Online Now 2923

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2298
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 2993
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

The Official Michigan, MSU, and 1 Random Guy from Arky Thread

  • D.Wags said...

    I'd rather have a five star at position than a three star at position as I don't follow recruiting so I'll have blind faith in what those magazine guys say. However, victories in the fall will forever trump star rating. We can argue "future" and "potential" all we want, but arguing scoreboard is only reserved for the most dillusiional fans.

    I get the excitement of having great recruiting classes, but give me the better feeling of walking out of a stadium with a victory.

    Every person in this thread agrees with you, and it was nice watching Michigan win their 11 games and BCS Bowl game last year. It has been 6 months since either teams played a meaningful game, we have had the discussions on better team, better season, signing day, spring practices, spring game, scheme, blocking, spread option, pre-season magazines, your romance novel collection... Recruiting is one of the things that is year round.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • Peterklima said...

    Worship at a "star alter"? You are crazy. I am just rebutting idiotic State fans that think recruiting rankings don't matter at all. they obviously do matter some. It's not random. The people who work at these sites may be fallable as well as incomplete, but no where near the level you would need to claim it is random.

    Obviously come pan out and others don't, but it is the best THIRD-PARTY indicator of talent out there/

    Instead you think how a plyer "flashed ability" in a back-up role or Spring Camp Coaches' Hype is better? Really, either our un-professional analysis of talent or sunshine blowing by the coaches? So either unqualified opinions by fans OR biased/motivational opinions of coaches.....are better than professional, third-parties trying hard to get it right?

    I don't worship at the alter of stars, but I recognize it is the lesser of all evils when it comes to evaluating pure talent.

    No, your rebuttal to everything is that stars matter. You're argument about UM's DL this year? Campbell was a 5-star, so he could be good. Argument about OL Depth? Well, our true FR have a lot of stars. Argument about the future? Star so hard; UM and tOSU will dominate the Big 10 in 2014 and beyond because of recruiting rankings. Nevermind the fact that over half of each team's 2014 team hasn't even played 1 down of CFB.

    I get that rankings are fun, and it's better to have a highly rated class than a lower-rated one. That's fine; you can be excited about the potential of incoming kids, etc. My issue is that you often ignore the on-field play of kids, or complete lack thereof, in favor of looking at their star rankings out of HS. Off of that, football is not a hyper-complicated sport. Watch it for awhile and you can tell who's good and who's bad. Quite frankly I'd take our unprofessional analysis of a guy on the field, against D-1 talent at the college level over the recruiting rankings out of HS.

    That means I'd take anything a kid does in college over what someone saw him do in HS. The further away a kid gets from HS, the less relevant those rankings become. Have an RB that breaks a few big runs in a reserve role? Great, talk about his potential as a home-run threat for the upcoming season. Back-up CB starts a few games due to injury, gets some PBU and maybe an INT? Sweet, looks like he can play. Have a returning All-American at LB? Fantastic, looks like that'll really solidify your front-7.

    Get a bunch of highly touted true FR? Cool, talk to me when they do something on the field. That's all I'm really asking for here.

    You're also mistaking 3rd party for "unbiased". These sites are businesses, with an emphasis on making paying customers, in this case, fans, happy. This isn't an independent scouting service for coaches, where the priority is on finding the best raw talent. That would be an unbiased opinion, because those scouts make their $$ by actually having the players they scout pan out for the coaches that recruit them. I like discussing recruiting and it's fun to talk about potential, but I stop at predicting player X will do Y because he had star rating Z.

    For instance, MSU could have 3 4-star WRs (Burbridge, Madaris, Arnett), a 4-star TE (Sims) and a 4-star QB (Maxwell) starting this year, with the lone new OL starter being a 4-star as well (Treadwell). Do you hear us proclaiming that MSU's passing O is going to be great? Furthermore, do I hear you proclaiming that MSU should be just fine in the passing game? Absolutely not. Why? None of them are proven. We both know that. We both agree. The problem is that you apply that logic to MSU . . . but turn a blind eye when it comes to your team.

