Per ESPN: Michigan 9th easiest sell for recruiting
December 9th, 2015 at 4:40 PM ^
Texas has to top any list for it to be valid. Even at the tail end of Mack Brown era their recruiting class would normally be full after their big junior recruit visit day. USC is a close second as they have some competition. Florida or FSU should be third.
December 9th, 2015 at 4:43 PM ^
December 9th, 2015 at 5:03 PM ^
TX was huge when population not so much. Bama, in its current condition is unmatched as far as best bet to play at next level. The entire SE is fertile as are TX and CA. OSU is not out of place here given no one in that state would consider Cinnci if good enough to play D1 at highest level. Think we should make them part of next expansion just to even things out a bit.
But as a fomrer head coach at the high school level, it bothered the hell out of me that so many of my kids were ND homers from birth. Hell, when invited to their homes for dinner, they had to do all the chest crossng, etc. They made a film of my team one year to show at a pep assembly. First up was the Pope, next Lou Holtz and then me. I told the lady, not half jokingly, that if she really wanted to capture what my team was about she should have replaced Holtz with Bo and left the pope out of it completely.
Believe me these kids that are good enough you sell them best you can on the blue but, as I said, from birth, they hear nothing but ND in church, in the home, from ND. It's all about the religion and this is more than huge when it comes to the parents. We have been fortunate to grab some great kids out of the feeders schools like St. Ed's and Joe's from Cleveland, but I think their second choice was ND but just wanted to play for Bo, MO, and LC. Multiply that nationally and it's often an uphill battle to unseat them. They should be hgher, imo only.
December 9th, 2015 at 4:50 PM ^
Considering the issue with #1 and the struggles the past decade at #4 (most of our national brand NFL guys are old dudes in the NFL who played for the coach who was here 3 coaches ago) I think its a good rating actually. It's hard to point to Tom Brady as a recent example of high level success, just as Woodson when LSU, Bama, USC, OSU types can point to plenty of guys in their mid 20s. We are not going to be able to fix #1 and as demographics continue to penalize Midwest it only will hurt more but #4 can take a massive jump.
Hard to argue with 1-8, just a matter of order. The Florida teams are digned for in state competition (Texas too I suppose with TCU Baylor A&M) so I'd probably put USC, OSU, Bama, Texas, GA , LSU in my top 6 (I'd probably do that order myself) and then followed by FSU UF. ND at #15 was too low -I'd put them 9, 10, 11 with UM, Oklahoma.
Michigan is about right in the tier with the Oklahomas, Notre Dames.
And yes while some proportion are looking at academics as a plus the way ESPN catergorizes it, its a penalty because it could limit your pool of potential recruits.
1. Favorable geography/local recruiting territory.
2. Recruiting/football budget. Sources of data were most current available information, including the data collected HERE and HERE, and original research by ESPN's recruiting reporters and team of scouts.
3. Facilities to attract recruits.
4. Next-level considerations.
NFL alumni and identifiable pro prospects who provide evidence to recruits that they can play at the next level.
5. Other intangibles including but not limited to winning tradition, game-day experience and academic considerations.
(Example: Schools with a positive tradition to sell to recruits could receive a "5" in this category, schools with academic restrictions that represent a hurdle in recruiting could get a "1." If there were no discernible positive or negative intangibles, panelists were instructed to give a "3" in this category.)
December 9th, 2015 at 4:49 PM ^
Michigan should be #1:
You only need one reason: Harbaugh
December 9th, 2015 at 5:07 PM ^
I tend to agree that Texas has more built in advantages than anyone else. A competent coach and administration should have Texas contending for National Chamionships every single year. Georgia has a lot of talent, but there are schools in surronding SEC/ACC country that come in and take much of that talent every year. Florida State, Clemson, South Carolina, Florida, Tennessee, Auburn, and Alabama are all schools with big names that come into Georgia for recruits. I believe Ohio State has much more success keeping their guys at home than UGA. Keeping that talent home will be the new coach's task at UGA.
Here's my top 10:
1) Texas
2) OSU
3) USC
4) LSU
5) Georgia
6) Alabama
7) Florida
8) Florida State
9) Michigan
10) Notre Dame
Honorable Mention (no particular order) : Texas A&M, Penn State, UCLA, Oregon, Auburn
December 9th, 2015 at 6:53 PM ^
is that they have sucked for so long that now Baylor, TCU, A&M and the Oklahoma schools are very legitimate alternatives for kids with UT offers.
