Blue McMaize

November 26th, 2009 at 2:48 AM ^

Lets see a coach in Ohio bashes Notre Dame, Michigan, West Virginia, and Pittsburgh. What are the similarities with those schools? I smell a Buckeye fan. People in Ohio already have a rivalry with the states of West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Then throw in the 2 other most recognizable programs in the Midwest. Look not much has gone right since RR was hired, but even tomhagan would have to admit that he can recruit. Two terrible seasons and he is still bringing in talent. And all we have read from recruits is how much they love the staff/family atmosphere. I'll base my opinion on RR's recruiting by the results, not by some anonymous high school coach with no credibility.

The Other Brian

November 26th, 2009 at 3:32 AM ^

Except it's easy to see that the clock is ticking on Kelly's stay at Cincinnati. Even if ND passes, he's simply too good (and too ambitious) a coach to stay in the small pond of Cincinnati and the Big East. I'm pretty sure Tressel is batting 1.000 on Ohio recruits that both he and Kelly have offered (that MIGHT change this year with Matt James), and since Kelly's name gets thrown at every significant coaching vacancy, it's not hard for OSU to sway any recruit they really want.

If Kelly is at Cincy in 2010, we may see things heat up since they're currently on track for a perfect season...but at the same time, a "down" year for Ohio State is still going to end in Pasadena. I don't think they're concerned about Cincinnati at all. Aside from non-native Ohioans (Jordan Hicks, Spencer Ware), the Catholic league kids who are allured by Notre Dame (Kyle Rudolph, Alex Welch), or lifelong Michigan fans (Justin Turner), they have almost exclusive dominance in Ohio, and Cincinnati doesn't have staying power.

The Other Brian

November 26th, 2009 at 3:37 AM ^

And in response to the snippet about Michigan recruiting like Notre Dame in the sense that the coaches just offer without trying to establish relationships, returning calls, etc...when you look at the sheer number of offers we sent out this year, combined with the consistent stories from insiders about how our coaches and recruiting coordinator do not go the extra mile to follow up with recruits...I tend to believe that there is a lot of truth to that.


November 26th, 2009 at 8:47 AM ^

if not completely opposite: that he and his staff have done a great job in establishing and maintaining a positive kind of contact with recruits, with some recruits' parents going out of their way to praise RR and staff for the way they've handled the recruiting process. Austin White and Craig Roh's parents come immediately to mind.

About a month or so ago, there was a minor flap over on Rivals over the allegation by some supposed insidery kind of guy that RR and staff had dropped the ball on Cullen Christian, hadn't maintained contact, and that Christian was seriously looking elsewhere as a result. It would seem, in that instance at least, that the allegation was—to use the technical term—horseshit.

Given the volume of offers they send out that you mentioned, I can believe that there is more contact from the staff for some players than others, reflecting the extent of the Michigan desire or their assessment of their chances to land a particular recruit. The mere fact that coaches of some of these kids take offense is not proof that it's the way RR and staff handle the recruiting of all kids.


November 26th, 2009 at 3:50 AM ^

Charlie Weis consistently pulls in big recruiting classes (and then squanders the talent, but whatever). So obviously, he is doing fine without the opinion of one Ohio HS football coach who he did not pursue a relationship with.

I give no credence to his opinion because he has obviously developed a relationship with Brian Kelly (and probably Jim Tressel as well). Therefore, he has a different slant than, say, the Pahokee or Cass Tech coaches would.

Also, I will say that the coach seems a tad egotistic in that he feels that big name colleges should be responding to him when he wants to initiate contact. My problem with this is that he says that Notre Dame has no shot of successfully recruiting a kid on his team because Notre Dame never returned his call. He seems to feel that because he was slighted by Notre Dame, Notre Dame shouldn't get to recruit his player, without mentioning the player's opinion on the matter. I know it's naive to say this, but shouldn't the coach care more for his player's wellbeing than his ego.


November 26th, 2009 at 11:41 AM ^

That was my impression after reading this as well. I think some of these HS Coaches have incredibly big egos and lose sight of the fact that they should do what is in the best interest of their players. Their players look up to them because of their position and they should be able to trust them to offer unbiased advice.

Antonio Watts at Renaissance High reminds me of that type of coach...also Coach Nickerson.


November 26th, 2009 at 8:01 AM ^

Maybe the stories of "insdiers" are coaches of kids who aren't exactly on the UM A-list. I will agree with TOB that the "sheer number of offers" can be prohibitive sometimes, but I would be willing to bet that UM recruits the kids they really want just as heavily as any other school.

The more I think about this, the more I think the coaches who whine about UM are coaches who live vicariously through their players and are angry because UM coaches aren't kissing their asses, and that their players have offers as a "back up plan."

Doing the math in a very elementary and rudimentary way, if the great players have only 20 offers each from elite programs, and everything else was equal, each elite program would have to make 500 offers on an average to get 25 elite players.

That is a lot of offers.

