Update on elite JUCO DL Jeffrey M’ba - He ain't comin'
There was some chatter about Michigan being able to take JUCO prospect Jeffrey M'ba.
That now apparently is dead - speculation was grades - but unsure why this died so quickly after it seeming a hot topic.
M’ba was set to officially visit Ann Arbor for the game against Ohio State next Saturday, but that visit is off, M’ba told Maize n Brew Tuesday afternoon.
“Nope, I will not visit Michigan (anymore),” M’ba said.
Instead, he will be visiting Auburn for its game against Alabama.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:58 AM ^
The way Michigan loves to rotate DL, they can never have enough DTs.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:39 AM ^
There will always be some rotation with the DTs, but currently the heavy rotation is out of necessity. There just isn't a single guy that stands out and can hold down the middle consistently regardless of the situation. They have to rotate so heavily right now because they really need to strategize who is where and when to counter only being an average-to-good group.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:07 PM ^
I think the rotation is based on the fact thaat they don't have a ton of DT's currently. The rotation consists of 2 dudes that aren't really DT's.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:32 AM ^
Transfers from JUCO are a tough pull but I imagine a decent amount of Power 5 transfers can and have made the switch (Rudock, Danna, Bowman, etc..)
Hell, maybe even X Worthy starts to have a change of heart after UT loses to... ?Kansas? at home.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:51 AM ^
I’ve been saying this cycle was weird especially given we’ve been performing this yea as on of the top 5-6 teams nationally all year as a very young team. A couple recruiting gets this year could really get this beast woke up over the next few years.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:37 AM ^
It probably wouldn’t be much different. It’s said that the big benefit from a strong year (or penalty for having a bad year) comes with the next year’s recruiting class. This year’s seniors had mostly set their lists of finalists by September.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:15 AM ^
I can't remember the last JUCO we took.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:19 AM ^
Took one under LC,supposed to be stud LB never panned out.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:21 AM ^
Austin Panter.
Interestingly, Panter was one of 31 4* JuCos in the 2007 class. In the 2022 class, there are just 2.
November 17th, 2021 at 6:45 PM ^
Austin Panter, baby! Russell Shaw!
I feel like I'm missing a more recent one.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:17 AM ^
he aint come to play school
November 17th, 2021 at 11:45 AM ^
Then maybe a school isn't the right place to go.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:09 PM ^
a) it's a Cardale Jones/OSU joke dude relax
b) Name 10 NFL players that didn't go to school. See, we have this stupid system where in order to achieve a dream (NFL) someone has to go to school. And a D1 school gives better chance to "shine" and get noticed.
Hilariously, unlike virtually any other sport or profession, the education you receive at said school has literally NOTHING to do with getting into the NFL.
So, if his dream is to play in the NFL, he must go to school to get that chance. And an FBS school gives more chanced to be noticed by NFL folks than a JuCo.
Think of it in the reverse. Let's say your dream is to become an engineer. But the only way to become an engineer is to go to a sports academy. And, you're 5'7" with a club foot.
Are you going to go to the school that has great engineering that Ronaldo and Anthony Davis went to (and you have have to be able to compete with them on a semi-even level or the engineering goes away) or are you going to go to another school that also has great engineering that has a mostly out of shape, obese, disabled student body.
The point is he has to go to school to reach his dream, and a college degree isn't an important part of his future.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:34 AM ^
Sigh. I admit to being concerned about this recruiting year (guess I'm a star gazer) but with the amount of staff turnover there was bound to be some struggle. Hoping the promise of this staff can equate to some top five classes in the next few years. And a strong close on some highly rated prospects for this class, last night's commit was a pleasant surprise.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:16 AM ^
"...but with the amount of staff turnover there was bound to be some struggle."
There seemingly is always a reason (read: excuse) when we struggle.
When Clink was hired everyone was ecstatic and thought he'd rip the doors off Ohio and Northern Kentucky.
