Michigan football recruiting - impact of season and new staff hires

Submitted by trueblueintexas on January 29th, 2018 at 1:28 PM

The overall article from ESPN (yes, I know) about the new coaches and recruiting isn't anything this board doesn't already know. (i.e. - one of the key qualifications of the new staff hires is their ability to recruit)

In the article, I did see this quote from Mustapha Muhammad which validates what many on the board have said about on-field performance impacting recruiting:

“Recruits go to the mainstream schools that are having a lot of success in the moment, if you look at Georgia and how they’re doing,” said ESPN 300 tight end Mustapha Muhammad, a Michigan commit. “In Michigan’s case, we didn’t have the best year and that’s why we missed on a few guys."

The bad news is that the season did impact some recruits (Friday & Ekiyor maybe?). The good news, if Michigan can have a good season in 2018, it can turn back around quickly. 

Link to the full article for people who have absolutely nothing better to do on a Monday (warning, there's not much more there):

http://www.espn.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/143729/its-recruiting-season-…

Comments

reddogrjw

January 29th, 2018 at 1:35 PM ^

3 OT's on the board - one grad transfer and 2 Freshman

Magnus said he likes our chances with Patterson, not so much the other 2

and maybe a greyshirt kicker

holding onto Reese is the other drama

and rumor that Doyle goes the Brad Hawkins prep route for a season

 

that is probably the summary of the rest of our 2018 recruiting

OwenGoBlue

January 29th, 2018 at 1:56 PM ^

I suspect the roundups aren't a priority because there's not a ton of '18 news and they all turn into wahhh-fests in the comments anyway.

Would be nice to hear more about the finish to '18 and the waves being made for '19. 

trueblueintexas

January 29th, 2018 at 2:13 PM ^

In addition, Ace is the primary recruiting writer and I think it is fair to say he has had much bigger and important priorities lately. 

What I am curious about is the general state of Brain's dong? The staff has been in a limbo situation and he has had nothing really to say about it other than the brief Hello posts. Additionally, in the past, he would have come out with a comprehensive statement about the MSU situation by now as well. 

I'm really getting concerned the end of the 2017 season was such a dong punch to him that he can't bring himself to have a stance on anything anymore. 

Can we get a META post on the current wherabouts and state of Brian's dong?

MgerBlerg

January 29th, 2018 at 2:43 PM ^

Brian's been giving his takes on the MgoPodcast and WTKA roundtables but yeah, not much written here.  I get the feeling he's worn down by both the disappointing season and, probably moreso, overreactions from the fanbase and doesn't feel like addressing football for a while.  Understandable.

funkifyfl

January 29th, 2018 at 2:56 PM ^

I don't Twitter all that much, but yeah I'm sure Brian's followers antagonize him a ton there. MGoBloggers can be an irascible bunch too, but I feel like this is a much better outlet than Twitter. But, this message board still needs a drastic overhaul to unleash it's [mostly good] fury.

mGrowOld

January 29th, 2018 at 1:34 PM ^

Image result for captain obvious gif

 

Which is why I HATE, HATE, HATE our schedule next year.  We could easily have a much better team and a slightly better or same record.  Which means we could be facing the same exact situation next year.

ghostofhoke

January 29th, 2018 at 1:43 PM ^

Please STFU about the schedule. That is such a loser mentality it drives everyone nuts. What exactly would you like? We play big boy football which means we have to beat good teams to go anywhere or make the playoffs. Some years you’ll face them at home, some years you’ll face them on the road. Hopefully it will be mix from year to year so you don’t have to play everyone at home one year at the expense of having to play everyone on the road the next. The schedule is what it is. Everyone has a tough schedule, end of story. It’s a total bullshit complaint. The only valid complaint one could really have about the schedule is maybe you have a prior commitment and can’t go to some of the best games or something like that. Other than that, grow up.

BlueKoj

January 29th, 2018 at 3:23 PM ^

It feels like @PU & vs MN in 2017 is significantly easier than @NW & vs NE 2018. Still must win the games on the schedule, but I think 2018 is tougher. FL was a pretender. Perhaps ND will be as well, but I think they'll be better than FL was, and it's a true road game.

