Talk about Recruiting

Submitted by jcontiz on

So earlier in the season I kept hearing all about MSU's ability to recruit in state.

So I took a looky at what states/regions we're recruiting from..

California - 1
Michigan - 2/3 (Cambell)
Texas - 2
Louisiana - 1
Illinois - 1
Florida - 5 (Hellz yeah)
Arizona - 1
Indiana - 1
Oklahoma - 1
Ohio - 3
New Jersey -1

That's just so far. We've still got some strong Midwest ties taking who we want from Detroit, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, but I love the fact that RR has strong ties in Florida.

So suck on that Dantonio.

Glen Masons Hot Wife

November 19th, 2008 at 9:46 PM ^

Smart move not mentioning State/Dantonio/Sparty in the headline. For this will onset the wrath of Doctor Worm.

Huss

November 19th, 2008 at 10:01 PM ^

presence in the psyche of Florida prospects is going to have a hyperbolic effect on our recruiting. Like ninja always says, we'll be a machine. A 3-star kid down here would probably be a high 4 playing against kids up in Michigan. There's just way, way too much talent - and it's good to see the coaching staff maximizing their efforts down here. Shit, our 2010 Florida haul might be better than any instate scool with Ricardo, Marv, Lo Wood, among others on the way. It's incredible.

WolvinLA

November 19th, 2008 at 10:49 PM ^

No doubt about the Florida talent. Look at Odoms. I know this is only one example, but this kid was a 3-star from Florida and he has looked like a stud so far as a true freshman, and much contribution as you can expect from a true frosh. I hope this continues to hold.

Magnus

November 19th, 2008 at 11:01 PM ^

Don't get me wrong - I like Odoms. But I'd be lying if I didn't say I was a bit disappointed in him. He gets open and he had a nice punt return against Purdue, but I really thought he'd be more elusive than he has been. I hope he starts re-enacting that punt return when he catches screens from now on.

WolvinLA

November 19th, 2008 at 11:20 PM ^

I mean, the guy is a true freshman still. And not a guy like Stonum who got here in January. He also doesn't have a QB who could throw to him. With a decent QB he could have been near tops in the Big Ten in receiving, not to mention one of the better punt returners. As a freshman. What exactly were you expecting from him?

mabrsu

November 19th, 2008 at 10:03 PM ^

I think one of the biggest indicators of RR's success here will be this offseason. It really lies a lot on how he finishes up this class and the 2010 class. If he is recruiting well, I am talking at least to Lloyd's levels he will have a good chance here. A big part of this off season will be preception and getting a commitment here and possibly on sunday at the beginning of the offseason will give us some momentum. I mean this offseason will be really bad if he doesnt have recruiting momentum and success right now due to the poor season. Getting these two guys NOW may reap benefits a month from now, and so on, and so on, etc.

jokenjin

November 19th, 2008 at 10:58 PM ^

I think the reason why RR doesn't have that many Michigan recruits is due to some of the experiences he had at WVU. While there, he mainly had to get scraps of neighboring states, namely Pennsylvania and Ohio - two great high school football states. He's made relationships there, so naturally he's going to those states first (not too successful in Penn but pretty good in Ohio). He's not too familiar with Michigan yet, so that's why MSU has been able to get the Michigan recruits.

It'll come, though - especially if we can get Campbell this year, then Dior Mathis and one of the dual threat quarterbacks from Michigan next year. Couple that with Jeremy Jackson and we'll have a great start to recruiting in MI next year.

Jeff

November 20th, 2008 at 12:04 AM ^

At first I thought this was just going to be some crazy, "Michigan is different than WVU" comment. But I think you have a great point. Rodriguez and his staff already had relationships built up with Ohio and Pennsylvania schools, which Michigan always has to recruit from in order to do well.

He never had those contacts in Michigan, so he had to spend time getting to know the coaches at the same time as trying to install his offense and do all his work at Michigan. It will take time, but we'll probably see it pick up already for the 2010 class. We have never recruited the majority of our players from Michigan, but we'll start getting back to taking about 5-6 of the top 10 instate players.

