UM Football Recruiting - by WM Wolverine

[drok]

I think they have the knowledge, Drok. Teaching it to the players, and getting them to do it on the field is another issue. Perhaps its more of a motivational issue.

Isn't that what coaching is supposed to do?

I don't doubt they have the knowledge. I don't doubt that Borges, for all his faults, knows a lot about football. But coaching requires a translation of this knowledge to the players in such a way that they are able to execute.

When it comes down to it, you can have players who never give up, ultra-aggressive players, players who don't go down after repeated beatings, players that lay the smack down on their opponents, players who are football smart, etc. I don't think there is a lack of players with these "attributes" on Michigan's team. But unless the coaching staff can teach the right way to harness those attributes, teach the technique to do it right, teach the discipline of each team member's responsibilities - the team will continue to look "soft" and as if they don't know what they are doing.

When I hear "tough", I hear a team that is disciplined, knowledgable, well-practiced, fundamentally sound. Those are all aspects related to coaching. And to date, there has been no evidence of this taking place in a way that would suggest our staff is any better than average. "Toughness" starts with coaching, a real field general, and I don't see that in our coaching staff. It's year 4 already, there's no reason for any excuses.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I fear this staff does not have the intensity necessary to excel in today's day and age. (Lloyd had the same problem I think)

[UMStan White]

Uh.....Lloyd won a national championship with the top defense in the country. god how quickly we forget.

[WM Wolverine]

This staff hasn't had the talent yet to compete at the B10 level. This year they should be pretty well off, winning 5-6 B10 games at least.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Uh.....Lloyd won a national championship with the top defense in the country. god how quickly we forget.

1) I didn't forget.
2) it wasn't that quick a forget. It was 17 years ago.
3) I stand firmly by my opinion of Lloyd. He didn't have the fire for football that other coaches have and is necessary to inspire your players to have the same.

[lineygoblue]

I especially agree with #3, but I'll add that I don't believe it was intentional.

Carr was a fine football coach, and a man of strong character and integrity. Kids who got to play for him got to play for one of the finest men to ever coach the game. However, I think even Carr would agree that over his last 2-3 seasons, his fire and passion for the game waned. Some of that I grudgingly give credit to Saint Jim, who basically took Lloyd-ball, improved it, and threw it right back at Carr. Carr spent his final 2-3 years trying to figure out how to get past it. He failed, and decided to retire, and left the cabinet bare. In addition, he spent the RRod years undermining anything/everything that Rodriguez tried to do. I'm not going to rehash all that here, but the record speaks for itself.

Back to the toughness issue. Teams like Alabama, LSU, USC, and others continue to show what success TOUGH players bring to the game. And I hate myself for wanting something from the SEC style of ball at Michigan.

[UMStan White]

From the time he won the National Championship he had one down year and he ended that year by beating Urban Meyer. You've been hanging out in the Seattle rain too long drinking that drivel they call "Starbucks" :-)

[SeattleLionsFan]

I was leading the little battle on this board telling people not to be so quick to call for Lloyd's head. He had the system down and probably would have won 8-10 games every year until the end of time. I don't know that he was going to win another national championship or really be one of the "elite" teams. But he wasn't going into the shitter like it has since.

That said, he was a great man and a great coach.

[drok]

Back to the toughness issue. Teams like Alabama, LSU, USC, and others continue to show what success TOUGH players bring to the game. And I hate myself for wanting something from the SEC style of ball at Michigan.

I think recruiting rankings would suggest that talent was a bigger factor in their success.

[Jeff Buchanan]

This staff hasn't had the talent yet to compete at the B10 level. This year they should be pretty well off, winning 5-6 B10 games at least.

Just as an objective measure, would you tell us what the recruiting rankings for Wisconsin and MSU have been over the last three seasons compared to M's?

I'll admit, Rodriguez recruited a different kind of player than the elites do and he was successfully working a system that allowed his teams prior to his stint at M to compete at a high level with those recruits.