Sure, Texas has significantly more top 300 football players, but there are many more "good" football schools in the area than say Michigan.
December 9th, 2015 at 9:23 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 9th, 2015 at 6:45 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 9th, 2015 at 7:00 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 9th, 2015 at 7:05 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 9th, 2015 at 7:16 PM ^
December 9th, 2015 at 7:43 PM ^
You make a good point. However, we are talking about recruits who are elite athletic talents and want to go to the NFL. Education is a consideration but it's probably not at the top of the list of things a recruit is most concerned about. If this wasn't the case, Alabama would not routinely bring in the highest rated classes. Those recruits aren't choosing Alabama for its academics. They are choosing Alabama because they believe that's the best path to the NFL.
December 9th, 2015 at 9:22 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
December 9th, 2015 at 7:12 PM ^
December 9th, 2015 at 6:51 PM ^
"No team in college football has a stronger tradition than Alabama."
SACRILEGE! ASSEMBLE THE TORCHES AND PITCHFORKS!
December 9th, 2015 at 7:10 PM ^
December 9th, 2015 at 7:28 PM ^
I will add that while Georgia has a strong tradition it pales in comparison to some of the blue bloods of the sport. They only have 12 conference titles in their entire history, only 2 have come since 1982. It's also been 11 years since their last title. They only have 3 National Championship in their history, only 1 in the modern era and that came in 1980.
Not to say that Georgia hasn't been close to winning an NC. They were 5 yards away from beating Alabama for the SEC title in 2012. If they win that, they likely beat Notre Dame for the NC and Mark Richt is still coaching.
Still, the relative lack of success compared to Georgia's peers in the SEC as well as Florida State in the ACC, does not make it a foregone conclusion that Georgia prospects grow up destined to go to Georgia. Further, while Georgia is rapidly growing especially the Atlanta metro area, much of this growth is fueled by transplants from elsewhere who have their own established loyalties. You combine these factors and that's why Georgia has to battle for all these in state recruits.
December 9th, 2015 at 7:22 PM ^
Michigan is 9th, mostly because it's reeeeeeeeally tough to compete with schools that give away the money, hookers, and/or blow
December 9th, 2015 at 9:26 PM ^
That's interesting because although we have tradition, facilities, and coahcing, we also have MSU, OSU, and ND all close by and there isn't a ton of talent in MI compared to TX, Fla, OH, or CA. But, our obvious problem is that OSU is our primary competition and is #2 ugh. If we are #9 why can't we take Clemson, Texas A&M, and Auburn's local recruits?
December 10th, 2015 at 3:10 AM ^
At the end of the day, most recruits still want to stay in their local region. That's true for students in general.
Hell, I could have gone to UCLA instead of Michigan, but I was not comfortable with the idea of going all the way out there.
December 9th, 2015 at 9:51 PM ^
This is written by Darren Rovell, right? Like, it's an article about brands with very little relevance to sport, so it has to be Rovell.
Recruits go places where they think they can succeed and benefit the most. UM will always be a great place for that to happen, and other schools have similar benefits. They really don't need 5,000 words about "brand recognition" to bear that out.
December 9th, 2015 at 10:16 PM ^
December 10th, 2015 at 3:07 AM ^
Drawbacks to overcome include less in-state talent than chief rival Ohio State, as well as some academic considerations that present the occasional hurdle in attracting top recruits.
We are the only school in the top 10 that they said that about. And we are still in the top 10.
December 10th, 2015 at 5:44 AM ^
has Nebraska really only had one ESPN 300 commit in the last five years?
December 10th, 2015 at 8:00 AM ^
And they still beat Michigan State.
*Snort*
December 10th, 2015 at 8:42 AM ^
I didn't find much that was off with this. This is right up my alley. I may disagree with Georgia being #1, but they should definitely be Top 5.
IMO, Georgia Tech has maybe the most limitations when it comes to admissions, due to our such limited curriculum. If it wasn't for our new MBA program, I'd shudder at the thought of getting FBS-level players into school.