    If you're not going to give MSU's 4-stars the benefit of the doubt for this upcoming season, when some of them have even seen the field in their careers, then don't expect us to quake in our boots over UM's latest hauls, or recruiting rankings in general.

    I'm just applying the same logic to recruiting overall as you've applied to MSU for this upcoming season. If you want to get all up in arms about it, then maybe you should revise your predictions for Maxwell and Co., and just maybe your predictions for MSU as a whole.

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky ●

  • AUBonner said...

    You guys have an awesome rivalry but at the same time have intelligent conversation.... Let's just say I am here doing research on how you guys make it work... However, I believe there is no hope for my counterpart.,

    You missed the part where we called each other poopy-heads for 7 pages, followed by 11 pages of yo-mamma jokes.

    This post was edited by SpartanRocky on 7/3/2012 at 10:24 AM

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky ●

  • AUBonner said...

    every page of our thread is the same way... I came here this morning and saw an intelligent debate on star ratings and draft picks... Will read again...

    Ours changes with who is posting on both sides. Sometimes good, sometimes not so good.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • D.Wags said...

    I'd rather have a five star at position than a three star at position as I don't follow recruiting so I'll have blind faith in what those magazine guys say. However, victories in the fall will forever trump star rating. We can argue "future" and "potential" all we want, but arguing scoreboard is only reserved for the most dillusiional fans.

    I get the excitement of having great recruiting classes, but give me the better feeling of walking out of a stadium with a victory.

    For someone who constantly says he doesn't follow recruiting, you always seem to insert yourself into every conversation about recruiting. Why is that?

    MrWoodson ●

  • Peterklima said...

    You first need to understand the difference between physical talent and coaches developing players. You don't.

    roflmao

    Why do you think I talk so much about waiting to see them play on the field? Because physical talent is only part of the battle. Come on now.

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky ●

  • SpartanRocky said...

    No, your rebuttal to everything is that stars matter. You're argument about UM's DL this year? Campbell was a 5-star, so he could be good. Argument about OL Depth? Well, our true FR have a lot of stars. Argument about the future? Star so hard; UM and tOSU will dominate the Big 10 in 2014 and beyond because of recruiting rankings. Nevermind the fact that over half of each team's 2014 team hasn't even played 1 down of CFB.

    I get that rankings are fun, and it's better to have a highly rated class than a lower-rated one. That's fine; you can be excited about the potential of incoming kids, etc. My issue is that you often ignore the on-field play of kids, or complete lack thereof, in favor of looking at their star rankings out of HS. Off of that, football is not a hyper-complicated sport. Watch it for awhile and you can tell who's good and who's bad. Quite frankly I'd take our unprofessional analysis of a guy on the field, against D-1 talent at the college level over the recruiting rankings out of HS.

    That means I'd take anything a kid does in college over what someone saw him do in HS. The further away a kid gets from HS, the less relevant those rankings become. Have an RB that breaks a few big runs in a reserve role? Great, talk about his potential as a home-run threat for the upcoming season. Back-up CB starts a few games due to injury, gets some PBU and maybe an INT? Sweet, looks like he can play. Have a returning All-American at LB? Fantastic, looks like that'll really solidify your front-7.

    Get a bunch of highly touted true FR? Cool, talk to me when they do something on the field. That's all I'm really asking for here.

    You're also mistaking 3rd party for "unbiased". These sites are businesses, with an emphasis on making paying customers, in this case, fans, happy. This isn't an independent scouting service for coaches, where the priority is on finding the best raw talent. That would be an unbiased opinion, because those scouts make their $$ by actually having the players they scout pan out for the coaches that recruit them. I like discussing recruiting and it's fun to talk about potential, but I stop at predicting player X will do Y because he had star rating Z.

