Hart's Leaders Changed?

Submitted by UM-Bear on
Rivals has Auburn and Florida as Demetrius Hart's new leaders and that a decision should be coming soon. Is this accurate? For quite some time, he seemed to be a Michigan lock. Anyone in the know feel free to verify or disprove these rumors.

me

March 7th, 2010 at 10:27 AM ^

a football recruiting class (at least in my opinion), especially one that's 11 months away from signing day. There are multiple offers out to RB's already and new RB targets will emerge. Yes it would suck to lose out on Hart but shit happens and this has been coming ever since he didn't come to the OSU game. Even TomVH has been dropping words of caution the last week or so. And as to the OP, Hart gave essentially the same quotes to Auburn Scout so I doubt both sites got it wrong.

SysMark

March 7th, 2010 at 12:33 PM ^

This is where I come down on it as well. By far the biggest issue has been the two losing seasons. When the winning resumes, which I fully expect to occur this fall, everything will change. As much as we would like this recruit and/or others 2010 results will be determined by the players on campus now and those arriving this summer. By this time next year we will have a winning season, likely bowl victory, the "scandal" will be history, and these recruiting "issues" will evaporate. The entire landscape will change rapidly and dramatically.

johnvand

March 7th, 2010 at 10:41 AM ^

There are some good RB's out there this year, and we are relatively deep at RB as far as numbers go. Just lacking experience, which can be scary. Wasonga out of West Virginia has had some very positive things said about him. Rivals lists his 40 as 4.7... so that's probably why his only BCS offers are West Virginia and Michigan. If he camps this summer and shows some things, he could land some more BCS offers. He could be Justice Hayes from Grand Blanc would be a great pick up. Jarrel Oliver from Texas seems like a poor mans Hart, if you look at the measurables. Think Fred Jackson has been on him for a while, so he must really like something about him.

Moe Greene

March 7th, 2010 at 10:33 AM ^

The statistical part of my brain suggests that every projection about recruits should be acccompanied by a confidence interval. Alternatively, we might need to change the name for this kid on the '11 recruiting page from "Locky McLockerstein" to something else.....

TomVH

March 7th, 2010 at 10:34 AM ^

I said this a couple days ago, but his family is playing a lot into this. They're all concerned about the allegations, which has caused them to think twice about a lot of things. Also, related to him and others, I've talked to probably around 6 recruits that have wondered why Michigan hasn't been calling lately. It's obviously because they have to follow the rules, and they're under the microscope, but most of these kids didn't know that. Evaluation period doesn't start until April 15th, which is when they are allowed more contact. It's putting Michigan behind.

Hoken's Heroes

March 7th, 2010 at 10:37 AM ^

...you might not know if coaches can do this, but why don't they give recruits a "recruitment syllabus" that shows them when and when they can't contact them so the kid knows the school isn't ignoring them during the times the coaches CAN NOT contact them? You would think by now that high school coaches would also know the routine too (unless they are biased against UM and talking trash to their kids about the school).

Magnus

March 7th, 2010 at 10:40 AM ^

When these kids talk about Michigan not contacting them, I'm assuming you tell them that it's illegal, right? The bad thing is...if you tell them it's illegal for the coaches to contact them, they might be thinking, "Yeah, well NOW they're following the rules since they just got hit with major violation allegations" rather than "Wow, these coaches are on the up and up." I just wonder if there's always going to be that suspicion now...

TomVH

March 7th, 2010 at 10:44 AM ^

Yes, I tell them it's illegal. They usually are more relieved then they are suspicious. Most of them don't even understand what the allegations are for, to be honest. It's always been a good reaction when I tell them they're following the rules.

Magnus

March 7th, 2010 at 10:57 AM ^

That's good. I feel like most people don't understand the allegations. All they probably hear is "major violations" and "practicing too long." It would probably be a good idea for the coaches to take the time to tell each recruit exactly what happened and/or send them a letter that explains the situation. For example, say "So-and-so has been fired for watching 7-on-7s when he shouldn't have. Our practice times went over on a handful of days because we spent extra time stretching. Etc." Of course, they might be planning to do that, but I think it would be worthwhile.

UMICH1606

March 7th, 2010 at 10:41 AM ^

Are you allowed to have that conversation with them? Explaining those types of NCAA rules and what not? Forgive me for my ignorance on what is and isn't considered recruiting for a school or helping a school out with people in your position, or scout, or rivals and such.

aenima0311

March 7th, 2010 at 1:58 PM ^

I'm not sure if it's allowable, but are you able to enlighten them as to why the coaches can't contact them? Just curious, I don't know the rules and certainly don't want to break any or have Tom involved with it (which I'm certain isn't the case.)

Don

March 7th, 2010 at 12:28 PM ^

The fact that schools all over the country are busily contacting recruits when it's against NCAA regs to do so is no secret, and if the NCAA had the slightest interest in cracking down on the practice it would find ample evidence. However, that would require some work and initiative on their part, and unless a major city newspaper is going to make an issue of it and do the legwork for them, they're not going to lift a finger. Which school benefits more: the one that goes over the practice limits 20 minutes in a week and has a QC guy attend some off-season workouts when he shouldn't have, or is it the school that is working the phones and emails to 4- and 5-star recruits when it's supposed to be a dead period?

Don

March 7th, 2010 at 4:55 PM ^

I'm not arguing that Michigan did not break NCAA rules. I do believe that our transgressions are in fact less serious than the kind of recruiting violation that contacting highly-ranked kids in a dead period is, and that the "help" we obtained via our violations was very negligible. I think it's revealing and significant that the NCAA admits on its own website that the practice time rules are nebulous and hard to understand and follow. Whatever, I realize that these are my subjective epinions and are irrelevant to the issue; it's what the recruits and their parents think that matters. There's no doubt that every other program in the country will use the violations as a club to whack RR and Michigan over the head with from now until NSD 2011, and beyond. Even if we go 9-3 and win a bowl game, they'll still use it against us in recruiting.