSU post 2000?


November 28th, 2012 at 4:05 PM ^

Kalis did flip. It is why he received so much grief from the OSU fanbase. It also is not simply a matter of flipping people but simply signing people. Michigan is getting a fair amount of talent out of Ohio. Guys like Wormley, Stroebel, Thomas, Wilson, etc.

You mention being a fan from the 90's. In that era, Michigan got guys like Grbac, Howard, Woodson, etc. all out of the state of Ohio.

I understand the "sky is falling" personality, but for your own sake, dig a little and use some facts and life will be much better.


November 29th, 2012 at 11:52 AM ^

Someone else mentioned the flipped thing. But it's not positive. It's just an overall outlook.  Recruiting is a numbers game. It's the very rare one recruit who makes or breaks a class. If Morris says HAHA, just kidding, going to Notre Dame...well, that's a problem because not only is he good, but we have QB numbers problems. If Conley says "oh, I really wanted to go to Ohio, but they had no interest in me till Michigan did", they come and they go. I'd rather have someone who really wants to be here. One 3* player isn't a big deal either way. We'll replace him with another 4*.

Bo didn't outrecruit Woody in Ohio. Neither did Mo, or Lloyd. Ohio State is always going to get the majority of good players from Ohio. It's their state. At our best we don't steal a handful of kids that OSU doesn't want, but a handful of kids OSU does want. Like the guys listed below. Didn't mean we were kicking their ass in Ohio recruiting, even when Woodson was here. Just meant that a few great players from there, to go with the Michigan guys and guys from around the country* lead us to even footing (along with ND and Nebraska we're the only major rtraditional programs that really HAVE to go outside the state to get talent).

And it's probably an age thing. And while the series has had its up and down periods with the team, when it was at its pinnacle was the Ten Year War, when both teams had legendary coaches and great teams. Bo was 5-4-1 vs. Woody. That's what I'm expecting. Unless the NCAA hammers Ohio State (which they didn't when they had the chance) or they hire another coach with a Michigan complex (Cooper actually had really talented teams that won a LOT of games, other than that last one) you're not going to see dominance again anytime soon. Certainly not under Meyer. Some have kidded themselves, but he's a good coach. I'll say it protect your home field, and try and steal more down there than they get up here. If that's not something you can handle, you're not going to like college football. Because that's where it's at. A battle every year.  And that's where it should be.


*I think Michigan has always recruited out of the midwest whereever there was program weakness. We're hitting Cali now because USC isn't taking every last good player. Fred Jackson used to hit LSU hard before they got good again under Saban. There were a lot of Texas players at Michigan when Texas stunk; if they continue to struggle, maybe we'll get more from there. We used to not only get our share, but got the very best from Pennsylvania when PSU was down. It's fluid.


November 28th, 2012 at 3:55 PM ^

Recruiting services are not experts, and their ratings are generally a stab in the dark, and our coaches seem to be well ahead of the curve, offering kids who nobody knows yet, then they turn into fantastic prospects. There's also the overall luck/bust factor. We have quite a few 4 star, even top rated safety/linebackers on our team riding the bench and playing special teams, and true walk on Jordan Kovacs and low 3 star Jake Ryan starting at an All B1G level.

Compare to Ohio, too. In 2011 they pulled in the #2 overall recruit in the entire nation in linebacker Curtis Grant, who played as a true freshman and has tallied up a monster 10 tackles(!) in 18 games. They also pulled in an average unranked 4star linebacker in Ryan Shazier, who was only rated around the 40th best player from Florida. He played as a true freshman  too, and only managed 172 tackles in 2 years, 24 for a loss, 5 forced fumbles, and 11 passes defended. Rivals rated Grant just a step behind Jadeveon Clowney as THE top prospect, and over studs like Bamas Cyrus Kouandjio, and ND DLine pair Ishaq Williams and Stefon Tuitt, and Deanthony Thomas. Grant was benched in favor of converted FB Zach Boren and played mostly on special teams last year, while Shazier has started every game for 2 straight seasons. Recruiting sites are just for fun, and generally shouldn't be taken seriously.

Top rated classes are also regularly filled with busts, and washouts. Reading through this list of recent recruting stories has given me alot more confidence in our coaches recruiting methods compared to teams that generally rank above us on the Rivals list.


November 28th, 2012 at 4:11 PM ^


So, are you telling me you wouldn't prefer to have the higher ranked class?  With just a quick look at ESPN (for ease) top 10 recruiting classes for the last 4 years tells me the teams on this list are all talented teams, many are from the SEC, and many are currently ranked in the top 10 (Alabama, FLA, Georgia, LSU) .  Who is the only team in the top 3 every year…Alabama.  I don't need to tell you their performance the past 4 years.  I’m not saying recruiting rankings aren’t flawed, but it seems like top ranked teams are good teams.  And, I'd prefer to be ranked ahead of every year.



