2016 OG Thiyo Lukusa commits to Michigan State
Traverse City (MI) West offensive guard Thiyo Lukusa committed to Michigan State last night. This is not notable so much for the fact that it's MSU, but because Lukusa was an in-state guy who was once very close to committing to Michigan. Supposedly, Harbaugh's staff was not particularly hard after Lukusa and didn't contact him for a while after they were hired. Lukusa's a 247 Composite 3-star and #346 overall.
I've been saying this since he was first recruited, so it's not just because he committed to MSU - I'm not a big fan of Lukusa. He's probably limited to offensive guard, and he's not particularly athletic. I had him ranked #7 in-state (not including Daelin Hayes, so probably #8) but it's not a particularly strong year within the state, in my opinion. I think Michigan has bigger fish to fry and can get some better prospects, although it may take a while because Harbaugh is recruiting out-of-state guys, many of whom haven't visited.
But I'm not that high on Lukusa either. I'd probably have him close to around #10 in state. Lukusa is big. But he doesn't move well, which hurts him at OT, but he is stiff in the hips and struggles getting leverage, which doesn't make him a great fit on the interior either. He's basically a lesser Braden.
But overall, I think this is a pretty deep year in-state with plenty of talent worth going after. I think there are probably 25 or so Power 5 players in Michigan this year.
I think there are a fair amount of Power Five types of players, but the big fish run out after about four or five guys. I assume Daelin Hayes is good even though he hasn't actually played much football, and then I'm high on Corley, Hill, Falcon, and Jordan. By comparison, I think the 2017 class is going to be significantly stronger.
EDIT: Regarding Lukusa in general, that's why I'm not a huge fan. He lacks the feet for OT and struggles with the leverage to play OG/C, so he's a developmental prospect anywhere you put him.
But his ceiling is probably limited. His feet will mostly improve just from losing bad weight. But I don't expect his feet to ever be good enough to be an OT. Hips and flexibility can be improved through the S&C program, but that's a pretty difficult thing to get significantly better as well.
Basically, yeah. He tried to commit to Michigan at one point but Hoke told him to wait until he explored the recruiting process more.
Hello K.J. Cos.............oh.....yeah.
Lukusa has always been big, but he has stiff hips and doesn't have great feet. The reason the last staff was after him, and a lot of other staffs, was because of his potential once he grew into his body. But he kind of plateaued a bit.
Harbaugh's staff wasn't the only one that apparently slowed their roll with Lukusa. OSU did to some degree, though kept in closer contact. MSU's staff actually did for a little bit until relatively recently.
What sucks about this, as Magnus points out, is that it's another in-state player going to MSU, and MSU is just gaining more momentum in-state. A lot of the top targets (Corley, Hill) look to be possibibly leaning toward MSU as well, and a few other good Midwest targets are quite high on MSU too.
MSU is going to have a good year recruiting. They've sustained success and only improved their success outside of one bad year in the past half decade. Most of these guys are play A guys for Dantonio and his staff. But the players still need to develop. Dantonio has had a great track record of developing guys, but some of his higher rated prospects didn't develop as well as some of the others. It looks like MSU will be good for a while, which is expected from that staff, it's just time for Michigan to step up their game on the field and win back some momentum.
To your geographical point, this is why I was optimistic about OSU taking Alabi's commitment in the 2015 class; I don't see him as a spectacular prospect, but as long as there's a handful of Cass Tech, or even Detroit area kids on the roster, the coaches have more access in the area and more pull based on relationships.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I wouldn't say Corley is the ONLY shot they have. Hill was interested in MSU at one point and doesn't seem 100% solid to PSU. Onwenu's probably leaning toward Michigan but has some friends headed to MSU. Kareem was committed to MSU for a little bit. So I think they at least have a chance at a few of those guys.
Hill visited MSU yesterday with Corley. They seem pretty confident he is flipping, he's also up to #64 overall in the class.
Not worried about Lukasa at all, seems like a good kid, but he's not an elite prospect.
I think Levert Hill is the best in state prospect in the class. He is absolutely scary good. Look at some of his one on ones in the camp and he was so shut down on receivers I couldn't believe. He intercepted a majority of the balls and made guys like Des Fitzpatrick look like they were in middle school. This video he is in the first few one on ones
That's the story with Lavert Hill - he's good in camp settings, not so special with pads on.
but when I read off the top 5-8 list in state, I expect Michigan to land at least half of the ones they want. MSU, ND, USC or whoever may pick off a couple of the elite guys, but we should get the bulk of them.
Now that narrative seems to have been flipped and people are saying stuff like MSU (!) won't be in on that many of them. There was a time where MSU getting any of the elite guys was coup for them. BLERG
Pardon my ignorance...
Since the end of last football season Tennessee, Arkansas, Iowa, and Auburn have all offered Lukusa. Why are they offering if the kid has already plateaued?
Just because he's hit a "plateau" doesn't mean he's unworthy of an offer. He's still 6'5" and 300 lbs., so he's going to get offers. But he was ranked pretty high early in the process (top 200 or 250, IIRC), and now he's starting to drop. Ultimately, every program needs to fill their quota of players.
It's good to see this report, since it's fun to keep track of these things. But if Harbaugh's staff had not been in contact with him much, it's safe to assume that they were not hard after Lukusa. My distinct impression is that this staff is not one to attack a recruiting assignment with ordinary enthusiasm.
