Hankins listed as OSU commit per Scout

Submitted by pdxwolve on January 5th, 2010 at 5:49 PM

The hotly debated, and all-but-known is confirmed.

Comments

los barcos

January 5th, 2010 at 6:06 PM ^

he's the Enemy now. time to smash him in the ground, if he ever gets off the bench. oh well, buy the ticket, take the ride.

see ya in hell you little traitor.

(some of this was an exaggeration, specifically the last sentence.)

DGDestroys

January 5th, 2010 at 6:01 PM ^

So (to bring up the infinitely overused conversation of final four spots without the infinitely overused snake oil reference) last four= parker grimes murphy.... wilson? chandler? Maybe Witty doesn't qualify and we take both?

umhero

January 5th, 2010 at 6:56 PM ^

We still have a chance at Chandler, Thornton, or even Big Tex. They are all higher rated than Hankins.

I think both Chandler and Thornton still plan to visit.

Remember, we didn't offer until late and State didn't offer at all. There's a reason he is a three star on both recruiting sites.

Raback Omaba

January 5th, 2010 at 6:04 PM ^

We could have had Hankins in the bag but we did not offer early on in the process, despite him having offers from Florida, OSU, Bama etc.

He wanted us and we didn't want him. Although we offered later in the process, I don't see this as a HUGE (no pun intended.) If the coaching staff had concerns RE conditioning and motivation, then I give them the benefit of the doubt.

We want to build a program that OSU and FLA will envy, therefore let them have the guys we didn't think could "cut" it..............Good Luck Hankin.

Let's hope we don't miss him.

acs236

January 5th, 2010 at 6:07 PM ^

but the DT recruiting strategy of Michigan baffles me right now. You'd think after the late misses on the two DTs last year, it would be a super important priority to get DTs in this class. Nevertheless, Michigan slow plays Hankins--which is fine if they didn't really want him--but the late push by Michigan makes that hard to believe.

West Texas Blue

January 5th, 2010 at 6:14 PM ^

The defensive tackles group for 2010 class is considered pretty week. Not alot of great options out there. Alot of guys who normally would be passed up by the big boys are now getting offers from top schools. I'm sure the M staff was being selective with who to offer; we may not pull in a NT this class but I think we'll be okay. Next year it's a must that we land alot of people on the DL, especially an elite NT and elite pass rushing DE.

Togaroga

January 5th, 2010 at 6:11 PM ^

He came to UM camp out of shape and slow. At the camp he did not impress the coaches. He was pissed, went home, worked hard, trimmed down, and had an outstanding season. He ended up being good enough to join our team, but he's going to another program.

We'll never know if he would have worked as hard, got in the same kind of shape, and had the same kind of season if we gave him the early offer he wanted. My guess is not. By not offering early, we provided him the motivation to improve. I'll trust the coaches judgment at the time, but I'd still like to have him now.

Rico616

January 5th, 2010 at 6:23 PM ^

Just months ago everyone was bashing Hankins saying his weight was an issue and now people are disappointed that he's not going to be a commit. I trust the staff in that they must of seen something that did not warrant an offer right away, however they did change their mind...was this out of need or did they really think Hankins was that good of a DT?

I'm excited to see where Grimes, Knight, Parker, and Mathis will land.

SysMark

January 5th, 2010 at 9:12 PM ^

He did get in shape for his senior year but his ongoing commitment to working and improving is unknown. At some point in the not too distant future it may seem that Ohio State et al are out trying to grab players with interest in Michigan, players Michigan is lukewarm on. If so that will be a good thing, because it means we are BACK.

Put another way - when they are picking up our castoffs we will be feeling much better about things, and happier. We aren't there yet but it may be coming.

Erik_in_Dayton

January 5th, 2010 at 7:29 PM ^

As people are noting, U of M warmed to Hankins a lot later than OSU, who offered him before they offered Sharrif Floyd. It will be interesting to see if OSU's consistent enthusiasm was justified...It would have been nice to get him, but I don't think we can blame the coaching staff for being slow to recruit a guy whose value no one can agree on (three stars, Oklahoma and OSU offers but no MSU offer).

stankoniaks

January 5th, 2010 at 7:40 PM ^

So, highly touted player, at a position of need (for depth purposes), is spurned by the team that he grows up liking who doesn't give him an early offer. Instead, he commits to the team's arch rival who had recruited and offered him much, much earlier. Sounds like...

Devin Gardner.

You win some, you lose some, but roles reversed, I'd say we won this one given the status quo. Hankins wasn't "All in", so it's time to fill up the class with those recruits that are.

Maize and Blue…

January 5th, 2010 at 8:13 PM ^

I don't think so. In a down year for DTs he is not even considered near the top of the class. Scout #50 DT behind Talbott and Ash who have verballed and also behind Black (a possibility) and Chandler and Thornton who probably aren't. Hankins isn't even listed in the top 80 on DTs on Rivals. Espn has him at #47 for DTs.