Mailbag: Hockey's Early Entry Trend, Manning Move Motivation
![11035686056_ecb401b24f_z[1]](http://mgoblog.com/sites/mgoblog.com/files/images/04cd2fa73a94_CC9C/11035686056_ecb401b24f_z1.jpg "11035686056_ecb401b24f_z[1]")
Early hockey entries: a trend? One applicable to basketball?
Brian,
With both Zach Werenski and Noah Hanifin (BC) graduating high school a year early to play for their respective schools, do you think this might be an emerging trend among schools looking to secure top end talent? Or at least secure them for more than a season?
Also, seems like there could be applicability to basketball. If he's academically eligible, bring a guy a year early. A lot of the high-end recruits are probably about as college ready at 17 as they would be at 18. Is this a possibility for schools or do you think Werenski and Hanifin are the rare exceptions?
-Brandon
Don't forget BU's Jack Eichel, who is joining Werenski and Hanifin in college this fall after accelerating. That's three, and that's a trend. And it's one that makes sense. The USA NTDP U-18 plays a schedule heavy with exhibitions against college teams, and they're competitive. You could take the top guys on those teams and put them on a second or third line and they'd be fine, if not better.
Then you probably will get them for a second or even third year instead of one, two, or—increasingly likely as the prospects get more and more touted—zero. One of the most interesting aspects of this new version of early enrollment is that all of these guys are leaving the NTDP a year early. That does not happen often because the NTDP contract comes with a clause that forces you to repay the costs of your first year in the program if you leave before the second.
Given that it seems like this is a concerted effort by the NTDP and college hockey to get the top 15 pick types in the program to college before the OHL can try to sink its hooks in.
As for applicability to basketball, it is something that comes up occasionally as players move in and out of recruiting years in an attempt to find the best fit. Usually this means going back a year, though. And since a lot of high end basketball players were strategically held back so they'd be bigger and stronger than everyone else, moving ahead a year is often just moving back to your natural spot.
But the real problem with accelerating basketball players a year is the academic situation of the top players. In hockey, many of the players are at tony private schools or, in the NTDP's case, Ann Arbor's well-funded Pioneer High. American prospects generally have some money in their family—hockey is expensive—and as a result have gone to good schools for the bulk of their scholastic career. Accelerating is evidently within the capabilities of both the schools and the players.
That combination is undoubtedly a lot rarer for basketball players. These days large chunks of the top prospects are at places like Findlay Prep, which are dogged with eligibility issues. Often those are because the players who arrive at Findlay have been miserably served by their local high schools. There's an entire cottage industry dedicated to taking promising basketball players and beating their transcripts into shape the NCAA might accept. Doing that in a year less and packing an extra year of credits in is going to be a bridge too far for almost everyone.
What's the deal with Manning?
Bryan Fuller
So, looking at coaching changes, is putting Manning, who has never coached DBs as the CB and nickel coach an effort to:
A) get your most dynamic recruiter to your most dynamic, desired athletes and keep them with him when they get to campus
Probably not. Coaches usually take an area rather than a position. The position coach does come into it but after much of the legwork has been done. And Michigan was recruiting CBs just fine before the move.
B) get a guy who has played and coached more physical positions (RB, LB) to take some physicality and tackling ability to the DBs
Maybe? Moving to what seems to be an aggressive man press defense means that a guy who knows what you should to to get under a guy and rock him back can apply his experience. It also minimizes some of his inexperience at the position. If the position is about getting in a guy's grill and reacting to what's in front of you that's something that takes less holistic knowledge of what to do in situation X in a zone.
C) minimize the role of Curt Mallory, who has been rumored to be looking at a head coaching gig elsewhere
Not sure if "minimize" is quite the right word, because just by the numbers he had five guys while the most anyone else had before the move was two. But yes devolving some of those responsibilities seems like a good idea.
D) get rid of overlaps in coaching staff. Hoke will work with Smith on DL, Mattison takes over LBs, Manning and Mallory take DBs. basically your 3 most dynamic recruiters (HC Hoke, Mattison and Manning) all head up a unit on D.
I do think this is a reasonable idea. When Montgomery, Hoke, and Mattison were all dealing with the DL that was three guys for four starters with the other two guys handling seven. Now everyone has about the same number of guys.
E) all of the above
TrppWlbrnID
Parts of three of the above.
I like 'em both.
