DB Reeves has PSU "slighty ahead" of UM
So, not to put a damper on the great Standifer news, but ESPN Insider Rumors page points to a pay-walled Rivals article that states Armani Reeves has Penn State slightly ahead of Michigan because of the opportunity to play both ways (DB and WR). Surprised Michigan wouldn't give him that same chance, but he says Michigan only wants him at CB.
Paging Mr. Morgan...Mr. Morgan you have a telephone call at the front desk.
...I am no longer worried about any single commit.
Hoke will keep going, and simply fill the spot with someone of equal or better quality.
Frankly, if Reeves is waiting...he may have no other choice than PSU.
I could't agree more.. I think Hoke has more than earned my trust on the recruiting trail.
Go Blue
I have Morgan signing "slightly ahead" of Reeves, so the point may be moot . . .
why we offered allen gant so early in the process, I was thinking he would have to camp for an offer. Naybe the coaches know something we dont...
From what I've seen on this site, Gant isn't exactly chopped liver. He has had injuries, and was once considered a top prospect. It is entirely possible that the coaching staff's evaluations don't match up to the recruiting sites.
After his freshman year and leading his team to a state championship, he was considered the TOP recruit in his class for the entire state of Ohio - that shows how highly he was considered. Then he had some injuries and didn't really move up while others did. He's a legacy kid, has always loved Michigan. We can assume he'll be a little better when fully healthy and that is good enough for our team, for sure. But also, this kid supposedly is a real hard worker and dedicated blue - you want those kind of people on your team to hold the team together. That is the lowest ceiling for him, but the highest ceiling is a little unknown seeing that he hasn't been too healthy the last two years.
Actually he rooted for tosu as a kid..... but he is fully onboard now and I agree with the possible upside... plus keeping someone in the "family" is good policy.
Naybe [sic] the coaches know something we dont...
You think?!?!?
every even remotely negative comment about a recruit as flaming. The "don't take shots at 18 year old kids" rule is a good one both because it's mean and because it's counterproductive, but all the post said was that he was surprised Gant got such an early offer. There's a difference between potshots and actual evaluation of the player, and "I'm not sure he was worthy of an early offer" is the latter (Magnus was a lot harsher than that in his evaluation).
would get defensive about a Michigan recruit and gant from all accounts seems like a real nice kid. I'm aware about his hamstring injuries and what he did his freshman year at Southview. But looking at his film, I didn't think it warranted an early offer espically when we are on some great DB prospects like Reeves and Morgan.
I understand what you're saying, but being purely a sunshine blower is counterproductive as well. I don't think there is anything wrong with talking about a recruits weaker points and even being pessimistic or thinking other recruits are better. I think having an opinion on these things is natural and to be limited to only saying every recruit is great is very close-minded and unrealistic. The recruiting sites don't give every kid 5-stars for a reason. Hopefully the doubt in the fanbase would only make the recruit want to be better, because frankly, if they turn out to be good, the fanbase will love them regardless of their impressions when the kid was recruited.
I think respect is the key thing when talking about recruits. Not every recruit is the best ever. Most have flaws and some aren't better than others, but you can still be negative about a recruit in a respectful way and hope for the best and that the coaches know something better. I don't think someone on a blog will turn a kid off from a school at this point in the process as long as they are respectful and not hateful.
If anything, we fans love it when our guys outperform their ratings. Nothing is more fun than to gloat about how our players were unappreciated. We break out the banner for Denard every chance we get . . .
Heck I don't know why the coaches even offered Morgan he's only a four star and the #19 ranked safety on scout we should have made sure the other 18 didn't want to come or maybe the coaches know more than me.
/
why we offered allen gant so early in the process, I was thinking he would have to camp for an offer. Naybe the coaches know something we dont...
People JUST explained it to you...
IIRC Gant was high on the early list for top players in Ohio. He has also been injured and being a two-way prospect, he is tough to scout.
is the one that really bothers me. Either someone is good enough to play at a program like Michigan, or they're not (this is not in any way intended as a commentary on whether Gant actually is good enough: I'm not qualified to judge).
Having family ties to the school doesn't help a team win football games. I hope that the staff decided that Gant was worthy of an early offer because they thought he was a good enough football player, not because of who he was related to.
I think whether or not legacy affects their performance is debateable. I know if I were offered and played for the school that my father went to, that'd be extra motivation to perform well (i.e. an 'intangible' asset).
Sure, it's not good to go around offering every former players' sons scholarships, but it in no way is a bad thing. At the very worst case, it's neutral that his father played for U-M, at best it's a tool for motivation and will help him push himself harder as both an athlete and a student.
For 13 recruits and give one the stink-eye. It's not hike uber alles 13/14ths of the time.
and I'm not wearing pants. So there.
pics or it didn't happen.
Errrr, wait.
Yea, I still stand by my comment.
You snooze, you lose... pretty soon it won't matter who you have "slightly" ahead.
<br>
<br>Go Blue
there's no need to make a jerky comment to some kid who dares have someone else ahead of Michigan.
Also it's likely a moot point once Morgan announces. Michigan isn't taking more than four DBs in this class.
who do you think we will sign as a QB
This is purely speculation on my part, but based on class size, any QB we take is likely going to be a QB/Ath that we can convert to a WR or something else. Doesn't make sense given that we have Morris locked up for next year and we need to micromanage the spots we have left to ensure we provide depth in the trenches.
is your name Brian?
Where the fuck are my pants?
Not sure, but it's too hot for pants, you should consider shorts.
Not sure, but it's too hot for pants, you should consider shorts.
but delivered in an overly snarky fashion. If Reeves goes elsewhere, I wish him all the best.
But he was also probably correct. If Morgan beats Reeves to the punch, I think the decision may be out of his (Reeves') hands.
In fact, there's a decent chance that Standifer's offer might force Morgan's hand.
Seen a lot worse than that. He's also spot on with the point.
2001 could have been Joe Pa's last year. I believe he's staying as long as he says he's staying.
Michigan has had a few players play both ways before, heck we've had a few DB's play 2 ways before, double-heck, we've had kids play 2 sports before, triple-heck, we're recruiting a lineman who wants to play 2 sports right now! I respect Reeves leanings, but his reasoning? Not so much.
and I'm happy. If Reeves likes PSU slightly more than I wish him success there. There is no reason to worry over one commit, with the way this class is filling up. Either you want to be a Wolverine or you don't. Didn't they get the memo that Michigan is the Texas of the midwest when it comes to recruiting (lol)
and move on to the lines, +2 WRs.
So, wait.....what in the heck is the latest on Morgan? I thought it would be blatantly visible somewhere but must have missed it.
His announcement was originally yesterday but moved a while back to today......now I'm not sure of any of the details. Is it a tentative situation?