Tyriq Thompson - UM/MSU battle

Submitted by Wee-Bey Brice on June 12th, 2014 at 9:07 AM

For a while it has been reported that Tyriq's recruitment is trending towards Sparty but it now appears that the good guys have covered some ground for the legacy recruit. It's a good ol' in-state battle. He'll decide before the summer is over.


#Spartans & #Wolverines "neck and neck" for LB Tyriq Thompson: http://t.co/tvcfHRgeYm #TeamAdidas #SMSBTakeover @SMSBFootball Academy

— Steve Wiltfong (@SWiltfong247) June 12, 2014



June 12th, 2014 at 11:12 AM ^

He didn't say UM wasn't mediocre, he listed UM as one of the "2 in-state schools". His point (not saying if I agree or disagree) was that while the "names" are there, there are circumstances why he has those offers. 


June 12th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^

The rest yes and a big offer doesn't mean shit nowadays, but we can't admit that. We need to recruit GA, FL, TX, and CA areas. We will never learn. Yes, I realize Ohio has been on a lucky tear against shit teams. Yes, I realize some coaches drive their 3 stars. to a new level like Dantonio. In general the Southern players are dominating. We have a great team no doubt, but not SEC good. We can get there if we play mean and smart.

Space Coyote

June 12th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^

So we see it from you at least a few times a week, and each time you say it you make it apparent that you don't really get it.

First, Michigan does recruit those states, just like other states. But by the nature of the beast they don't recruit them as hard as elsewhere, because they don't have the connections and they aren't local. Recruiting isn't just about getting in contact with certain recruits, it's about getting prospects to commit to your school. Without great connections in the area, you're less likely to recruit players to the caliber that you desire, both athletically and personality-wise. Without great connections, you're less likely to know about the good recruits in those areas. Without great connections, you're less likely to land them even when you do know them.

So with all that, you end up with a high variance method of recruiting. You take a bunch of kids that don't work out for the few less sought after recruits that do work out. That some how the dozens of local schools, not to mention the dozens of other schools closer than Michigan to the area that dip their hand in the pool, some how didn't find.

Rich Rod dipped heavy into Florida and got a lot of 3-star Florida kids. Some where pretty good, some were busts. God bless V. Smith, but just because he was a 3-star from FL doesn't mean he was good. Iowa made a living taking farm kids and risks on some FL kids that others didn't want to touch, and they had some success with it, and also some real struggles with it.

On top of that, while we can all agree that the talent is deeper and in ways better in those areas, that is reflected in the top-xxx lists and the offers that go out. Scouts/coaches are accounting for it already. What you're asking is that they put too heavy of an emphasis on region than is realistically good. Not to mention your lifeblood will always be more local, which is important for the program. Not to mention that you can't just dip your hand in random areas far away from you and start pulling all these good recruits that others want.

So no, a 3-star with a worse offer list from FL isn't likely to be better than a 4-star from Virginia with better offers, no matter how many times you say it. He may be, but a 3-star from Virginia may be better than a 4-star from FL too. There are advantages those FL kids get, they play better competition, they tend to get better coaching, things like that. That's reflected in all the things. That may make them better right from the get go in college. But that's why places like Michigan may offer the 5th best player in NJ but the 15th best player in FL. It's reflected. Just recruiting random kids (and likely not landing them) in those areas won't help. You can stop saying this in every recruiting thread.


June 12th, 2014 at 9:44 AM ^

"Neck and neck"

I really feel like the trouble with how recruiting is reported on these days is that media outlets keep trying to quantify things that are not quantifiable. 

Prince Lover

June 12th, 2014 at 9:55 AM ^

Every kid should want to follow in his father's exact footsteps every time.

My dad grew up in Toledo so he liked Ohio St. When he moved to Detroit area in early 70s, he retained his hatred for UM and began his love of MSU.

I attended UM and he never liked the decision. He refers to Ann Arbor as 1 square mile surrounded by reality. So, not every kid wants to be just like dad.

PS, for the record, I do love my father, and enjoy our trash talk. I'm not saying you can't want to be your own person and love your dad at the same time.


June 12th, 2014 at 10:33 AM ^

Glad to hear Michigan is in it with Thompson. I think most of the comments have already been made. I guess the thing I really would want is for Thompson to land in the best fit for him. This isn't rocket science, but it involves:

  • How he meshes with coaches,
  • How they plan to use him.
  • The defensive scheme and how it fits (4 - 3, 3 - 4, other.)
  • How he relates to his future fellow teammates
  • How the depth chart is (within reason . . . you're only an injury away from starting,)
  • How the academic programs meet his needs.
  • How his family feels.

All of these things come together, and there isn't always a perfect match. One program is stronger in some areas, another program is stronger in others. Magnus has often commented on a prospective recruit that he is really good in a particular way, but not a good fit for what Michigan is doing.

Having followed recruiting at mgoblog for several years, it strikes me that there is a frenzy with the hunt, the chase, the courting of a recruit. Then, a recruit is signed, and in more than a few cases, is buried on the depth chart and the bench, rarely heard from again. Yes, I want Michigan to have the best players possible, and to win out against MSU and OSU all the time. But really, I want these players to go where they fit well, and have a place they can shine. That's where I want Tyriq Thompson to end up, and I hope he figures that out well.

Space Coyote

June 12th, 2014 at 12:21 PM ^

Because they didn't want to completely fall behind for a pretty decent back up plan. I think there are better LBs on the board, and I think they've recruited better LBs recently. But he's a solid back-up plan that could turn out to be a pretty good college player. But Bilal, Hilliard, Masina, McMillon, Townsend I think are all better OLB prospects. But, because neither of thsoe individual is likely to commit to Michigan, I don't think it's a reach to want to get Thompson in the fold. I think there is also so perception with what it means to recruiting in the state.


June 12th, 2014 at 1:17 PM ^

I see him as a career back up who will fight for playing time on special teams. I see him as another Allen Gant another legacy who will never contribute much to the team, IMO we need players who can play and help this team get back to contending. I don't care about winning a recruiting battle for a in state legacy, I care about beating MSU on Game days.


June 12th, 2014 at 4:16 PM ^

I call bullshit....  don't fall for it folks.... its apparent that he is sparty all the way, and this is Dantoni's way of trying to usurp us, making it appear as if he chose them over us... fact is, he isn't a high priority for us.   Nice try sparty


June 12th, 2014 at 9:12 PM ^

Based on some of the comments made here and elsewhere by respected recruiting guys, sounds like a nice "depth" guy but would probably sting more from a legacy standpoint than an on-the-field one.