The primary problem with this staff, as I see it, is player development. Hoke recruits very well albeit he has lost some good ones who fear his job is in jeopardy as a result of two bad seasons in a row.

The top recruits have a passel of "advisors" including their own HS HCs who can evaluate college position coaches. The purpose of that evaluation would be to let the HS player know where the best spot for him might be if he wants to get to the NFL. I think M has a problem there despite Mattison's rings.

Mattison is good, no doubt but his success with the Ravens was built around Ray Lewis an astonishingly good NFL player. Lewis built the ravens defense and ran it as I understand it.

Mattison was a facilitator in the NFL, did well at that but his college credentials are spotty at best. The other M coaches? Meh if on field performance over the last two seasons an indicator of that.

To reiterate ..... M's problems with football are at the macro level (Brandon and M culture)) with contributing micro level factors such as Hoke is not a good game day coach and his staff, each of them, is likely to have significant coaching - player development - deficiencies. I'll add hangover talent issues from the RR days.

Its hard to flesh out whether the macro or the micro issues contribute the most to M's football shittiness these days and it really doesn't matter that much to me. M football sucks and its going to be a good while before it returns to national prominence ..... if that even happens ever again.

[WM Wolverine]

Wisconsin & MSU have done very well at identifying, developing and coaching up talent.... When you can't bring in top recruits like those two, identifying talent becomes even far more crucial as does the latter two. You have to have a high success rate or hitting on your three stars, which they have done and unlike M under RR keep them in your program instead of them leaving campus after a couple years...

Especially important is the line of scrimmage, you can't run, pass or stop either if you can't control the line of scrimmage. You can have the best skill talent in the country or back seven in the conference, it'll go to waste if your line is one or the two worse in your conference. RR entirely bombed recruiting the lines and were still paying for it and 'could' again still in '14 as his recruits he recruited in '10 could still be around and his recruits in '11 should still be around. Only Frank Clark & Brennan Beyer are left from those classes that play on the lines.... I think if you looked at Sparty & the Badgers; you'd see they usually have lines with a great deal of 3rd, 4th, 5th year players...

I wouldn't look at the last three classes however ('12 - '14) if you want to compare the past success of the past three seasons. You'd have to look at the '08 - '11 recruiting classes if you want to look at the performance from '10 - '13... M's coaches haven't inherited a whole lot of talent though I really like the large '12 & '13 recruiting classes that is very deep in talent though arguably missing on elite talents. Those two recruiting classes are very deep in talent but the current team is still a year away from really gelling imo as the have so few 4th, 5th year players to rely on, learn from.

[The Oracle]

I was leading the little battle on this board telling people not to be so quick to call for Lloyd's head. He had the system down and probably would have won 8-10 games every year until the end of time. I don't know that he was going to win another national championship or really be one of the "elite" teams. But he wasn't going into the shitter like it has since.

That said, he was a great man and a great coach.

That was ME!

[Jeff Buchanan]

Thanks, WM .....

Good response. I agree with your assessment .... it just makes sense.

I still think M football is in trouble because of both the macro and micro issues.

You can have pretty good talent. If you can't coach it up, if you can't get the players to buy in an lead from within, you're going to have crap for football. I'm convinced, save a really good season in 2014, which I think is an unlikely outcome, that Hoke, et. al. are an albatross around the neck of M football and its potential for success going forward.

Given the utter piece of shit Dave Brandon is, the culture of Michigan which seems to tolerate mediocrity, at least in the football program, you have a formula for continued mid-tier BIG performance.

[The Oracle]

I've been more patient than most, but this is a huge year.

[UMStan White]

"Those two recruiting classes are very deep in talent but the current team is still a year away from really gelling imo as the have so few 4th, 5th year players to rely on, learn from."

Tomorrow, tomorrow tomorrow it's only a daaaaaay awaaay. I've been reading that shit on this list serve from you and others for five fucking years! OOPs I'm sorry.I've been reading that shit for SIX fucking years!