Brian,
Would you rather see Michigan win a football national championship or the USMNT win a World Cup? I'm a lifelong Michigan fan like most of your readers but I think I would rather have the World Cup. At this point I have more pride and anticipation when watching the USMNT in the World Cup. What are your thoughts?
Ryan M.
I like 'em both.
Welp.
A couple of readers who would prefer not to be identified passed along this:
Greetings Golfers,
We are pleased to announce a special offer for our Season Pass Holders. To show our appreciation for your loyalty to Radrick Farms and the University of Michigan's Athletic Department, we are offering complimentary tickets for you and a guest to attend up to two football games at the Big House!
We have LIMITED tickets available for the following games on a first-come, first-served basis:
- UM v. Appalachian State on August 30th
- UM v. Miami of Ohio on September 13th
If you are interested in attending these games, you must let us know at least THREE weeks prior to kick-off.
FYI.
Rooting interests.
Hey Brian,
Football's just around the corner, but World Cup fever (including your soccer columns) has me paying a little more attention than usual to soccer. Last year I caught bits and pieces of NBC's EPL coverage on Saturday mornings while counting down the minutes to actual football and was thinking maybe this year I'd find myself watching more of it.
Here's my question: Who should I root for? Should I pick a team to follow? Pick a team to root against? Root for current/future USMNT players? Root for bicycle kicks or red cards? A quick guide to "What to watch on Saturday mornings before real football kicks off" would be a fun read.
Looking forward to your season previews!
Thanks,
Simon
There's not a whole lot of American flavor in the EPL these days, just a couple goalies and various people trying to keep their teams from getting relegated. There was a good eight years or so where Fulham was relying on Brian McBride and then Clint Dempsey as their primary goalscorers, but now not so much.
You can't root for the Yankees, and you probably shouldn't root for whichever random club has been picked out by a petrosheik and driven towards the top of the league through no merit of its own. And you don't really want to pick out some team that stands a good chance of relegation within five years, because a team that gets relegated won't be seen by an American until it comes back up.
With that in mind, options:
EVERTON. Tim Howard, a strong finish last year (fifth, just outside a Champion's league spot), they like Landon Donovan, you know their manager from ESPN, they've been in the top flight since 1955, and haven't won since 1987. Wear blue.
TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR. Named "Tottenham Hotspur." That's all you need to know. Also have been in top flight forever but hasn't won since 1961. White and blue color scheme M-friendly. Have the money to potentially do something but generally don't. Had Clint Dempsey for a bit.
STOKE. Brek Shea and Geoff Cameron. Probability of relegation is low in immediate future. Long term… they will probably go down at some point. Currently have Peter Crouch, the 6'7" robot-dancing beanpole former England striker.
LIVERPOOL. Along with Arsenal, the most tolerable team that regularly participates in the Champions League. Advantages over Arsenal: still plays at Anfield instead of stadium named after Middle Eastern airline, you might be tired of Nick Hornby, Arsenal's manager is a French guy who wears a ridiculous puffy coat whenever the temperature drops below 70.
ARSENAL. Along with Liverpool, most tolerable team that regularly participates in the Champions League. Advantages over Liverpool: you might rather like Fever Pitch, haven't won since 2004, just like Michigan.
Rooting against is obvious: Chelsea and anyone from Manchester. United is the Yankees, Chelsea plays desultory bore-ball and is backed by a Russian kleptocrat, Manchester City is Qatar FC, basically.
It'll be just like rooting for Michigan.
More than enough money to compete.
A director (a.k.a. AD) who interferes a bit too much for some people's taste.
A really damn good song. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wrW9OtjvQ8
Also, makes it very easy to pick out assholes when playing opposing teams. (Lot of anti-Semetic hate thrown at Spurs.)
I guess they're in town for a friendly with the Crew tonight.
Fuck West Ham - I was accosted by a black-out drunk West Ham fan at RFK Stadium, of all places, after DC United had just beaten Leon for the CONCACAF Champions Cup (or whatever it's called). Dude punches me after I established my MUFC credentials, and then he falls down, proceeds to get arrested, and pisses his pants.
Solid call on Arsenal = Michigan. Both used to be and expects to be title contenders. One more parallel would be their chants of "boring, boring Arsenal" from the 90s mirrored Michigan football's Lloyd Carr teams winning a lot of low scoring affairs.
But, when does Michigan get Alexis Sanchez on Campus?
Arsenal just won the FA cup, so there's that
I equate that to Michigan winning the Sugar Bowl. It's a nice Bowl/Cup win but it's not the same as winning the EPL title or the Big Ten championship.