1.       Alabama

2.       FSU

3.       Texas

4.       FLA

5.       Georgia

6.       OSU

7.       Michigan

8.       Miami

9.       Notre Dame

10.   Clemson



1.       FSU

2.       Alabama

3.       Auburn

4.       USC

5.       Texas

6.       Georgia

7.       OSU

8.       Clemson

9.       Notre Dame

10.   LSU



1.       FLA

2.       Texas

3.       Alabama

4.       Auburn

5.       Oklahoma

6.       FSU

7.       USC

8.       LSU

9.       Tennessee

10.   UCLA



1.       LSU

2.       Alabama

3.       Texas

4.       USC

5.       FLA

6.       Georgia

7.       Miami

8.       FSU

9.       OSU

10.   Michigan


November 29th, 2012 at 11:36 AM ^

It's better to be Top 5 than Top 50. You can judge that much talent difference. It's just the minor changes of "this kid drops from 26 in the country to 35" that's hilarious. Which means the math they base the overall rankings on is flawed. If I ran a recruiting services I'd list like Top 5 best classes (no order), and a Top Ten, and those that fall in the Top 20. Then like 20-50.  And others.  And I'd probably be pretty close year after year. But I'd go out of business because I don't have people clicking on me every day to see if their player jumped two spots in my 3rd week in May updated to change next week.


November 28th, 2012 at 4:48 PM ^

Recruting success on Rivals doesn't necessarily = success on the field. Just look at the teams listed there and then look at the last 2 BCS rankings. There isn't much of a correlation. FSU should've won half of the last BCS National Championships if that were the case. Recruiting good talent matters, but teams like Bama and LSU also have is top coaches. What Rivals says good talent is, and what our coaches say good talent is are sometimes 2 very different things. I like the position Michigan is in, and I wouldn't trade it to be Miami, or Texas, or Tennessee, or USC, or Auburn right now, with their wonderful recruiting success, and derptastisc teams. I do thouroughly enjoy any public praise and prestige that comes Michigans way, though.


November 28th, 2012 at 5:06 PM ^

Does the information you cite from Rivals require a membership?  I will look into that.  But, my concern still makes sense even in the context of your argument.  OSU has good coaches AND good recruiting.  I do trust Hoke as a head coach, I also have a tremendous amount of faith in Mattison based on the fact that the talent I see is average for the conference, but the numbers put us highly ranked amongst the country.  But, I'm sure how I feel about special teams and the entire offensive unit coaches.  It's hard to tell, but based on performance I don't see we have great offensive coaches.  And, one weaknesses of Hoke is that he can't make up for offensive weaknesses the way, say Meyer can, who is an offensive mind.  I guess maybe they have the problem we have on offense, on defense.  But, they showed their defensive talent can turn it on when neccessary.  


Anyway the true anwser to this question would be if you could take all emotion out of the equation, which would you rather have...our recruiting and entire coaching staff or OSU's?  My heart says ours, I'm not sure my brain does.  I won't anwser that question yet because the sample size is too small, but it's certainly not heavily favored in our direction if at all.

Young John Beilein

November 28th, 2012 at 1:56 PM ^

You should always want to succeed if you are to be Michigan material.  Here are some ways that we will be the better program:  1. better coaching and player development 2. Not having sanctions on the program 3. Talent recognition that does no necessarily manifest itself in recruiting rankings.  Get a grip man.


November 28th, 2012 at 7:00 PM ^

Meyer has a few things working for him. In the last 7 years or so, OSU has had a generally better football program with more media recognition than UM. To a HS recruit, that covers the time period back to the age of about 10. That matters. Meyer has his name/NC recognition. Things like that.

What Hoke doesn't have is his recruits playing his football on the field. You can tell a WR that you're going to throw the ball, but it's better to show them. You can tell a RB that you're building a king hell Oline for them to run behind, but it's better to show them. By some accounts, the second half of the season with Devin throwing a lot of passes(and long ones at that) had an effect on WR looking at UM.

Meyer and OSU are always going to recruit well, and you'll always be nervous and/or bummed if you compare UM to OSU in that regard. If Hoke stays more or less even with them, it's all good. And if the Oline recruiting develops on the field as projected along with Devin going into Morris as QB, you'll see the skill position big names come in.

Finally, don't worry. Meyer implodes at some point; he'll run away and leave the program as something of mess when it gets hard. Ask Gator fans.


November 28th, 2012 at 7:52 PM ^

His track record points to great success landing 5* players and highly ranked recruiting classes based on recruiting sites - but there quality of those recruits is debatable.

Plus, his first two gigs at BG and Ut were too short to require recruits to contribute. Most of his top rated recruits were very productive at FL, but the program's rapid decline in 2010 and 2011 are largely a result of the mix of "characters" that he recruited. 30 arrests in 5 yrs is extraordinary (25% arrest rate). Whether he can properly evaluate talent and select the right personality traits ... largely in question.

He will get a lot of highly rated recruits as he deeply believes in a system rooted in star players. If we stay equal or close on site ratings, I am confident UM will have the better players and character.