Does anyone else see Rich Rod losing some (phone) numbers...

Submitted by k06em01 on November 27th, 2009 at 3:46 PM

the point of this thread - that was missed by so many who are so quick to criticize and neg - is this.

there are twenty-two commitments. there might be no more than twenty-five scholarships available, according to sam webb.

there are two players on the verge of comitting (grimes, murphy...we already have 4 cb's, and 3 de's) that we don't need quite as bad as we might need some others who could.

...furman has given sam webb a "gut feeling." that'd be 23.

...beachum still sounds much more excited about us than arkansas. that'd be 24.

...baxter almost comitted during his visit, and is sounding like more and more of a lean. that'd be 25.

if we can get those three to commit before signing day, when grimes and murphy plan to announce, rich rod might just "lose their phone numbers" and stop calling them...as he did with some other less desirable commits/near commits last season.

Comments

bluebyyou

November 27th, 2009 at 3:56 PM ^

I think with all things recruiting related you don't see the whole picture until sometime on signing day. Trying to predict what will happen with a bunch of 17-18 year old high school seniors is not an easy way to make a living. I suspect we will have a good outcome.

Zone Left

November 27th, 2009 at 4:01 PM ^

Michigan will be okay--a lot of comments I've seen suggest that the staff is doing a great job of selling opportunity to play early and rebuilding the program.

bmbender

November 27th, 2009 at 4:21 PM ^

I must agree that this has been beaten to death but my 2cents are that in four years we'll know whether these players have panned out. We win some and lose some. Must defer to the coaches since they are in a better position to determine whether a certain player is a fit for Michigan. But if I was a 18 year old and seeing the potential for playing time at Michigan, I would jump at it.

MLAWyer

November 27th, 2009 at 4:24 PM ^

I think you are asking whether RichRod will try to induce some decommits to open up scholarship spots for higher rated recruits.

The recruiting roundup and Brian's post immediately preceding it made it sounds as if Michigan is not in as strong of a position for Baxter or Beachum (or Shaw or Jefferson) as some thought might be the case right after their visit. I'm hoping we can get Furman but I still think he's probably about 50/50, maybe a bit better.

So as of now, we have 3 spots left with Murphy and Grimes hopefully taking up two of them. I don't see RichRod "losing the number" to any of our current commits right now. Some guys might decommit without prompting, and right now I think with the guys left on the recruiting board, Michigan doesn't have a good reason to kick anyone out of this class.

jg2112

November 27th, 2009 at 4:38 PM ^

There's a couple of good football games on brah. Go do something, anything, other than speculating on Michigan's recruiting and depth charts for the 5th day in a row.

I doubt you'll follow my advice, so I'm excited to see your cutting edge analysis of Michigan's WR recruits tomorrow.

1M1Ucla

November 27th, 2009 at 5:32 PM ^

whiny bitch blog. A guy writes something that's on his mind and about 20 clever little whiners jump on him for being repetitive, unoriginal, or whatever. There are generally more words thrown in from the bitches than were submitted in the original post. Do you guys have accounts that cost you by the column inch or something? I can understand your sensitivity over the cost of inches, I suppose, since you are probably the same guys with a paper and pencil in at least one hand when those Enzyte commercials come on TV.

GOBLUE4EVR

November 27th, 2009 at 5:43 PM ^

people are bitching is because he does this almost everyday... when he posts a thread its usually a regurgitation of something that had been posted early in the week and he just puts his own spin on it. i will give him credit for throwing stuff out there and see if it sticks.

maizedNblued

November 27th, 2009 at 6:09 PM ^

...this class isn't as good as everyone has hoped it could be. Way to many 3 star recruits, definitely getting more depth across the board but is it really much better this February than the "past few February's"?...like RR referred to with LC's last few classes...hmmmmm....

GOBLUE4EVR

November 27th, 2009 at 6:16 PM ^

that this class isn't any good??? are you able to see into the future??? you, me or anyone else on this board is not going to know how good this class is going for a couple of years yet. and if you are going to bitch about how many stars a player has, just think about this, mike hart was only a 3 star player coming out of HS and i think he had a pretty decent college career.

bklein09

November 27th, 2009 at 7:08 PM ^

I actually think that this class has the potential to be a great one four years from now when we are looking at the upperclassmen it produced.

You've got a couple of highly ranked offensive weapons in Gardner and Ricardo Miller, mixed in with some other four star guys. And considering our youth on offense and the last couple classes, that seems more than sufficient to me.

On defense is where we really needed to come up big, and I think we're doing pretty well considering our record the last two seasons. We've got two highly rated four star guys so far in Christian and Robinson, and the 2-5 more we are going to add are almost all four stars. More importantly, we are recruiting some depth in the secondary. Personally, considering that it is really hard to predict how recruits will pan out, I'd rather have 4 three stars over 2 four stars. The more players you bring in, the better chance you have of finding someone who can be a major contributor.

Maybe I'm being overly optimistic here, but I am liking how this class is shaping up. I'm not saying that it is guaranteed to be successful, just that it has potential and it addresses some needs.

clarkiefromcanada

November 27th, 2009 at 9:35 PM ^

I think you make some good points in that we took a lot of players at positions of need (CB/Safety for example). I never thought we'd get to a place where I was worried we were potentially getting too many quality CB's. It's currently the 14th best class nationally which is not awesome but not completely terrible. The expected signees should bump that up a bit.