I've come across rumors that ticket sales for the Appy St. game were 20-30K below capacity not too long ago. I'm assuming it's just typical internet exaggeration—that's a large hole to climb out of ticket-sales-wise, unless you start essentially giving them away.
the 20-30K is an exageration it's probably not like someone heard they were 2-3K below capacity and through word of mouth/the grapevine it worked it's way up to 20-30K. You'd have to figure even with possible exageration, there is still a huge allotment of tickets available for Appy St.
But you could root for, like, Dempsey's current team. Or Michael Bradley's, or Thierry Henry's, or Mo Edu's (hey!), or the batshit lumberjack's.
Still, the Saturday morning English games are great to look at, no more so than before kickoff at Anfield. (just google YNWA)
Doesn't Altidore still play for Sunderland?
still own him, yes
ownSSah OWNSSSSAH
/slapshot
/soccereyeroll
I doubt accelerating becomes a huge trend, because frankly, there's very few players good enough to merit it, and it's still not easy to do(If they could have for Kyle Connor, I'm sure they would have). College hockey has moved in the direction of older players; not younger ones.
Where it does happen a decent amount is players in a situation like Jack Eichel or Shane Gersich this past year, who are late birthdays and will age out of the NTDP a year before they would be scheduled to graduate high school. In those cases, they generally start the acceleration process two years out, so it's a little more manageable.
Even for January enrollees. Senior year of HS is just an amazing period of messing around and spending time with friends, sometimes for the last time.
Eh, pretty much every year of college was better than senior year of high school. Might be different for athletes, but then again, the NTDP guys aren't exactly having the typical high school experience either.
It's especially heartbreaking considering Spurs were seven points clear with only two months to go in the season, before England fired Capello and 'Onest 'Arry just stopped giving a damn and Spurs got pipped for the Champions League, what a bummer.
My bias is obvious, but pick Spurs, Michigan fans love heartbreak or we wouldn;t be Michigan fans, the ride with Spurs is painful, but infinitely more interesting. plus the color scheme is good. Arsenal's color scheme has red in it(gross!)
In London, so it'd be easier to get to a game if you really got into it.
Badass logo.
great history with heartbreak on and off the pitch, great fans, great stadium, great songs, can't break the bank to sign players like Chelsea, City and United. Two great rivalries with United and Everton.
Once great club struggling to keep its place in the top 4.
I always adopt a recently promoted club. This year the pick is Leicester, Burnley or Queen's Park Rangers.
QPR was relegated just two years ago, bounced back last year. Smallish club who think they're big and will way overspend and probably survive somehow, but not for very long.
Burnley smallish club with an old history, surrounded in the Northwest by much, much bigger clubs. Their most recent Premeirship year ended with a quick return to the Championship. Wear Clarett and blue like about 6 other clubs. Almost certain to go down again after this year.
Leicester City were a regular Prem club until their over ambitous finances caught up with them and were relegated almost a decade ago right around the time their new stadium which was supposed to save them was set to be completed. Their old Stadium Filbert Street was a real relic (ie shit hole) but I loved watching matches from that old place. They seem to have real ambition to stay in the Prem, and possibly the finances to do so this time. I'll probably pick them.
I adopted Liverpool as my main team two years ago, just in time for Brendan Rogers' arrival and the success last year, and am now a big fan. And QPR I will adopt this year because I like the name Queens Park Rangers and that is all.
Maybe it's because I went to school at U-M, but this is simply incomprehensible to me. Nothing takes precedence over Michigan football. Ever.
I am as likely to even CONSIDER this question of World Cup over UM Football as I am to watch the Tour de France.
Here's one for Chelsea. Those colors doe...
Chelsea fan since the Gianluca Vialli years. Your post gives me a sad. I had a much better time watching them when they were irrelevant and owned by Ken Bates. Since Abramovich bought they team they've been more focused on branding and importing expensive talent. IMO they're trying to become the Yankees of the EPL.
As far as actually wearing blue and yellow, Arsenal and Chelsea fit that category.
Arsenal = red and white
http://justarsenal.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/Arsenal-Puma-Kit-3066501.jpg
Arsenal wore a blue and yellow third kit, as have Liverpool and Southampton, though its been awhile. Everton also had a kit with some yellow in it.
Arsenal's away last year is the blue and yellow kit pictured there. The purple is their third kit. Similair schemes this year with Puma.