He's doing well'ish (Top 20 recruiter for 2022 cycle: Link), but he's the ONLY Michigan recruiter in the top 50 with the next being Sherrone Moore at #70.
That has to change...nothing changes if nothing changes.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:36 PM ^
I agree but UM pretty consistently recruits in that top-12-ish range, so when they're out of that range there's usually a good reason. Sometimes it's a down year, sometimes it's staff turnover, sometimes it's uncertainty or under-performance at a spot. This year does feel a bit like uncertainty around Harbaugh + new staff having to figure out some connections with recruiting grounds. And recruiter rankings always seem a bit quixotic to me, since you'll see guys at the top recruiting at the best schools and then they fall off a cliff when they go somewhere else. But I mean, Moore was #9 last year and #21 the year before, so I do wonder a bit about this one-year blip in that respect.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:48 PM ^
We literally replaced a ton of staff, both coaching and recruiting. If you think we are not trying to fix recruiting you have your head in the sand.
November 17th, 2021 at 1:46 PM ^
Nobody said they weren't trying. You're not reading what I wrote or understanding it.
Existing coaches NOT part of the turnover are also nowhere to be found on the recruiting rankings. Jaybaugh anyone?
I applaud the efforts of trying to change things, but so far - the results are mixed to mediocre.
November 17th, 2021 at 1:50 PM ^
I had some concerns about recruiting, but the transfer portal is an option to fill in some gaps. I think we'll have more success with guys transferring over from a 4-year school than a JUCO.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:42 AM ^
Admissions strikes again. Even the Ivy's make some pretty serious admission concessions (based on Ivy standards) to get athletes into the school. There is a limit on how many the football team can take, but there is a number set aside every year to help the program get some kids in.
November 17th, 2021 at 10:49 AM ^
You really don't think Michigan is making concessions to get athletes in to the school?
But, there's still a limit to the level of concessions an elite academic institution like Michigan can make.
I'm sure that the average GPA and ACT of the athletes at Ivy League schools is higher than that of Michigan...and that the average GPA and ACT of the athletes at Michigan is higher than that of the five or six schools that have dominated college football during the Playoff era.
There are concessions...and there are Concessions. OSU, the SEC schools, Clemson, Oklahoma, etc. can make Concessions. As an alum who's proud of the school's high ranking in almost every academic field, I'm willing to pass up Playoff appearances to have somewhat higher academic standards for athletes.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:02 AM ^
I question how many they make, yes. 85 football players, a portion of whom are excellent students anyway, aren't going to drag down Michigan's academic standing. There are over 32,000 undergrads. 85 out of 32,000? Even if you want to count all athletes, that's about 900 out of 32,000. Michigan certainly hammers transfers. It's absurd too, since 2 of my kids transferred there after injuries ended their D2 playing careers. Not transferring credits is likely a money grab from the university to force you to pay for their classes instead.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:20 AM ^
There is no limit to the concessions they make on admitting students as long as they ncaa minimum requirements. Its not different at Michigan than it is at OSU. I can think of one D1 school who consistently turns down guys that can get into other D1 programs and its Stanford.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:15 PM ^
I mean, there are kids who absolutely meet the minimums who don't wind up at UM and go somewhere else that is clearly not a "recruiting loss". Again, UM isn't Stanford in terms of just blocking guys entirely but I've long heard that the athletic department has sort of a soft "cap" on guys on the fringe academically they can try to get past admissions but there's a limit and they lose guys as a result.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:52 PM ^
Sam Webb has addressed this issue multiple times over the last several years. Your assertion that Michigan takes an unlimited number of minimum qualifiers is bullshit. Michigan will take a small number, but in virtually every recruiting year there are minimum qualifiers that Michigan won't or can't take that are accepted at other institutions.
The fact that you refuse to admit this doesn't change that fact.
November 17th, 2021 at 4:03 PM ^
Very, very, very little of what goes into the USNWR's methodology deals with high school grades or scores. In fact, it's 7%.