I might like to see a snake oiled offensive lineman but it seems we might or might not have the numbers...

maizedNblued

November 27th, 2009 at 7:09 PM ^

....was a tadddddd bit overrated. If he wasn't hurt...he was whinning on television.....I've never seen anyone interviewed so much even when he didn't play in the game...come on...I'm a firm believer in recruiting gurus aren't as bright and accurate with their judgments on players but please come at me with someone a little more consistent and productive than MH.....you should have used someone like David Harris, who turned out to be a workhorse and or even David Molk, both 3 star recruits who turned out better than expected....

GOBLUE4EVR

November 27th, 2009 at 7:17 PM ^

"but please come at me with someone a little more consistent and productive than MH"

WHAT??? are you kidding me??? i guess being the all time leading rusher in michigan history and 5th all time in the big ten isn't consistent enough for you. the guy has most 200 yard rushing games in michigan history and i know he is up there in 100 yard games. so i guess he was doing something right in those 4 years.

maizedNblued

November 27th, 2009 at 7:33 PM ^

...I'd take Wheatley, Thomas, Perry (of guys that I grew up watching) and I'm sure older fans would take Morris and Woolfork before MH. I never said Hart wasn't good...but check the history specifically the more important games, he never came through in the big games. He also has about 200 to 300 more carries than anyone else in UM history, but for some reason, he couldn't get in the endzone. His yardage is solid but give the ball to anyone over 1000 times and that person's going to have solid numbers. Hart was good, but he wasn't as great as some people made him out to be; his stats are a bit exaggerated....and it annoyed me that he always spoke at press conferences but he hadn't even played in the game....my opinion ofcourse....

CrankThatDonovan

November 27th, 2009 at 11:19 PM ^

Hart sucked in big games, especially when he repeatedly turned the ball over. That dude could never score touchdowns, either. I mean, look at these shitty stats!

2007
App State: 188 yards on 23 carries, 3 TD
Penn State: 153 yards on 44 carries, 1 TD

2006
Notre Dame: 124 yards on 31 carries, 1 TD
Ohio State: 142 yards on 23 carries, 3 TD

2005:
Michigan State: 218 yards on 36 carries, 1 TD
Penn State: 108 yards on 23 carries, 1 TD

2004:
Michigan State: 224 yards on 33 carries, 1 TD

What a cock!

maizedNblued

November 28th, 2009 at 1:07 AM ^

App State?? Michigan St?? Notre Dame??...you can't be serious about App State so I'm not even going to comment on that...MSU didn't make a bowl either of those years, and ND hasn't had a good team since Holtz was the coach. PSU lost 4 games in 2004 and in 2007, Mallett was the QB and if I'm not mistaken he threw the ball 13 times so, by default, Hart had to have a good game because he carried 44 times. I appreciate your argument but check the all time stats...

Thomas: 924 carries, 55 TDs, scored a TD every 17 touches
Wheatley: 688 carries, 47 TDs, scored a TD every 14 touches
Hart: 1015 carries, 41 TDs, scored a TD every 25 touches
Perry: 811 carries, 39 TDs, scored a TD every 21 touches

...Hart had about 200 to 400 more carries than just about everyone on the Top-10 rushing list. If you break down his games, he rarely showed up in "The Game" or a bowl game (Texas, USC, Nebraska)...I personally think Ty Wheatley was the best running back in UM history but I'll concede, statistically, Anthony Thomas was the best.

I definitely never said Mike Hart wasn't one of the best running backs in UM history, I just think his stats are alittle misleading.....my argument is I can only think of a handful of BIG games (Not MSU, not a mediocre ND)..in which he came through. (Bowl game vs. Florida comes to mind, 2006 OSU game as well)....

CrankThatDonovan

November 28th, 2009 at 1:31 AM ^

Three touchdowns and 123 yards against OSU in 2006 doesn't count as a good game? He didn't come through by scoring three times?

You can say whatever you want about what is and isn't a big game, but if you're going to arbitrarily say that only the games in which Hart didn't play well were big, then there is no point in discussing this any further. Hart carried over 1000 times because he was an extremely tough runner. Even though he was injured in 2005 and 2007, he was still able to rush for over 5000 total yards and 10 TDs per season. If you want to hate, whatever.

maizedNblued

November 28th, 2009 at 1:51 AM ^

...I mentioned his performance in 2006 in "The Game"...but he scored 14 TDs in 2007, 6 of which were against App St. and Eastern Michigan....and quite frankly, if you don't arbitrarily agree that USC, Texas, Nebraska, Ohio St aren't the big games then ummmmm....maybe Minnesota, Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois as well as you know something that I don't.

Hart was a very dependable back and a very good runner, didn't fumble etc etc etc....but honestly, I'd take A-train and Wheatley before him.

CrankThatDonovan

November 28th, 2009 at 2:08 AM ^

I misread what you said, maybe if you used periods instead of ellipses I could actually comprehend what you are trying to say...

Hart was injured the second half of the 2007 season. He had zero carries against Illinois, Minnesota, and Wisconsin and only 15 and 18 against MSU and OSU. We don't know how well he could have done against better competition because he played sparingly against half of the Big Ten schedule. If you would count anything but bowl games as big games, you'd remember that Hart single-handedly beat Penn State, ran all over Notre Dame the week after we were crushed by Oregon, and kept us in the Appalachian State game (which you don't think was a big game...even though we lost it).

Hart was an integral part of all four Michigan teams that he played for. His leadership has been sorely missed the past two seasons. Like I said, if you want to hate, whatever

MC Hammer

November 27th, 2009 at 9:59 PM ^

I really liked Troy Woolfork's play this year.

In addition, I wish we still had Adrian Harrington.

Don't you think our most improved lineman was David Mossman?

When he wasn't hurt, Brandon Minor was MAJOR! LOL