Also, the Puma one posted above in response isn't even an Arsenal uniform, for the record:
Liverpool is owned by the Red Sox. Makes it pretty well impossible to chear for them. Arsenal is owned by Stan Kroenke (Nuggets, Rams)
is owned by the group who own the Red Sox.
Arsenal is also owned by Usmanov, who's basically like Abramovich. All the top EPL clubs have some shady characters owning them. I used to support Liverpool, but now a days it's too much of a business for me to get emotionally invested in supporting them. I just watch and hope for an entertaining game.
I suggest creating a fantasy 'football' team. Just take a stab and pick some players and it gives you a rooting interest, no matter which teams play.
It's hard to get quickly passionate about a particular club when you don't know their history, players, style, etc. But you may find yourself slowly warming to a specific team as you go along.
I started watching Premier League matches last year and chose Arsenal for my rooting interest for no real reason other than they were not the Yankees (with all the championships) even if they seemed to have a history with some success, and I had to have a rooting interest. I haven't joined the American fan club, but I understand that the local branch gathers at Conor O'Neill's, and it sounds like a good way to be a part of the larger fanbase even while most of it is on the other side of the Atlantic.
I have to admit, I cared nothing for soccer for most of my life but had some interest in the 2010 World Cup because I was in Europe during the semi-final and finals and everyone around me cared a great deal about it. Seeing all of the national flags waving over the apartments of expats in Malta and then the Spanish nationals singing and chanting while wearing their jerseys and waving flags at the foot of the Spanish Steps in Rome was remarkable. This so-called "football" seemed like kind of a big deal to everyone else. The convenience of the weekly NBC broadcast, recently discovering SiriusXM FC, the relative success of the US men's national team and the advent of the Detroit City FC has me wanting to learn more about a game that suddenly seems so much more complicated and intricate than I ever gave it credit for before. I wish that I had discovered it years ago, although I realize I would not have been able to really enjoy it until all of these things (the internet, cable and radio broadcasts and a World Cup in prime time) came to pass. But I agree with Don: Michigan footbal over the other kind. Always.
... with rich owners injecting money into traditionally mediocre teams. The premier clubs have the advantage of tradition and money that is difficult to combat without an infusion of cash. If you develop great players, they end up signing with the traditionally great clubs. At least now, there is some change and more options. And, in my opinion, Fair Play is doublespeak to reverting back to the "good old days" when only 3-4 teams in each country had a chance to consistently win.
All that being said, go with Arsenal in England, Dortmund in Germany, and I would have said Barcelona in Spain, but the leadership since Laporta has been a disaster. All success from 2010-2013 was set up by the team and business he built.
Ask PSG what they think about the fair play rules as they are about to bite them in the rear very shortly. Initially I was skeptical, but I think they will really make a difference in most cases.
Also, I genuinely don't understand the hatred toward my Man United. They have won a lot over the years, yes, but they have done it the right way (until this very year). Their success has come since the hiring of Sir Alex and he stayed at the club an astounding 27 years in which he won 13 titles. Prior to that United had only 7 titles in their history which goes back to 1878. The lions share of the titles were won on the backs of player who came up through the ranks at ManU like Ryan Giggs, David Beckham, Paul Scholes, Roy Keane, Nicky Butt, etc. Sure they went out and purchased quality players to at key times but it isn't like they are Man City or the New York Yankee's. Their youth system has served them very well over the years and continued to until very recently.
Now, unfortunately, they're in a position where the fans and board are demanding they win now so they are going after just about every decent player thought to be on the market and we'll see how that goes, but people who compare ManU to the New York Yankees really don't know much about the EPL at all. They're an old club that has been around forever and really wasn't a major player until Sir Alex came along and turned them into what they are today. A great FC in my opinion, but half my family is from Manchester so that probably plays into it too.
As for other rooting interests. I always follow the two Welsh Clubs (Cardiff City and Swansea City). Two small clubs trying to make it with the big boys. The other half of my family is from South Wales which is why I chose to follow them.
... I respect any organization that can dominate that long. I'm an Arsenal fan and prefer they win, but seeing Man U struggle this year wasn't enjoyable for me. I'm not a scheudenfreude (sp) kinda guy. I want my teams to win, I don't care what happens to the other guys 95% of the time.
I look at Fair Play like a government saying you can't invest capital today to reap some benefit in the future. It's like taking away the ability of companies to get credit from a bank. At the end of the day, they need to pay their bills, whether it's paying back a bank or some rich oligarch. I'm okay with that. Building a team, a loyal fanbase, and merchandising agreements takes time. If they have the liquidity or the financiers who are willing to tolerate the risk, why not allow it?