    For instance, MSU could have 3 4-star WRs (Burbridge, Madaris, Arnett), a 4-star TE (Sims) and a 4-star QB (Maxwell) starting this year, with the lone new OL starter being a 4-star as well (Treadwell). Do you hear us proclaiming that MSU's passing O is going to be great? Furthermore, do I hear you proclaiming that MSU should be just fine in the passing game? Absolutely not. Why? None of them are proven. We both know that. We both agree. The problem is that you apply that logic to MSU . . . but turn a blind eye when it comes to your team.

    If you're not going to give MSU's 4-stars the benefit of the doubt for this upcoming season, when some of them have even seen the field in their careers, then don't expect us to quake in our boots over UM's latest hauls, or recruiting rankings in general.

    I'm just applying the same logic to recruiting overall as you've applied to MSU for this upcoming season. If you want to get all up in arms about it, then maybe you should revise your predictions for Maxwell and Co., and just maybe your predictions for MSU as a whole.

    clap

    OTPT

  • D.Wags said...

    We can argue "future" and "potential" all we want, but arguing scoreboard is only reserved for the most dillusiional fans.

    I think you may have forgotten a word or two in that sentence.

    Anyway, obviously, the whole point is to win. The person who raised this issue mentioned Nebraska not having as much talent on the roster. That person thinks it means UM will win. Fine. It, of course, doesn't mean they will win. We are just in the prediction game.

    Recruiting is always big...to every CFB team. Michigan fans might be more into recruiting this year for two reasons: 1. They are doing better than in the last few years, and 2. the coach at Michigan is much better than the one who failed to develop those previous (slightly lower, but still top 25) recruiting classes the last couple years.

    Think about it as a Michigan fan, Hoke took over about the same level of talent as Rich Rod....and Hoke won AS MANY B10 GAMES IN ONE YEAR AS RICHROD DID IN THREE YEARS...and he won a "big bowl game." Now, Michigan fans see even higher talent (i.e. potential) kids coming through the door to that coaching staff. It seems very likely to lead to much more "walking out the stadium with a victory" for UM fans,

    Peterklima ●

  • SpartanRocky said...

    No, your rebuttal to everything is that stars matter. You're argument about UM's DL this year? Campbell was a 5-star, so he could be good. Argument about OL Depth? Well, our true FR have a lot of stars. Argument about the future? Star so hard; UM and tOSU will dominate the Big 10 in 2014 and beyond because of recruiting rankings. Nevermind the fact that over half of each team's 2014 team hasn't even played 1 down of CFB.

    I get that rankings are fun, and it's better to have a highly rated class than a lower-rated one. That's fine; you can be excited about the potential of incoming kids, etc. My issue is that you often ignore the on-field play of kids, or complete lack thereof, in favor of looking at their star rankings out of HS. Off of that, football is not a hyper-complicated sport. Watch it for awhile and you can tell who's good and who's bad. Quite frankly I'd take our unprofessional analysis of a guy on the field, against D-1 talent at the college level over the recruiting rankings out of HS.

    That means I'd take anything a kid does in college over what someone saw him do in HS. The further away a kid gets from HS, the less relevant those rankings become. Have an RB that breaks a few big runs in a reserve role? Great, talk about his potential as a home-run threat for the upcoming season. Back-up CB starts a few games due to injury, gets some PBU and maybe an INT? Sweet, looks like he can play. Have a returning All-American at LB? Fantastic, looks like that'll really solidify your front-7.

    Get a bunch of highly touted true FR? Cool, talk to me when they do something on the field. That's all I'm really asking for here.

    You're also mistaking 3rd party for "unbiased". These sites are businesses, with an emphasis on making paying customers, in this case, fans, happy. This isn't an independent scouting service for coaches, where the priority is on finding the best raw talent. That would be an unbiased opinion, because those scouts make their $$ by actually having the players they scout pan out for the coaches that recruit them. I like discussing recruiting and it's fun to talk about potential, but I stop at predicting player X will do Y because he had star rating Z.