WolvinLA

November 20th, 2008 at 12:07 AM ^

Honestly, have an extra month and a half to work on stuff like recruiting might be a better option than going to a crappy bowl game. Not that I'd turn down the bowl if I had the option, but in the end it might be better.

Huss

November 20th, 2008 at 12:13 AM ^

Odoms arrived a month before the season started, has played with two horrible QBs who can't lead him on an easy bubble screen, and he's obliterating the Michigan freshman record for catches. Elusive? I mean, I know we all expect black kids with dreads to be Devin Hester - but Odoms is more than good enough at creating space for a midget. And he's exceptionally strong and sturdy for a guy that tiny.

Of all the disappointments this season, Martavious Odoms' performance isn't on the list.

Magnus

November 20th, 2008 at 6:47 AM ^

Jeez...you're acting like I shot your mother. I said I like him. I just expected him to be more elusive, as in making people miss. I'm not disappointed as in "That guy sucks." But as far as creating big plays with the ball in his hands, I can really only think of two plays (one was like a 49-yard catch and run in the Miami game, I think, and the other was the 73-yard punt return against Purdue).

jamiemac

November 20th, 2008 at 10:17 AM ^

I think you need to cut him some slack about his elusiveness.......dont you think a lot of times that multiple defenders have just been sitting on those bubble screens.....its hard to be elusive when you're hemmed in by 3-4 people the second you get the ball.

Odoms has lived up to my expectations, and I expect great things from him in the future.

I do think he's struggled to find a role in the downfield passing game, but is that really his fault....I mean, the team as a whole as struggled discovering a comfort zone in the down field passing game.

Magnus

November 20th, 2008 at 3:42 PM ^

I don't understand. How am I not giving him any slack? I'm not suggesting that the kid be replaced or have his scholarship removed. I realize that some teams are sitting on the bubble screen, but I've still seen some instances where I felt like he could have created more yardage.

"I expected Odoms to be more elusive. I'm disappointed that he's not."

That's all. He should still start. He should return punts and kicks. I think he'll be a good player for the next three years. Is he as dynamic as I expected? No. Not yet, anyway.

cfaller96

November 20th, 2008 at 10:19 AM ^

When you throw subjective schlock out there (e.g. "I expected Odoms to be more elusive"), be prepared to have someone throw some cold water on it. Getting pissy will not win you any points.

If you can't handle having your unsubstantiated assertions be disputed, then perhaps you should stop making unsubstantiated assertions.

Magnus

November 20th, 2008 at 3:38 PM ^

Tell me exactly where I was being a dick. How was I being a dick when I said I was disappointed in his lack of elusiveness? Is someone "being a dick" when they say "I wish McGuffie broke more tackles"? No. They're just offering analysis.

Is it subjective? Yes. But I don't understand how I'm being a dick for offering a subjective opinion. Some of you are of the mindset that if I'm being critical of someone, I'm being an asshole. Chill out.

I said "I like Odoms." I never said he was a bad player. I didn't say I wish he would be replaced. I didn't say he sucks. What exactly are you pissed about?

ShockFX

November 20th, 2008 at 11:40 AM ^

I don't understand how you can be disappointed in any of these players. If you had just said, "I thought Odoms would have made more big plays" that would have been fine. But how can you actually say "I just expected him to be more elusive, as in making people miss." Like, what the hell is this based on? Are you a scout?

It's just bullshit to say that people you've never met, that don't owe you anything, are disappointing you because they can't meet your unrealistic, baseless expectations.

Magnus

November 20th, 2008 at 3:50 PM ^

I never said he owes me anything. WTF are you talking about? Stop putting words/ideas in my mouth.

Just because I've never met him doesn't mean I can't criticize him. We ALL - every single one of on this board - criticize people that we haven't met. When we question playcalls, when we (well, not me) called for Carr's head, when we get pissed at Steve Brown, we're all criticizing people we haven't met (unless, of course, you've met all those people).

