U of M thread (in the Lions Forum) :)

[chemiclord]

On an additional note (and some of you might be surprised to read this):

From what I've seen, I think the book is a little biased against Lloyd Carr. Part of that might be due to the fact that Carr refused to comment or answer questions, leaving the narrative a bit one-sided. I want to believe that Carr tried more subtle discreet channels to air his concerns rather than immediately resorting to sabotage, but we don't know, because he never allowed his thoughts to be heard.

Part of it no doubt was Carr's open disdain for the media, as he probably very rudely refused the interview with Bacon in the most condescending manner he could.

[Jamie H]

Again, they have the #1 class in the country as ranked by one recruiting service, and are at least top 5 in the other services. How can you be wary about an approach that is bringing in one of the best classes in the country? How are they supposed to do better than they have?

RichRod concentrated on other parts of the country than the midwest and look where it got him. You have to recruit locally first and foremost and then get some studs from around the country to fill in the class.

[chemiclord]

Again, they have the #1 class in the country as ranked by one recruiting service, and are at least top 5 in the other services. How can you be wary about an approach that is bringing in one of the best classes in the country? How are they supposed to do better than they have?

Because it was one year in a year where the midwest pool was remarkably deep and recruits were abandoning their primary rival in droves.

I don't know what approach the U-M has; that's the point. I'm not sure how Hoke is handling recruiting. I'm not sure what his process is. I do know that there were circumstances this year that could have artificially inflated his success.

[Jamie H]

As far as I'm concerned, recruiting is a results-driven process. So if they are #1 in recruting rankings, they are clearly doing something right. Who cares if this approach doesn't work next year? They will have to adjust if that is true. Good coaches adjust when needed.

I will tell you this though--If Michigan finishes up in the 10-3 range, with the talent they have coming into the program, recruting nationally will be easier because people will see them as a program on the rise again.

[chemiclord]

Who cares if this approach doesn't work next year? They will have to adjust if that is true. Good coaches adjust when needed.

And that is my concern, because the U-M hasn't exactly struck me as the most adaptable program in college athletics. It took them... ten some odd years to finally bring coordinator compensation up on par with other BCS schools, for example.

[Jamie H]

Well, the way I see it, the team is 6-0 and has the #1 recruting class in the country, and you are worring about them not being adaptable enough to do well in FUTURE recruting classes, mostly based on some gut feeling you have.

Seems like a pretty pointless thing to worry about. The coaching staff has the team playing well and is recruiting great at the moment. Why worry about speculation that they might not be perfect in the future until they give us a reason to worry? It be like sitting around worrying that the Tigers might not be dominant in 2014 instead of concentrating on the ALCS. There are more important things to concentrate on.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Who exactly is this mythical Perennial national power that doesnt recruit primarily regionally?

[Cody_Russell]

Who exactly is this mythical Perennial national power that doesnt recruit primarily regionally?

Purdue

[chemiclord]

Well, the way I see it, the team is 6-0 and has the #1 recruting class in the country, and you are worring about them not being adaptable enough to do well in FUTURE recruting classes, mostly based on some gut feeling you have.

Seems like a pretty pointless thing to worry about. The coaching staff has the team playing well and is recruiting great at the moment. Why worry about speculation that they might not be perfect in the future until they give us a reason to worry? It be like sitting around worrying that the Tigers might not be dominant in 2014 instead of concentrating on the ALCS. There are more important things to concentrate on.

The way I see it is based on the history of the program and their demonstrated reluctance to change. I'm sorry you don't like it.

You keep trumping this one year as indicative of something where there were variables involved that you can't count on year in and year out. Michigan can't count on 3 or 4 top recruits defecting from OSU because of potential violations. They can't count on that corridor always being as heavily stocked as it was this time. There are going to be lean years in that SE Michigan/NW Ohio pipeline (much like it was the last handful of years), and how they recruit outside that corridor will go a long way towards maintaining a high level of talent.

I'm not saying they won't. I am saying I don't know.

[Jamie H]

The way I see it is based on the history of the program and their demonstrated reluctance to change. I'm sorry you don't like it.

It's not that I don't like it. It's that I prefer to concentrate on the reality of what is actually happening vs. whatever fantasy you are worrying about.

The reality is that they have one of the top recruting classes in the country. That is about 10 bazillion times more important than your gut feeling that says they won't be able to recruit in the future.

Michigan has never really had trouble recruiting. Now they have one of the best classes in the country, and you are harping on their ability to recruit? The whole thing is pretty confusing. Should we bag on them for being 6-0 too? Dammit, they should be 7-0 by now!!!