    For instance, MSU could have 3 4-star WRs (Burbridge, Madaris, Arnett), a 4-star TE (Sims) and a 4-star QB (Maxwell) starting this year, with the lone new OL starter being a 4-star as well (Treadwell). Do you hear us proclaiming that MSU's passing O is going to be great? Furthermore, do I hear you proclaiming that MSU should be just fine in the passing game? Absolutely not. Why? None of them are proven. We both know that. We both agree. The problem is that you apply that logic to MSU . . . but turn a blind eye when it comes to your team.

    If you're not going to give MSU's 4-stars the benefit of the doubt for this upcoming season, when some of them have even seen the field in their careers, then don't expect us to quake in our boots over UM's latest hauls, or recruiting rankings in general.

    I'm just applying the same logic to recruiting overall as you've applied to MSU for this upcoming season. If you want to get all up in arms about it, then maybe you should revise your predictions for Maxwell and Co., and just maybe your predictions for MSU as a whole.

    I really haven't seen him say recruiting stars are the end all be all. It is a factor, bit not the only factor.

    Similar to how you talked about RSing almost the entire class last year means those guys will be better than their "star" rankings. I think you went with, a 3* would then be a 3.5* or 4*.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    I really haven't seen him say recruiting stars are the end all be all. It is a factor, bit not the only factor.

    Similar to how you talked about RSing almost the entire class last year means those guys will be better than their "star" rankings. I think you went with, a 3* would then be a 3.5* or 4*.

    Peter has claimed before that the game is over for MSU in a few years because of the talent gap widening...

    OTPT

  • MrWoodson said...

    For someone who constantly says he doesn't follow recruiting, you always seem to insert yourself into every conversation about recruiting. Why is that?

    1 it's a message board

    2. I do have opinions about recruiting. Just not the same as you and that gets you angry. So regardless of that Im allowed to on a message board.

    3. I love the fact you have to comment on everyone of my posts and start threads specifically about me on your board. I've pretty much put a tent inside your head. I don't believe I'll be starting a thread in regards to you anytime soon.

    4. You are the fan that would argue scoreboard results and that's amusing.

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    I really haven't seen him say recruiting stars are the end all be all. It is a factor, bit not the only factor.

    Similar to how you talked about RSing almost the entire class last year means those guys will be better than their "star" rankings. I think you went with, a 3* would then be a 3.5* or 4*.

    That's odd, because I thought the Sparty argument was that stars don't matter. Why would you hold a player back for a year to increase his star value if stars don't matter?

    MrWoodson ●

  • D.Wags said...

    1 it's a message board

    2. I do have opinions about recruiting. Just not the same as you and that gets you angry. So regardless of that Im allowed to on a message board.

    3. I love the fact you have to comment on everyone of my posts and start threads specifically about me on your board. I've pretty much put a tent inside your head. I don't believe I'll be starting a thread in regards to you anytime soon.

    4. You are the fan that would argue scoreboard results and that's amusing.

    How can you have opinions about recruiting when you don't follow it? I guess that would make them uninformed opinions, right?

    MrWoodson ●

  • MrWoodson said...

    That's odd, because I thought the Sparty argument was that stars don't matter. Why would you hold a player back for a year to increase his star value if stars don't matter?

    Classic having a decent discussion and then this guy comes in..

    it's not about "raising their star value", it's about the player getting more time in the system, practicing, more college weight room time, blah blah blah, etc.

    OTPT

  • OTPT said...

    Peter has claimed before that the game is over for MSU in a few years because of the talent gap widening...

    Really, is that worse than someone claiming a team can't win because the opponent is wearing pro combat unis?

    No matter the talent level, the Michigan/MSU game will be competive almost every year.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • Peterklima said...

    I think you may have forgotten a word or two in that sentence.

    Anyway, obviously, the whole point is to win. The person who raised this issue mentioned Nebraska not having as much talent on the roster. That person thinks it means UM will win. Fine. It, of course, doesn't mean they will win. We are just in the prediction game.