Gotta be in contention for a conference title and need to win 11 games to satisfy me -- tough schedule or no. 2016 and 17 disappointments demand a rebound to excellence. EDIT (this does not mean JH is on a hot seat. It's just time to win impressively and despite difficulties).

mGrowOld

January 29th, 2018 at 1:50 PM ^

Apparently Alabama, Georgia and the rest of the teams who continually make the final four have been doing it all wrong according to you.  While they schedule OOC cupcakes for the most part they should've been scheduling the toughest games they could, on the road, to prove how manly they are instead of padding their record.

Sorry I'd rather see us playing for something more meaningful at the the end of the year than the Outback Bowl trophy (which we didnt get BTW).  Even it means we wont be considered the roughest, toughest root-toot-tootenst team east of the Rockies in your book.

And you can stop with both the "STFU" and "grow up" crap.  I was supporting this team and even recruiting for this team while you still trying to figure out how to not take a shit in your own pants.

reddogrjw

January 29th, 2018 at 1:55 PM ^

each schedules 1 tough OOC game, just like us

 

Bama scheduled FSU and Georgia scheduled ND along with Georgia Tech

we scheduled Florida

 

Bama has Louisville in 2018, Georgia still has GT

 

the difference is when we schedule SMU and Western they schedule high school teams as well as them having only 8 conference games and us 9 (then again, one of them is Rutgers)

 

CLion

January 29th, 2018 at 2:28 PM ^

The biggest difference is the 8 vs 9 conference games, but I also agree with the rest. Georgia won @ Notre Dame. Not exactly a Wisconsin schedule.

And we all know Bama was doing pretty well back when the SEC West was clearly the best division in football.

lilpenny1316

January 29th, 2018 at 2:36 PM ^

Bama will play a tough game in Atlanta, Dallas or Orlando (Louisville 2018).  But don't expect them to play a true road game or a non-conference game outside of the footprint of the southeast.

I think the last time they played a team with a pulse on the road OOC was PSU and they weren't exactly elite when that game was scheduled.  I don't even know if Saban was there when they scheduled it.  They backed out of the home and home with Sparty for reasons I don't know.

 

Reader71

January 29th, 2018 at 2:55 PM ^

[+1: Inciteful]

Any andvice on how to not poop pants?

I’m with you - Michigan has the advantage of being Michigan. Schedule cupcakes, win the conference, and they will be in the playoffs. Scheduling real nonconference games is stupid and evidence supports that.

Also, I don’t think anyone out west is very root-toot-tooty.

A Lot of Milk

January 29th, 2018 at 1:52 PM ^

Disagree completely. Auburn played three of the four playoff teams this year (played Georgia twice). Bama played a ridiculously easy schedule and got rewarded by having fewer losses than auburn and not playing in the sec championship game. Switch Bama and Auburns schedule and you have a different national champion

NYC Fan3

January 29th, 2018 at 1:56 PM ^

With the state of our team we have to look at our schedule to get a gauge on next season.

Alabama likely doesn't care about their schedule next year, nor OSU as they should be in every game they play.

Unfortunately Michigan has trouble with any team over .500 and when adding road games on top of that, l see why it is a concern.  

Wolfman

January 29th, 2018 at 5:25 PM ^

I am aware of what has occurred on the field, what he has inherited at the position and what he has recruited. I have never been one to shout, "wait until next year" and I never will be. However, with both Peters and DCaf being in AA for multiple years, and wil experienced players around them, I certainly do expect a great deal of improvement from last season. If that doesn't occur, I won't be making excuses and I won't be shouting for a new coach. That is not my job. My job is to be a fan, pretty cut and dry really.  I do understand the frustration though, especially those that are younger. I was a fucking terror when it came to UM losses when I was a young man. GO BLUE!!! and not meant as a personal attack. Just answering many posts in one writing. 