[chemiclord]

It's not that I don't like it. It's that I prefer to concentrate on the reality of what is actually happening vs. whatever fantasy you are worrying about.

The reality is that they have one of the top recruting classes in the country. That is about 10 bazillion times more important than your gut feeling that says they won't be able to recruit in the future.

Michigan has never really had trouble recruiting. Now they have one of the best classes in the country, and you are harping on their ability to recruit? The whole thing is pretty confusing. Should we bag on them for being 6-0 too? Dammit, they should be 7-0 by now!!!

Again, I'm not saying they won't. I am saying I... DON'T... FUCKING... KNOW.

I DON'T KNOW what their approach is. I DON'T KNOW how they approach recruiting outside their traditional pipelines. I DON'T KNOW what has changed and what hasn't. I DON'T KNOW how much of this year's success was because of OSU's troubles (although 3 or 4 top recruits have already acknowledged that OSU's impending judgment caused them to decommit and two of them went on to choose Michigan). I DON'T KNOW if this top class is an exception or the new standard. I... DON'T... KNOW.

What I DO KNOW is that the way Michigan has traditionally done it really doesn't work anymore, and that is evident in how the talent level has dropped considerably in Carr's last years and throughout the RichRod debacle.

[Jamie H]

What I DO KNOW is that the way Michigan has traditionally done it really doesn't work anymore, and that is evident in how the talent level has dropped considerably in Carr's last years and throughout the RichRod debacle.

See, that is the problem. That statement is 100% wrong. The way Michigan has traditionally recruited works just fine. The problem with the latter Carr years were that Carr wouldn't promise anyone he was going to be around and there was a shitload of negative recruiting going on around him and his health. Plus, several people have questioned the motivation of Carr considering he knew he was done. And RichRod was, well, RichRod and was as far from how Michigan has traditionally done things as possible.

There has never really been a problem with the way Michigan recruits, as can be seen by the large number of successful players they have put into the NFL. I have issues with how RichRod recruited, and Carr clearly didn't do well in his last few years, but neither of those events say anything about Michigan's traditional recruiting tactics.

[chemiclord]

No, my statement is 100% right.

The big draw of Michigan was that they were one of a handful of teams that could promise a national draw every week. They could promise exposure to NFL teams that few other schools could. They didn't need to be a hard, aggressive sell. Players were willing to be backups for two or three years simply because the potential payoff of having a national stage was worth it.

Now, just about every Division I school has some sort of nationwide exposure. ESPN 1, 2, 3, CBS, ABC, emerging conference networks, online streaming... why would that second string talent gamble on being a starter two years down the road when they can go to say... San Diego State and get more exposure?

The problem for Michigan is never going to be getting the four-year starters. It's getting the freshman to sign on at positions where there's already an established sophomore or junior at that position that keeps the talent level high in periods of transition. They have one such player in Devon Gardner, which is an encouraging sign.

And that's where they need to be more aggressive than they were in the past. They have to be willing to target outside their pipelines and start sending more people for lesser-known players outside the normal comfort zone of the team.

That's really what I mean by "recruit nationally"; find the occasional from say Wisconsin or Oregon or Missouri or New York or wherever that might not have the big star ratings, but have potential that can be shaped. That's where Michigan has largely failed over the last decade. The college football world has changed, and Michigan is only now starting to catch onto that.

[Jamie H]

No, my statement is 100% right.

That's really what I mean by "recruit nationally"; find the occasional from say Wisconsin or Oregon or Missouri or New York or wherever that might not have the big star ratings, but have potential that can be shaped. That's where Michigan has largely failed over the last decade. The college football world has changed, and Michigan is only now starting to catch onto that.

How much Michigan football did you watch over the last decade? Michigan has had a crapload of players from out of state. Hell, the entire offense was from out of state for a while. Henne, Hart, Manningham, Arrington, none of those guys were state of Michigan kids. Navarre, Breaston, Perry, those guys were out of staters too. Terrell, Marquise Walker, Anthony Thomas, none of them were from Michigan. Tom Brady was a bit more than a decade ago, but he was from California. The majority of the offense isn't this year either. Robinson, Touissaint, Shaw, Hemmingway, Smith, Gallon, Koger, Roundtree, none of those kids are from Michigan.

The truth is, Michigan has almost certainly had more out of state stars over the past decade than they have Michigan kids.

[chemiclord]

You're pointing to classes back 7+ years ago where all Michigan had to do was flash the winged helmet and have people lined up around the block.

Those days are gone. You're living in the past.