    Recruiting is always big...to every CFB team. Michigan fans might be more into recruiting this year for two reasons: 1. They are doing better than in the last few years, and 2. the coach at Michigan is much better than the one who failed to develop those previous (slightly lower, but still top 25) recruiting classes the last couple years.

    Think about it as a Michigan fan, Hoke took over about the same level of talent as Rich Rod....and Hoke won AS MANY B10 GAMES IN ONE YEAR AS RICHROD DID IN THREE YEARS...and he won a "big bowl game." Now, Michigan fans see even higher talent (i.e. potential) kids coming through the door to that coaching staff. It seems very likely to lead to much more "walking out the stadium with a victory" for UM fans,

    Michigan's bad year in recruit rankings would be msu's best year. We have to live with that and do our best. That's for sure. Hoke is a coach that seems to motivate his players. So far I'm impressed with what I see.

    Sue me for saying regardless of all of that, I'd still take our roster and staff over yours going into next year given the choice. That may change, but nit this year.

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • OTPT said...

    Peter has claimed before that the game is over for MSU in a few years because of the talent gap widening...

    Peter is right.

    MrWoodson ●

  • MrWoodson said...

    That's odd, because I thought the Sparty argument was that stars don't matter. Why would you hold a player back for a year to increase his star value if stars don't matter?

    I'd rather have a 23 year old playing for me that came in as a three who has had five years of strength, conditioning and coaching then a second year four star. I'm thrilled MSU has finally been able to do that.

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    Really, is that worse than someone claiming a team can't win because the opponent is wearing pro combat unis?

    No matter the talent level, the Michigan/MSU game will be competive almost every year.

    I didn't claim that. But good deflection to take away from his stupid prediction. Said the team would be ready to play, regardless of the bye week.

    Shit, if you threw that out, let's all remind xxmgobluexx that he still has his alma mater to root for even if Michigan struggles

    OTPT

  • MrWoodson said...

    Peter is right.

    Yeah, because we play Michigan every single week of the season.

    OTPT

  • MrWoodson said...

    How can you have opinions about recruiting when you don't follow it? I guess that would make them uninformed opinions, right?

    lol no I'm reading what all the "informed" people say about these kids. You know, the guys that have watched all the film on them.

    lol

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • OTPT said...

    I didn't claim that. But good deflection to take away from his stupid prediction. Said the team would be ready to play, regardless of the bye week.

    Shit, if you threw that out, let's all remind xxmgobluexx that he still has his alma mater to root for even if Michigan struggles

    So much for having a decent discussion.

    MrWoodson ●

  • OTPT said...

    It's michigan at home, wearing pro combats. The players will be ready to play.

    Pro combat bump.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • SpartanRocky said...

    No, your rebuttal to everything is that stars matter. You're argument about UM's DL this year? Campbell was a 5-star, so he could be good. Argument about OL Depth? Well, our true FR have a lot of stars. Argument about the future? Star so hard; UM and tOSU will dominate the Big 10 in 2014 and beyond because of recruiting rankings. Nevermind the fact that over half of each team's 2014 team hasn't even played 1 down of CFB.

    I get that rankings are fun, and it's better to have a highly rated class than a lower-rated one. That's fine; you can be excited about the potential of incoming kids, etc. My issue is that you often ignore the on-field play of kids, or complete lack thereof, in favor of looking at their star rankings out of HS. Off of that, football is not a hyper-complicated sport. Watch it for awhile and you can tell who's good and who's bad. Quite frankly I'd take our unprofessional analysis of a guy on the field, against D-1 talent at the college level over the recruiting rankings out of HS.

    That means I'd take anything a kid does in college over what someone saw him do in HS. The further away a kid gets from HS, the less relevant those rankings become. Have an RB that breaks a few big runs in a reserve role? Great, talk about his potential as a home-run threat for the upcoming season. Back-up CB starts a few games due to injury, gets some PBU and maybe an INT? Sweet, looks like he can play. Have a returning All-American at LB? Fantastic, looks like that'll really solidify your front-7.