What I meant was the new rules are going to make a difference, not that it was going to be a good one. I still haven't decided what I think about the rules as yet. At first blush I'm incliined to think that if an owner (or group) have the money and want to spend it to put a championship calibre team on the field why not? I'm a big baseball fan as well so I'm used to sports that don't adhere to hard salary caps.
I do like to watch competitive football though and these rules would definitely bring more parity to a sport that seems to be consistently dominated by a very small minority of teams. Would that be better or worse for the game? Your guess is as good as mine.
What would be great is if some big spenders would buy up a handful of teams in the championship division and spend the cash to bring some clubs that have been out of the top flight for a number of years back to prominence. It isn't even that hard, I do it all the time in FIFA 14.
My son and I had this conversation last summer, and it looks like we were mostly the same wavelength as Brian.
I picked Everton for the Tim Howard angle, and the fact that my son is also a keeper.
He picked Spurs, primarily becuase this was just before the Gareth Bale to Real transfer, and my son wears 11 for his club, which happened to be Bale's number for Spurs. But, transfer or no, the Spurs are his team, and he has stuck with them. It did not hurt that the Spurs were also the very temporary home of Coach Ted Lasso.
We're driving to Chicago this weekend for the Spurs @ Fire friendly, and will be in the stadium watching Bale's team the weekend after (if not Bale himself.)
I picked Everton because of Howard/Donovan a few years ago.
Whatever team you pick, pick one. You might not be a die-hard who lives and dies with every shot off the post, but you'll know the players a little bit better and notice that team's news when it crosses your screen, which will in turn help you pick up the game and the subtleties of the league writ large.
ManU it is then.
Are actually Abu Dhabi FC, but whatevs. Sweet, sweet oil money
I would take a World Cup, only because I have already seen Michigan win a national title.
Coaching a position you never played.
Hanlon was not always an O line coach for us.
He was the QB coach the year Harbaugh was All-American.
Mattison says if you can coach, you can coach any position.
It is not unlike a teacher filling in for another one, caveat of course being replacement understands subject matter. As a HC ideally you want your assistants, especially position coaches to learn as much as possible about all positions. This is advantageous in a number of ways. Aside from the teacher analogy it adds to the knowledge of the entire staff, thereby allowing for exchages in ideas, etc., many of which are overlooked by the coach who coaches the position he played simply because he accepts the untrue reality, "obviously they know this," which of course they don't. And given the fact that coaches are teachers, obviously each will have strengths they can pass on helping to compensate for the weaker areas of others.
And it's not a coincidence that our best recruiters are also our best coaches. Recruits need to be motivated to make their decision. That motivational ability definitely carries over to the field. Mention was made of Hanlon coaching Harbaugh which is a good example. An even better one, imo, is RR whose playing experience at the collegiate level was as a db. Even though I believe his offensive genius stems from a love for that side of the ball, he definitely has an understanding of defensive assignments and reads, thereby enabling him to design an offensive scheme based on the duties of each defensive position. He probably could be as effective on the other side of the ball but like any job, you are best at what you truly love.
AT the high school level I designed each week's offensive plan based in large part on the inherent weaknesses that exist in any defense. Although the playbook usually remained the same, most "impressions" of a different offense are generally alignment based and the OL usually has the same area of responsibility unless, of course, you were purposely designing strategy based on the weaknesses of a particular player that was easy to pick up on tape. Believe me, every coach in the BIG was aware of Ezeh's tendency to fill the gap with his shoulders perpenduicular to the line, thereby making himself much smaller and Big Will's tendency to stand straight up as his primary first move after the snap. Really doesn't matter what position you coach, after you've been around football for awhile, and we all start learning from those that obviously know more, every coach in the room will see the same weakness. It is also true that not all will know the best way to take advantage of same. It's those that after learning coaching fundamentals are capable of adding new and unique dimensions to that foundation that normally make the best HCs, In no way is that meant to insult position coaches and coordinators who remain in one spot. Some, like Narducci and Mattison choose to remain there for different reasons. I'm in definite agreement with Greg on this one. HCs, as stated, are able to think outside the box to a degree. Innovaters such as Lewis at Houston with the wishbone could only go so far - some of it due to personnel limitations- but give the same knowledge to a coach that can acquire talent coupled with outstanding motivational skills, then you have a Barry Switzer and an all but unstoppable OU wishbone attack.
Comments