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/ranking-criteri…
They also don't look at current performance, except graduation rate.
Michigan could fill its entire football team solely with players who meet the bare NCAA minimum for qualifications and it wouldn't move the needle at all on Michigan's undergraduate rankings, which are in and of itself fairly meaningless except for a few fields. That WVU is not on the level of UM has nothing to do with the academic qualifications of the football. The same holds true for why Michigan isn't Stanford.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:17 AM ^
Lol at thinking the michigan admissions department is anything other than the NCAA minimum when it comes to getting athletes into school. God people are so insufferable with literally no evidence to back their claims and tons of alternative evidence that points to them being wrong.
Maybe we just lost a recruiting battle
November 17th, 2021 at 11:35 AM ^
We didn't here. It's a fact that coming from JUCO prevented him from coming to Michigan. It's Michigan's transfer policy in this instance.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:44 AM ^
Where is the proof of this fact? Because the Michigan admissions department every year allows for Juco transfers to come to Michigan to play sports.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:48 AM ^
EJ Holland stated as much based on what he has gathered.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:05 PM ^
I agree it's not some grand conspiracy against junior college transfers but are there a ton of guys and gals who actually transfer from junior colleges to UM? Sure seems like the fact most of us can name the majority of them who have done so on the football team over the past couple of decades points to it being pretty rare.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:16 PM ^
I think a big issue is that Michigan generally only has relationships with community colleges in the state of Michigan, and football is not popular at those community colleges. So Michigan can and does take community college transfers, it's just that intersection of people who are good enough at football and people at community colleges that can transfer lots of credits to Michigan is basically non-existent.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:39 PM ^
That's part of it, but I also think some of it is that the big JuCo programs are barely schools when it comes to football players and so I'm sure most don't really have the grades/classes that UM can transfer over easily. I get a sense that's true for the general student body as well but I doubt a bunch of kids from East Mississippi Community College try to transfer to UM academically, for example, so it doesn't come up as often.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:11 PM ^
This isn't an admissions issue, it is a compliance issue.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:21 AM ^
This is a case where a kid will sign his LOI right now but there are only a handful of Brad Hawkins' out there who will buckledown and get it done because they can't see themselves anywhere else.
November 17th, 2021 at 11:28 AM ^
Meh -- this doesn't bother me. Sure he's a giant, but someone on the previous thread said his tape was unimpressive. We can do better.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:28 PM ^
Was this the guy in France?
November 17th, 2021 at 12:34 PM ^
Getting in and succeeding are different things. His classmates, for the most part, will be students admitted to Michigan based on their academic abilities. The classes will therefore taught at a high level, with high expectations. People who complain about Michigan's high academic standards for admission never seem to understand that there are high academic standards for success that the football program can't circumvent.
To put it simply, it's harder to pass a class at Michigan than Auburn or MSU.
Playing football and surviving academically is hard at any school, but especially at Michigan. There's no shame in not wanting (or being able) to do that. Michigan's not for everyone, and we should be OK with that.
November 17th, 2021 at 1:04 PM ^
Michigan football players have an opportunity to take much less rigorous classes than the general student body. There are "do not take" lists that they have. Unless they want it, lets say that football players have a vastly different academic experience than the regular student body.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:42 PM ^
not coming, never was.
November 17th, 2021 at 12:46 PM ^
I get the sour grapes sensation of this board every time a recruitment goes awry, but let's not pretend academic prestige is Michigan's problem or that we do not make major concessions to accomodate the transcripts from many of the upper echelon players. Even the Ivy League does it with every player they bring in w/ a 23 ACT requiring 3 others w/ a 32...when the avg for the institution is a 34 or 1520 SAT. Our prestige should only be viewed as an advantage, much as we contort Stanford when they beat us on a player. For what can be more useful to a student-athlete than to develop a network "after football" of hyper-competitive people who want to help you succeed.
November 17th, 2021 at 2:42 PM ^
“Ain’t” is stupid, do better, this isn’t RCMB