All the folks on the board rending their garments because MSU is getting commitments should take a deep breath, and realize that both MSU and Michigan will fill up their recruiting classes. I trust that Harbaugh and Co. can still evaluate talent, and do not perceive this as a "miss". I also think that while MSU may win a few recruiting battles moving forward, I think Michigan will win the vast bulk of those battles.
(Of course some of those "battles" will appear lost because the kid in question does not qualify academically at Michigan. And, of course, some kids will simply prefer MSU - weird as that seems to most of us.)
Again...
"Of course some of those "battles" will appear lost because the kid in question does not qualify academically at Michigan. "
There isn't a battle to be lost (due to academics) against any other B10 (or FBS for that matter) school. Until we have clear evidence of a change in procedure, the acceptance standard at Michigan is the exact same as OSU, or IU, or KU, UCLA, UF etc...The NCAA minimum.
And a coaching program will also take into account whether a kid is an academic risk - i.e., is there a significant risk this kid will wash out academically. RichRod (who I liked) was much more likely to take a gamble on a kid than, say, Lloyd Carr. Harbaugh does not strike me as one to take big gambles on low qualifiers.
Other schools are much more likely to take a gamble on a kid, especially ones with less competitive academic environments. (NOT to suggest that MSU is not a good school. But as competitive as Michigan? Nawh.)
Wisconsin also cleary is upping their game in terms of admittance. There was a highly ranked DT last year they could not get in, who flipped to MSU. And based on the rumblings of their HC departure his inability to get in some kids weighed on his decision to leave.
I don't think the thrust of what he's saying is entirely encapsulated here. The NCAA rules are the same, but that doesn't mean all schools within the NCAA will accept the exact same kids. Some kids - based on test scores, classes taken, grades, etc. - will not be accepted by the University of Michigan. This popped up a few years ago when, essentially, the admissions department told Rich Rodriguez that he was taking too many academic risks and needed to cut back.
People who write
There isn't a battle to be lost (due to academics) against any other B10 (or FBS for that matter) school.
shouldn't really accuse others of writing "nonsense". Do you really think that the admissions standards at, e.g., EMU are not lower than at Michigan? I know the father of one of their recent recruits well, and can assure you that they are. And, as I write separately, there are different coaching philosophies as to whether to take a low qualifier that can result in Michigan not offering a kid who might get other B1G offers.
Glass houses, and all that.
The admissions policies for the general student populations at UM and EMU are obviously different...And while some of the anecdotes offered up are worth some consideration (including RichRod taking too many recruits of a certain academic profile)...For the right talent, Michigan has and will take an NCAA minimum qualifier...And the bottom line remains that Michigan's admittance standards (perhaps floor would be a more apt term for the right situation) are no different (again, for prospective football recruits) than Alabama's or MSU's or Oregon's.
The poster in this thread that observed that Northwestern has a higher minimum standard is correct, and as I understand it, Wisconsin has a very specific core course requirement that also can affect potential acceptance (although I've also been told that their GPA/test score scale is essentially the same as everyone else's.
The floor is the same, but that doesn't mean Michigan will take AS MANY risks (or any, if they can help it).
I don't think there's a school in the league that's going to load up on academic risks...The point was and remains, that academic qualification has not been - and most likely will continue to not be - a reason Michigan Football loses out on a recruit it truly wants...And that's been the case for a long time. From low-qualifiers to actual non qualifiers. Where there was a will, there's been a way.
You keep doubling down on silly arguments, which is ... in a way ... admirable. There are three levels that academic admissions standards can be set for football players.
- First, by the NCAA. That's the floor that's common to all schools.
- Second, the B1G can (and does) establish admissions minimums that are common to all member institutions, which are higher than the overall NCAA floor.*
- Third, the individual school can (and does) establish admissions minimums which are higher than the overall Conference floor. That's where intra-conference differences arise.
Nobody is saying that the football players don't get admitted that might not otherwise qualify for admission at all B1G schools. If you're relying on that, it's not at issue.
But schools do have different admissions policies, and coaches have different philosophies regarding taking a chance on a kid with spotty qualifications. Some are up against burgeoning APR issues, while others aren't. There are several academic factors that can come into play. And that fact is why some recruiting battles will be lost due to academics - and why your position is nonsense.
*This is why your argument that Bama, Oregon and Michigan have the same "admissions floor" is silly. Or should I say "nonsense"?
For a better fit. I'm fully aware of each tier of the academic qualification process (I went through it)...I'm also fully aware of a number of the aforementioned schools' requirements (went through that too).
Let me put it to you this way, there has not been, nor will there be, an example of a prospective football recruit that Harbaugh and company truly want, that they couldn't get into the school as long as that prospective recruit meets the NCAA and Conference's minimum standard. Low qualifiers, non-qualifiers...It's all already been done in Ann Arbor, and unless Harbaugh and the University officially change policy, it'll be done again.
Protip 1: It's disrespectful to attack someone's position as "nonsense" even if you're correct. You're not correct here (by your own inadvertent admission - see Protip 2).
Protip 2: If you are "fully aware of each tier of the academic qualification process", then don't also write stuff like "the bottom line remains that Michigan's admittance standards ... are no different (again, for football recruits) than Alabama's or MSU's or Oregon's". You can't be taken seriously if you admit that different conferences have different academic floors and still (in the same thread!) maintain that the academic floors are the same between conferences.
Protip 3: When you lead off your argument by calling someone else's position "nonsense" and you're wrong (again, see Protip 2), you're inviting condescension.
You're welcome.
Perhaps I can help you guys out a bit by example.
See Exhibit 1, Aaron Burbridge.