lhglrkwg

March 14th, 2017 at 12:19 AM ^

There are a decent number of people on this board (and by decent I mean probably more than 10) who think that tweeting recruits is good as long as it's a positive tweet. Whether or not recruits really do appreciate 32 year old dudes they've never met tweeting at them, it remains very creepy plus it's a gateway drug for full-on rage tweeting at a 17 year old across the country who you will never meet

Gucci Mane

March 14th, 2017 at 3:40 AM ^

I believe everyone on this board should tweet positive things at recruits. A simple " we would love to have you at Michigan" really does help. I have tweeted 0 negative things ever. And I have actually developed friendships with a few guys, even two that went other places. No recruit ever got mad for getting love from a fan base.

poseidon7902

March 14th, 2017 at 7:25 AM ^

I have a twitter and probably log in once a year now.  i created it to bitch at Dave Brandon back in the day.  That said, this isn't what Partridge said in the excerpt of this interview.  his exact words were "negatively attack".  

 

Whether they think you're cool or not, kids also like attention and having their ego stroked.  So yea, they probably aren't interested in you as a person, but when you positively tweet at them they enjoy it.  

 

 

They should be emotional about their program, but I don’t get why you negatively attack a 17-year-old kid, because they're kids. They’re going through a process that is crazy and they should be protected from the process.”

Gucci Mane

March 14th, 2017 at 10:45 AM ^

Partridge clearly said negative tweets. One guy who I tweeted a simple positive message to was Aubrey Solomon after I heard of all the negative tweets. He took the time to reply in kind fashion. I'm telling you guys that recruits really do like positive attention.

And in reply to another person here, the player I know best is a current player on UofM who will be a likely all American this year imo. I'm not out of touch, it is many of you who are. And I really do understand it, I don't blame you guys, I know you think you are doing the right thing. But many recruits have a Twitter literally to interact with fans and to feel popular or special. Snapchat and texting would be where they talk to their close friends.

MJs_PJ_Party

March 14th, 2017 at 11:16 AM ^

saying and what others are replying and stating in this thread.  

I think that some of the differences in opinion may be based on the age of the posters.  I'm in my mid-forties, used Twitter briefly, thought it was stupid, and deleted it.  I equate it to stepping out on your porch and randomly yelling a sentence at the world.  

For me, I wouldn't want people that I don't know tweeting comments of any kind to me.  Quite frankly, I would find it creepy and exhausting.  Any negative tweets would make a big impact on me.  

Buuuuuuutttttt, I have a high school senior who, as is typical, spends a large (and ridiculous) amount of their life on social media.  I think that the their expectations for who would tweet at them is very different from mine.  

And, yes, I found it very painful to type "I'm in my mid-forties."  

Vote_Crisler_1937

March 14th, 2017 at 6:58 AM ^

Gucci,

Maybe you are a really cool guy that kids just relate to or maybe you found one or two exceptions to the rule.

If Coach Partridge is telling you not to do it - don't do it.

I can tell you as a former recruit who was friends with other former recruits and also did my share of recruiting that generally recruits do not want to hear from you. They already think they are cooler than you (and everyone) and they want their social media free of clutter so that they can use it to stay in touch with their friends and girls - whom they also think are cooler than you. There are people they want to hear from, famous people, hot girls, coaches (like Wheatley or Harbaugh) but they don't want 1,000 messages if those messages are just regular people they don't have all that much respect for.

So don't tell people to interact with recruits when your only success is "a couple guys who went elsewhere" and the risk is "Aubrey Solomon almost didn't come specifically because adults who like Michigan couldn't keep it together online"

MichiganTeacher

March 14th, 2017 at 10:03 AM ^

I've also had experience with recruiting, and I can't think of a single instance where a kid getting positive social media attention didn't want it. These days, actually, Twitter is pretty much _only_ used for public stuff. The kids I know use other stuff for friends, flirting, etc.

Artie

March 14th, 2017 at 7:33 AM ^

Why don't you have a seat of there, Gucci. If I wanted to interact with kids all day, I would have been a teacher. Whatever I say to a recruit would have absolutely zero impact on where they ultimately attend college. "Facilities? Coaching? Relationship with players? Academics? Program standing? Nope. I'm going to Michigan because this dude tweeted at me that Michigan really needs me!!" C'mon guy.

MichiganTeacher

March 14th, 2017 at 9:58 AM ^

Well, I am a teacher, and a coach, and I've had Beilein in my gym recruiting players, and you're wrong and Gucci's right.

What you say to a recruit absolutely has a non-zero impact. Kids listen.

The truth is simple: Tweeting good things at recruits helps. Tweeting bad things hurts. 

Telling people not to tweet at recruits is like telling them never to use scissors. If you're a one year-old, then yeah, don't use scissors. Otherwise, grow the hell up and use the damn scissors.

N. Campus Tech

March 14th, 2017 at 10:56 AM ^

Uh, no. We don't need grown men engaging in conversations online with teenagers they don't know. It's not helping a damn thing.

Are you honestly trying to tell me that a kid is going to commit to a school based on what random people on the internet say? It can only hurt. Don't encourage that behavior.

Just stop it.

 

Steeveebr

March 14th, 2017 at 12:29 PM ^

This is just really outdated and backwards thinking.  If the number one recruit in the country was at Crysler would it be creepy and wrong to cheer for him?  Or, to chant come to Michigan?  I mean we are all still strangers then.

I don't twitter, or even facebook.  I'm not interested in either of those outlets.  However, you are outdated if you think sending a twitter message is similar to engaging in conversation. Also, I'd hardly qualify a 23 year-old as a creepy grown man (in reference to Gucci).

The context of Coach P.'s comments were negative recruiting.  I think we can all agree on that.  As for the rest, just let the recruits control who they let contact them.  I won't decide for them what type of interaction they like or who they should let follow them.  There is probably a reason they keep their twitter open to the public.

 

P.S.  I'm not talking about NCAA rulebooks wrong.

N. Campus Tech

March 14th, 2017 at 2:44 PM ^

Potential NCAA violations asside, no, it would not be wrong to cheer somebody from the stands. Why? Because they are in a public setting, voluntarily putting themselves in a position to draw attention to themselves, and you are not engaging them one-on-one.

What would be wrong would be following the recruit around Crisler and trying to recruit him. 

This is a teenager that you do not know. Do not engage them in conversation. When you might think you are being positive and helpful, you may be coming across as creepy, but you wouldn't know that, becuase you are the type of person that tweets recruits.

If thinking that adults shouldn't stalk children online makes me "outdated and backwords" then fine.

Steeveebr

March 14th, 2017 at 4:13 PM ^

"Why? Because they are in a public setting, voluntarily putting themselves in a position to draw attention to themselves, and you are not engaging them one-on-one." ...

That's what you and I don't understand about Twitter and why we get the heebie jeebies from this stuff.  I don't know why these kids do it, but they choose to make their twitter account a public account.  It's a definite choice.  On twitter you can choose who you let follow you and who you let contact you.  They make that choice by choosing to let Gucci follow them or in other words friend them.  They choose to walk into that stadium.

Winchester Wolverine

March 14th, 2017 at 8:44 AM ^

My younger brother's best friend does this. Tweets positively at recruits.

He's a good kid, with good intentions and he too claims that he's built friendships with a few of them.

For him, right out of high school, age is not what contributes to the "creep" factor. It's that he's doing it to begin with. It's obsessive, weird, and does more harm than good.

People feel empowered when they think they're contributing to their favorite school's success with recruits.

But you're not. Your fandom, no matter how passionate, doesn't mean shit to a recruit. I'm about as obsessive a Michigan fan as they come, but I refuse to stoop to that level of creepiness or meddle in things beyond my control.

Just leave it to the fucking coaches. Simple as that.

Kewaga.

March 14th, 2017 at 11:32 AM ^

 

 

is that in my opinion for every 9 positive tweets it only take 1 negative tweet to outweigh the positive.   And given the responses (and at times lack of self-censorship) just seen on the board... I think a blanket policy of no contact with recruits is absoultely the best policy.  Let the professionals that are paid to do the recruiting, recruit.  Save your support for cheering them on at the game.

That is all.

StephenRKass

March 14th, 2017 at 11:10 AM ^

I have so many thoughts on this topic.

  1. Full disclosure:  I don't have a twitter acct, nor snapchat. I have an instagram acct I have never used. So personally, this is virtually irrelevant to me.
  2. I have teenagers under my roof (twins, boy and girl.) Also a young 20 something daughter. So I have some inside info and experience on social media and contact between adults and kids.
  3. My kids generally do NOT want to interact with adults. Specifically, with old people. I am not cool, I am not interesting, I am irrelevant. Old people represent "the man," i.e., the parent, the teacher, the administrator, etc., etc., etc. From their perspective, at best, I am boring. At worst, I am snooping.
  4. My son plays football and is a Michigan fan and sports fan in general. Having said that, he is way, way more interested in cute girls, sometimes cars, friends and the stupid stuff they're doing, etc., than in Michigan sports. (WD is an exception, not the rule.) My guess is that if you play football and are cute and at least average cool, you will always have tons of girls after you. He certainly does.
  5. My daughter is much more responsible as a person and student than her brother, and even she wants minimal contact on media with adults.
  6. There are a few exceptions. My son is friends with at least a few football players in the Big 10. If you are actively playing ball, I guess the rules don't apply to you quite the same way. He obviously would be ok with contact from coaches too. Oh, and if you're a really hawt, smokin' babe (smh . . . never typed that before,) if you're a really cute girl, I guess recruits wouldn't complain at contact. That seems weird too, but maybe they wouldn't complain. Although, there are so many pictures that portray a girl as cute when the reality is something else. I digress.
  7. Think of it this way. Some of you have had (or are) parents who cheer their kids on. This is good. However, even when a parent cheers their kid on, what happens? The kid typically tunes it out. I mean, they receive it, they'd rather get positive strokes than negative, but it kind of goes in one ear and out the other. And if an adult is TOO interested in them, especially someone they don't know, it starts to creep them out. I used to send my kids encouraging texts. I have figured out that they really don't want them. Or that I should really limit them.
  8. Both because of my job, and because I have teenagers in my house and know and interact with some of their friends, I have way more contact with teens than is typical for an adult. (typically text, sometimes in person, sometimes via FB.) And it still is weird and fraught with danger. I can tell you that contact is ok if there is a good reason for contact. And contact is ok if they reach out to you for some reason. But it still is tricky. When they are young, I have their parents in the loop. Once they are in college, the rules change a bit. However, in all cases, I have a reason for contact.
  9. Being a fan of Michigan is virtually NEVER a reason for contact. There is only one exception that comes to mind. Because my kid plays ball and has played for maybe 7 years, I know a bunch of the kids on the team, especially his personal friends. Many of them know I am a Michigan fan. If one of them was going to play college ball, and was good enough to play at Michigan, and was interested in Michigan, and wanted to know what I thought about Michigan, well, sure, I'd be in contact. But I think that describes very few of the users on mgoblog. And even with that, I would be in personal contact, and not tweeting.

EDIT:  And as far as I'm concerned, I'd have no problem with mgousers being ID'd on the board. Put out their name, address, phone, email, usernames, etc. Instead of the banhammer, let them receive negative social media contact and get a taste of their own medicine.

Rodriguesqe

March 13th, 2017 at 11:53 PM ^

The dark side of social media isn't going away. The people surrounding these big name highschoolers should do a better job of sheilding them from this. Sure, don't tweet at recruits, but the people who listen to that are the onesthat would at least dilute the nastiness.

Weber's mom was the worst, implying he went to OSU because M's social media presence was so bad. Its one thing for a highschooler to make a huge decision for a dumb reason, but for his mom to do it is another. 

Blue in Paradise

March 13th, 2017 at 11:54 PM ^

But a lot of people on this very board were personally attacking Solomon after the decommit, the "video" and his process to make a decision.

I got into some ugly board on this board over the topic of whether adults should tweet or post nasty remarks about teenagers.  Someone called him a snowflake that didn't want his feelings hurt - and yet they are posting about him because they felt butt hurt that he made a dumb comment about UM.  Who is the snowflake?

I am sure some of these folks will post on this thread how it is ok to trash kids that pick a different school (or in this case actually picked UM) because the kids shouldn't pay attention to message boards or some foolishness like that.

Every school has a segement of its fanbase that does this stuff.  It's just a function of the social media culture we now live in. 

Blue in Paradise

March 14th, 2017 at 10:00 AM ^

One says he is skeptical that this is an issue as kids shouldn't factor hate tweets in their decisions.

Either way, I don't care what they say about the subject- although it would be entertaining to see someone try to defend himself. It's more about whether posters actually trash the kids or not.
And yes that happens on the regular when a big recruit picks the "wrong" school and people get butt hurt.

Do you need us to find the threads?

stephenrjking

March 14th, 2017 at 12:07 AM ^

The internet-based hate culture, that showers cruelty on whatever subject is deemed convenient of derision, is absolutely one of the worst things about our larger modern culture. It cuts across every line of politics, race, religion, you name it. People get behind a screen and feel they have a right to saw things of abominable horror to others.

 

stephenrjking

March 14th, 2017 at 1:03 AM ^

I've been aware of the phenomenon since at least 1998 (I used to bump around on an Ann Arbor-based bbs called Grex where we ran into some doozies) but it seems almost not strong enough to assess it like that article does. I feel like there is or ought to be more ubiquitous serious academic research on it.

The way that page and attached papers describe it does seem to fit the facts. Also, Paul Lukas did a great piece of journalism partly exposing and then interviewing a troll that attached itself to his Uni Watch site. You'll find a link to that interview here. In this case it was, indeed, a regular guy who acted like a monster behind a screen.

dragonchild

March 14th, 2017 at 6:52 AM ^

The anonymity doesn't make someone into something they're not, despite their pleading insistence when they get caught.  All it does is remove inhibition.

Social media has shown us what we are really like when we're not wary of what others think of us.  The result ain't pretty, but don't think to blame technology.  And consider, the only really effective solutions are active moderation, such as here.  Otherwise, this is what we truly are -- a bunch of shameless, bile-spewing assholes.  I think there's a lot of denial because the truth is too much to bear, but it's not like these people think of themselves as fictional authors doing some kind of postmodern social experiment.  They're just letting loose what's on the brain without a filter.

And if anyone wants to doubt that, it's well known alcohol is another effective method at removing inhibition, and as the sober one I've all too often seen alcohol reduce a bunch of otherwise "civilized" people into a bunch of loud, rude, obnoxious assholes.  It's practically the point.

It's not like reality changed.  But at least thanks to social media, now you know.