Hoken's Heroes

November 26th, 2009 at 8:25 AM ^

Did ya notice the Blogger Chris failed to cite where he heard this story? There's no reference cited at all for where he got the quotes from the HS coach(s) that made the allegations. He is what gives bloggers a bad name because of his shiteous so called reporting. And because of this, I smell BS on the part of CHRIS who posted it. His punishment for such yellow blogging should be beating by turkey drumstick.

turbo cool

November 26th, 2009 at 8:19 AM ^

Also, perhaps this particular recruit really wasn't someone we were high on. We could've just put a 'feeler' out there for him to see if there was enough mutual interest to recruit him harder. Perhaps there wasn't.


November 26th, 2009 at 9:21 AM ^

I think The Other Brian hinted at it above, but if that coach's anecdote is true (and it might be), consider the following:

Michigan has had attrition problems up the wazoo, suffered an inordinate number of decommitments last year, and needs to fill its recruiting class to the brim. By my count, Michigan has offered ONE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY SIX players this year. That's an astronomical number.

To keep up with 176 players would be an extremely time-consuming effort, even though I'm sure the coaches have stopped contacting some of those players due to a lack of interest or a solid commitment to another school. When Michigan gets back to the point where it doesn't 25-28 players every year, then the coaches can pare down their lists of players to contact.

In the meantime, while they're recruiting 176 players for 2010, it's probably somewhat difficult to start fostering great relationships for 2011. If Michigan gets to a point where they only need 15 players or so, then you'll see the offer board get shorter and, I would imagine, the coaches can concentrate a larger percentage of their time on each individual player.


November 26th, 2009 at 9:31 AM ^

There was a thread about this article earlier this week, but it's been buried by the Sparty/Jimmy/Cullen Christian avalanche.

The recruit is undoubtedly Trey DePriest. The schools that the coach lists are identical to DePriest's schools of interest on Scout. Springfield HS is the school, in Ohio.

The article just sounds to me like a coach trying to build good relationships with schools that he wants his kids to go to in the future.


November 26th, 2009 at 9:50 AM ^

DePriest is very high on Michigan, and has been up for at least two games now. The coaches are in regular contact with him, I assure you. If it is him, then it might be a case of his coach not being fond of Michigan. I know for a fact they're in contact with him.

I've talked to him before, and Michigan is seemingly one of his leaders.


November 26th, 2009 at 1:53 PM ^

I don't doubt Tom VH one bit regarding DePriest and his interest in Michigan.

On more than one occasion over the years, we've seen that the interests of potential recruits and their high school coaches usually diverge (this year, for example, the nation's #1 offensive lineman is a good example). That might be going on here.


November 26th, 2009 at 5:04 PM ^

Yeah, unfortunately that happens a lot. I'm assuming it's the case in Ohio wrt Michigan. It's hard enough for these kids to know who and what to believe on the college end, let alone what their own coaches tell them.

Quite frankly, the coach in that article says that Charlie Weis didn't return HIS phone call, and HE won't send any film to coaches who don't respond. As long as they're calling the actual recruit, I'm ok with it. It's beneficial to build a relationship with the coaches, but ultimately, with a high profile recruit, it's about making him happy.


November 26th, 2009 at 4:19 PM ^

As far as ND is concerned the only players that could even qualify for this guy's article is DePriest and Chris Rock (not that one). Both DePriest and Rock have made visits to ND for games this year so I have no idea what he is talking about.


November 26th, 2009 at 9:46 AM ^

I don't know about CW recruiting methods, but regarding RR recruiting I will give that HS coach a single name: T. PRYOR. We all saw how hard RR went after a player that he really wanted, even when he had a very small chance of getting him.
Some HS coaches need to understand that their player is a small fish in a big pond. He actually says, and I quote "no point in his film disc just sitting on a desk with a thousand others", which tell us the volume of data a coach has to analyze during the recruiting time.
Now, there may be a number of reasons why they stop recruiting him:
1. They may have lost interest in him.
2. They may thing his not really interested in them.
3. They may go for a better player.
4. They may thing he may not be able to qualify academically.
5. They may not want to deal whit such an a-hole coach.


November 26th, 2009 at 4:25 PM ^

Michigan blankets the nation with hundreds of offers each year for ~25 spots. RR and company follow up those offers with varying degrees of tenacity (compare Pryor's recruitment to the anecdote in the article). Pryor was deemed a "must have" for last year's class, and even though we didn't land him, it wasn't for lack of effort. That one coach in Ohio felt that Michigan gave a lackluster interest in following up on a scholarship offer says more about the strength of the offer than about a failure in recruitment.


November 27th, 2009 at 3:26 AM ^

that the Ohio coaches have good relationships and out-of-staters don't? i assume where it's helpful to have relationships, most good recruiters will have good relationships. the high school coach doesn't address the seemingly obvious point that recruiters might not treat all coaches the way he's treated. of all the possibilities, it seems most likely that the HS coach is the least sophisticated.

so, basically, I wonder if Chris should have made this post if he couldn't have let us know a little more about the relationship he has with this coach. the coach's credibility is critical to the usefulness of the article.