You've never met me. I don't owe you anything. But you're being critical of me. Looks like you're guilty, too.

How are my expectations "unrealistic" and "baseless" when a) it's very realistic to expect a 5'8", 170 lb. kid with exciting highlight tapes to be elusive and b) I've watched his highlight videos and kick returns, yet he doesn't replicate that elusiviness on the slants and bubble screens. That's the basis for me thinking this way.

Wash the sand out of your vagina, sit back and take a deep breath, and relax.

ShockFX

November 20th, 2008 at 10:21 PM ^

I'm being critical of you because you are a giant assclown. I never said you can't criticize. I said you're an asshole for being disappointed in Odoms. Disappointment is based on expectations. If you find anything, in a freshman that's kicking ass, to be disappointed about you are an assclown of the highest order and don't deserve to watch him play.

"a) it's very realistic to expect a 5'8", 170 lb. kid with exciting highlight tapes to be elusive and"

You expect, based on his highlight tapes, him to be more "elusive" all the time? Is this before or after you criticize him for having "ONLY" two exciting plays? You are quite possibly the most smug, self-righteous, arrogant asshole I've ever encountered.

Magnus

November 21st, 2008 at 12:28 AM ^

I'm allowed to be disappointed. Why the fuck does it bother you if I say that I'm disappointed that somebody isn't more elusive? You're obviously just pissed off at the world if when I say something like, "I like Odoms, but I thought he'd be more elusive," you get your panties in a bunch and attack me and call it complete bullshit and baseless and unrealistic.

If it's bothering you that I said the word "disappointed," just remove that fucking word from the equation. It doesn't change the meaning of what I said.

"I expected Odoms to be more elusive." There. I'm not disappointed in him anymore. Yet it means the same thing, doesn't it?

What if I said, "I thought this team would be better than 3-8"?

Oh my god that's complete bullshit that's completely baseless how could you have any expectation that this team would be better you don't know these players and it's bullshit for you to judge them you're such an assclown dickhole.

Why the fuck does it bother you what I think about Odoms? For fuck's sake, I said I like him and that he's a good player. Some of you motherfuckers just decided to blow the comment out of proportion and make it seem more important than it is. It's not important. Get off my ass.

I don't give a fuck if you think I'm smug, self-righteous, arrogant, etc. By your own logic, since we've never met, you have no right to judge. So you're a hypocritical dickfuck whose opinion means jack shit when you get so fired up and pissed off about a simple word like "disappointed."

ShockFX

November 21st, 2008 at 3:03 AM ^

I never said you couldn't judge or criticize someone you've never met. I, and others, just called you a assclown for being disappointed in Odoms, BECAUSE HE OWES YOU NOTHING. That was the key part there. Don't put words in my mouth.

Magnus

November 21st, 2008 at 6:25 AM ^

I would like you to find any point in which I have stated that any of the Michigan players owes me anything.

Then you should probably stop posting on this thread because you have no clue what you're talking about, and all the holes I've poked in your argument are making it sink.

Sommy

November 22nd, 2008 at 2:31 AM ^

I was afraid at first, that this dialogue box reduction was based on some sort of "1/2 of the size of the last box" formula, but it appears that is not true, and we will eventually be at the end instead of being stuck in some sort of Sisyphean eternal combat in which the box size reduses ad infinitum.

mjv

November 20th, 2008 at 4:35 AM ^

If I'm not mistaken, Michigan has missed on two recruits that RR targeted in the state of Michigan for the 2009 class (assuming Campbell signs). This is not the deepest year for instate talent, so the focus has been on out of state kids.

So let's not just assume that Dantonio is dominating instate recruiting because RR doesn't care or doesn't have ties to the state. looking at the number of the top 10 kids in state going to MSU or M is far too simple of an analysis. The analysis needs to look at each recruit.