Around the 'Shoe

It changes year to year. PSU used to give us a hard time till after a couple years of kicking their asses and now we recruit whoever we want from their state. Michigan got a win and had a good year last year. They have some momentum and are cashing in on it. They have something to sell the kids. That is going to dry up rather quick after Ohio sends them home with their tail between their legs. Hard to sell Michigan over Ohio State when you are getting your teeth kicked in year in and out. Bottom line is OSU is still far more talented than the current Michigan club. Those recruiting classes won't have a significant impact for another year or two and by then the momentum will be gone.

UFM is going to destroy the Michigan program and burn it to the ground then piss on its ashes.

I can actually argue against this post. I think Shane Morris is a better prospect than Barrett. It's true Barrett is a nearly perfect fit for Meyer's system, but the same could be said about Morris. I think Michigan has the lead in this case. And argument could also be made for the defensive front 7. Bosa is by far the best prospect of the group, but after Bosa, Price is a pretty good prospect and Sprinkle is a sleeper. While, McCray, Charlton, Gedeon are all between Price and Bosa on a talent scale.

So your answer to why Michigan had some momentum and OSU turning that around due to the difference in the quality of the head coach is to say......"It can't happen again because......we don't understand and are spoiled?"

Great point. Only you possess football understanding. The rest of the ignorant masses are enthralled by your wisdom. Lets forget how your point for the previous streak was the difference in head coaches even though that was my point as to why it will continue.

I hate to break it to you but the previous streak wasn't some freak accident. It was due to a process and it is repeatable.

Your statement made me want to hit somebody!!!! GO BUCKS!!!!!

Again, THEnb, I agree with your disagreement.

More than any other position, QBs are based on systems and Morris and Barrett are as different as Meyers's and Hoke's offenses. Neither is a good fit for the other school's system; hence, it's a push.

Between the two schools' offensive skill players, of our three, Marshall had an offer from scUM but Elliott and Baugh did not; of their four (the B/R writer somehow managed to overlook C'Sonte York), only Smith had an OSU offer but ours are all 4/5-stars by every recruiting service while theirs are 3/4-stars.

Defensively, I liked Gedeon but more for his versatility as an LB, FB, or H-back. He's the only one of their three front-seven recruits to get an offer from us; conversely, Bosa and Price both had offers from scUM, while Sprinkle did not.

All three of our DBs had offers from scUM; of their two, only Thomas had an OSU offer and he committed 9/10, nearly three months before Urban was hired.

If you look at it in terms of where they went head-to-head, seven of scUM's 17 recruits had OSU offers (Thomas, Fox, Kugler, Tuley-Tillman, Shallman, Smith and Gedeon), while seven of OSU's 11 recruits had scUM offers (Marshall, Burrows, Woodard, Thompson, Lisle, Bosa and Price), so on paper it appears pretty even but when you break it down by groups the way the writer did, the only one they've won is OL (which, in fairness, is admittedly impressive).

I appreciate what you are saying, but your basing you're argument on what if or on a possibility. I am sticking to put facts.

Or I could use the same assumption and say Sprinkle is starting to light it up and many are saying he should be a 4 star so he is one now, therefore he would beat Gedeon.

Sorry there is no comparison

Quarterbacks are often based on the system, but if they're both almost perfect fits for their system, do you want to rely on or what they have shown so far? The one knock on Morris is his inconsistency and which Shane Morris you will get that game or that camp. I haven't really heard any negatives about Barrett.

The reporter actually missed couple recruits but they were the lesser named ones.

I never really liked Gedeon and thought he was average compared to some of the prospects we offered and some of the ones we didnt offer like Kimbrough and McCray.

As for the DB's people keep talking about how Thomas had an offer. It irritates me when Michigan fans say that bc he got the offer 6 months after he committed to them and was already waist deep in them. I'm not breaking it down based on offers, but their protential. I think some of their players have really high potential.

Well the whole recruiting game is based on what ifs. Potential = What if/ what could be. I think Sprinkle is a high 3 star or a low 4 star. He isn't as highly ranked as Gedeon by any of the 3 major recruiting services. I think he has great potential though. I think if he shows more consistency in his burst and add more weight, he could be a hell of a strong side.

As I said in an earlier post, I'm not a big fan of Gedeon and never was. I think people base his ratings on his versatility and maybe the fact that he could be a great athlete once someone teaches him how to run. I think if he gets his running mechanics corrected, he could be a great inside linebacker.

I was just about to say... Southward actually had great players ahead of him and Taco didn't. Once again, valid argument but I would prefer to say Mike Thomas for the simple fact that no one knew who was playing over him. But, Taco's situation is kinda weird considering he has been holding offers since his sophomore year and gained more his junior year even though he didn't start. Nor does anyone remember the people who started over Barry Sanders.

But, back to Charlton. There may be multiple reasons why he didn't start. Maybe he's lazy, has a bad attitude missed practices, wasn't aggressive enough, etc. You can say he didn't start but you can't say he lacks the talent. He is a 4 star on every single recruiting board and website despite the fact that he didn't start. He also performed well at camps against other highly ranked players. Is that enough for someone to give him credit?

Mike Thomas played at Woodland Hills Taft as a senior. He had 86 catches for 1,656 yards and 21 TDs. His QB, Mike Bercovici, threw for 3,755 yards, 37 TDs and 9 INTs. He's a sophomore at Arizona State and 2nd on the Sun Devils' depth chart.

Thomas did not catch a pass as a junior in 2009 but Taft's leading receiver only had 391 yards. Their QB threw more INTs than TDs (12 to 11). They were a run-oriented team that year--their RB was ranked 9th nationally by Scout and signed with USC. So it sounds like it was a matter of the coach playing a system that he felt best suited his personnel. Another great case study of a kid coming out of nowhere.

Thomas was homeschooled as a sophomore and attended Westlake Village Oaks Christian as a freshman.

Damn you, damn your research, and damn wiki. Good research and you made a very good point, but all I was saying was we can't exactly say he's a bust or overrated when all these college coaches and recruiters at these camps say otherwise. And even without him starting, his tapes are incredible. I never sat and watched an entire game of his, but I think he showed great flashes on his tape.

So, the author is not looking at recruiting rankings by the paid services....he is going with how he feels OSU is doing?

For example, despite Shane Morris being rated significantly higher than Barrett on every site (247 is the only one where he is even close and Barrett is still twice as far down the list as Morris), this guy thinks it's a "PUSH." I know Barrett is a dual threat, but that doesn't explain why he rated lower than Morris. Pryor, Vince Young and Tebow were all top 10 guys in the overall rankings as dual-threat quarterbacks. OSU may be getting a fit for their system, but I guess this is a down year for dual-threat QBs, so it seems Barrett is less of a "prize." Also, the incorrect assumption that Morris would have to start as a true freshman is laughable.

Why do people ever share the Bleacher Report with other people? It is just a way to spread ignorance.