Kevin13

January 29th, 2018 at 5:34 PM ^

I too don't believe in making excuses, but you do have to look at the facts. We had a young team this year and very poor QB play from game 1 on. I would expect a big step up for QB play next and if not, then I will start being dissappointed with that position. We also had very young receives learning on the fly and I would expect them to improve next year also. I also expect the interior of line to improve and hopefully even a small upgrade at tackles.

Defense shoud be damn good across the board so now it's time for the young players JH has recruited and got experience last year to step up and start making a difference.  It's not time to panic. We face a tough schedule next year, but this team should be much better and able to win 9-10 regular season games, and with a couple of breaks who knows maybe even better.

Now if I see poor play from QB's and WR's and even the line next year, well then I think people have a right to start questioning the programs direction. But, if your fair you should've expected what we got this year and need to relax one more seasona see what 2018 holds before jumping off the cliff.

mgobaran

January 29th, 2018 at 2:35 PM ^

Unfortunately Michigan has trouble with any team over .500...

Why must our fanbase make sweeping program statements based off of 1 year of performance? The 2017 Football team had trouble with teams over .500. Jim Harbaugh's Michigan teams were 7-6 against .500 teams prior to 2017. Not a shining record, but far from trouble, or incapable of beating strong opponents. We are not Alabama, Ohio St., Clemson, or Oklahoma. Every other team in college football can be beaten by .500+ teams as often as they beat them.

kurpit

January 29th, 2018 at 3:52 PM ^

So... under Harbaugh we have a losing record against teams over .500 and that's not concerning? If Michigan is going to reach a conference championship level, aren't they going to have to beat some of the teams that are currently ahead of them with some level of consistency?

mgobaran

January 30th, 2018 at 10:33 AM ^

Just be a realist. 10-3 record (good record) is roughly .500 against above .500 teams on your schedule. That is the level Michigan has been at since 1990 with blips of better success (1997/2006/2011) and blips of worse success (2005/2017). Michigan is at the point where any year they can overachieve and win the conference or underachieve and get the fans pissed off. That in and of itself is a better place than where we were under RR and Hoke. 

You can hold the program to a higher standard, and hope they get there. But that isn't where we are yet. 

Don

January 30th, 2018 at 2:38 AM ^

That's the problem—the entire premise of Michigan football is that we're NOT just "every other team."

The last decade has mostly been disappointing as hell, but that hasn't yet changed the expectations and assumptions for the majority of Michigan fans, especially the older ones like me who were fortunate to have been around in the era when Michigan was on par with Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, or Oklahoma.

A 7-6 record against .500 teams in two seasons is the definition of mediocre for a program that thinks of itself as an elite blue blood. It's Hokian.

mgobaran

January 30th, 2018 at 10:26 AM ^

The fact is that we are not an Elite program. 7-6 against .500 teams in 2 years is an improvement of who we were for the past decade. Just think about it. 10-3 is a good season, right? 13 opponents, 6 should be below .500, 1 at .500, and 6 above .500. Split the above .500 teams and win all the others, that is 10-3.

You're expectations are skewed until we prove to take the step to the next level. Assuming we are going to take that step before it actually happens is hope, not expectation.

 

Neversatisfied

January 29th, 2018 at 2:27 PM ^

If we are good we can go on the road and beat good teams. If we aren't good we can't. At the end of the day if we are just good enough to limp into a bowl we don't deserve should we play against someone who will stomp us without conscious just because our schedule was soft? Iron shapes iron. Bring on tough ooc games, and tough in conference away games. If we are good it will all work itself out. If we aren't we won't be in a bowl we don't deserve.

CLion

January 29th, 2018 at 1:47 PM ^

It's also a lot of marquee match ups that are going to get a lot of attention. If we have a decent or better season, we are going to be in the spotlight a lot. It's an excellent chance to rebuild the hype for the program. 

CLion

January 29th, 2018 at 2:53 PM ^

I thought we would have a better season too. I have high hopes for this season. But I think it is objectively true that Michigan and Harbaugh were not in the same spotlight this fall as in years past that featured Harbaugh tirades, a better season in 2016, recruiting ridiculousness (camps, sleepovers, tree climbing), etc. That's just because there's always something new and better and my original point was, it won't take much for us to get back in the spotlight.

lilpenny1316

January 29th, 2018 at 1:47 PM ^

I think we have the goods to sweep the home schedule and the road schedule is getting a little easier.

ND is losing coaches and players are opting early for the NFL.  They won't have a game to work out the kinks with the turnover.

Sparty has lot the ability to go full disrespekt now.  Plus the B1G finally screwed them over by making them play NW, @PSU the two weeks prior to playing us.

There's a good chance we're playing OSU for a shot at Indy and a bigger prize.

reddogrjw

January 29th, 2018 at 1:33 PM ^

Notre Dame recruited well after 4-8

Florida State went 7-6 and is doing well (look at the average rating)

same for Texas

and Michigan State never got a top 5 class with their best seasons

being a blue-blood program matters more

and it isn't like we suck, we just aren't top 6, but we are already doing well in 2019 without playing another game

recruiting seems to be more about drive and relationship building - winning helps too, but good schools still recruit well even with an "off" season

trueblueintexas

January 29th, 2018 at 1:47 PM ^

I believe you are talking about a programs standing in general vs. the impact a specific season can have on a class. Kind of like the difference between climate and weather. 

Coaches don't change the benefits Michigan has of the Big House, weekly nationally televised games, history, etc. Those will insure Michigan stays near the top of recruiting. But losing out on a few top recruits because of the 2017 season performance definetly impacts the overall quality of the 2018 recruiting class. 

 

trueblueintexas

January 29th, 2018 at 6:09 PM ^

Before tracking recruiting was really a thing, yes. Seth has shown that the classes Moeller brought in would have been very highly ranked nationally. Carr continued to recruit at a top level for a good chunk of his career. So yes, when a good coach, who knows how to recruit is at Michigan, good talent comes. 

Despite the Rich Rod & Hoke expereinces, Michigan has conitnued to recruit at a top 25 level for the past decade.

As soon as Harbaugh arrived, Michigan moved back into a top 10 level with this year slipping out of top 10 but remaining top 20. 

If you consider elite to be only top 5, then no, but only OSU and maybe FSU could claim that kind of consistency over the past 30 years. Every other program has had their struggles. 

That is the great news about Michigan, there are built in factors which will always help Michigan recruit to a certain quality level. When the right factors exist, they can recruit very well.

Wolfman

January 29th, 2018 at 6:21 PM ^

known it. I'm speaking of none other than Bump Elliot. i can already see the many "WTFs" and raised eyebrows. However, and this includes all of those that took off when Bo was not in the vicinity to never return to MI football. 

Truth is Bo inherited more future AAs than during any other 5 year period in the history of the program including his tenure. There were players about three deep that could have started for all BIG schools outside Columbus. The fact he did not know what to do with them says a lot, but many including Bo, held him in very high esteem, as both a man and a football coach. Same is true of Bennie O. who inherited Fritz'a players took them to a NC and never came close to smelling one again. 

But yeah there was a period Michigan, possiby by mistake, was bringing in some of the best talent in the country. 

FatGuyTouchdown

January 29th, 2018 at 1:52 PM ^

had a longer track record of success with their current coaching staff. Florida State and Texas are both in more fertile states and have much better track records over the last 10 years than Michigan. Being a blue blood matters, but winning matters more. Michigan needs a B1G title soon to avoid falling even farther behind. Michigan has three ten win seasons in the last ten years. Current recruits have no recollection of Michigan as a blue blood. To put that number in persepective, Michigan has the same number of losing seasons as 10 win seasons. Time to win.

Chiwolve

January 29th, 2018 at 2:27 PM ^

Come on man -- this type of framing may work elsewhere, but not here

Michigan has three ten win seasons in the last ten years. 

Or you could say Michigan has two ten win seasons in the last three years...but I guess that doesn't support your story quite as nicely.

Chiwolve

January 29th, 2018 at 3:23 PM ^

Perhaps, but if we assume most of the kids we are recruiting are ~16-17 years old, then I would argue the last 3-5 years would matter significantly more than seasons that happened when they were 7-8 years old.

I think we can agree that more winning = better recruting.