    Get a bunch of highly touted true FR? Cool, talk to me when they do something on the field. That's all I'm really asking for here.

    You're also mistaking 3rd party for "unbiased". These sites are businesses, with an emphasis on making paying customers, in this case, fans, happy. This isn't an independent scouting service for coaches, where the priority is on finding the best raw talent. That would be an unbiased opinion, because those scouts make their $$ by actually having the players they scout pan out for the coaches that recruit them. I like discussing recruiting and it's fun to talk about potential, but I stop at predicting player X will do Y because he had star rating Z.

    For instance, MSU could have 3 4-star WRs (Burbridge, Madaris, Arnett), a 4-star TE (Sims) and a 4-star QB (Maxwell) starting this year, with the lone new OL starter being a 4-star as well (Treadwell). Do you hear us proclaiming that MSU's passing O is going to be great? Furthermore, do I hear you proclaiming that MSU should be just fine in the passing game? Absolutely not. Why? None of them are proven. We both know that. We both agree. The problem is that you apply that logic to MSU . . . but turn a blind eye when it comes to your team.

    If you're not going to give MSU's 4-stars the benefit of the doubt for this upcoming season, when some of them have even seen the field in their careers, then don't expect us to quake in our boots over UM's latest hauls, or recruiting rankings in general.

    I'm just applying the same logic to recruiting overall as you've applied to MSU for this upcoming season. If you want to get all up in arms about it, then maybe you should revise your predictions for Maxwell and Co., and just maybe your predictions for MSU as a whole.

    1. The "recruiting sites" just try to appease the biggest fanbases is something small fanbases say, but it doesn't make it true. They generally want to be right about a kid so they are trusted in the future. Scout has been inaccurate and it is hurting for it (from what I can tell. I disagree that it is all about appeasing fanbases. In fact, they often rank kids before those kids even narrow their list. You think they reach out to the kids first to see if they have USC on their list and then rank them high...or do you think they rank the kids based on objective analysis? Please give me some evidence they weight their rankings toward "elite" schools. If MSU picks up a kid (or any BCS school) he usually gets a bump from no stars to a 2 or 3 star player. The sites "put him on their lists" at the bottom rung. But, they don't rank guys as 4 stars and 5 stars AFTER they commit to a big-time program, just to appease those fans.

    2. No one here has said that a 4 or 5 star will be great their first year. Some people HOPE that, but no one predicts it. At most, you might say you think he will play right away, but not that he is going to be an All-American.

    3. Likewise, I apply predictions based on stars the same (depending on the position). I think Kalis could play this year, but I don't think he will be near as good as Lewan. For MSU, some high ranked WR may play, but I don't think they are going to be near as good as Cunningham, etc. in the way of production. There is nothing inconsistent there.

    THE REAL PROBLEM for MSU's passing game (and offense as a whole) is that it needs MULTIPLE young guys at the skill positions to play really well as inexperienced players. (i.e., x-factors at QB, WR and to a degree RB all have to work out in some degree to come close to last year's offense). While at Michigan, there is one new guy on the DL and a new guy on the OL and a couple new WR. They have other guys at the same position that ARE experienced. (It is especially hard for QBs, since they play alone and are so important.) So, Kalis may be a "below average" B10 player at his position, but UM can still have a good offensive line in spite of that. Everyone has weak links.

    Peterklima ●

  • The talent gap is widening? I guess we'll have to find out if this is true on the field. I'm confident in Coach Dantonio's ability to find talent and his ability to coach them up, are Michigan fans sure Hoke and his staff is good enough to do the same? I believe the gap is not enough until I see it on the field then we'll talk a few years from now to see.

    Being called a sunshine blower is not insulting to me and I'm proud to be one.

    SpartyFever

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports