If you trust JB, it doesn’t matter what any of us say or what recruits say in interviews. If JB is recruiting him, then he thinks he’s a fit in culture and tactics. If he doesn’t, he doesn’t thinks he’s a fit for one reason or another. We will never know on most kids.
I just don’t like anybody speculating on the moral character of any recruits. They’re teenagers. And we don’t know them so any speculation on our part on if JB thinks they are “coachable” or will create “distractions” is unfair. I just think it’s a discussion that message board posters that don’t have a meaningful personal relationship with the recruits should stay away from.
Fair enough. And I agree, just as I think disparaging any of our players or recruits is a discussion that message board posters should stay away from. Unfortunately, from my perspective, some on here would disagree with that position. I DO trust JB’s judgement, and that’s kinda my point. He gets to recruit the players he believes will “fit” best what he hopes to do with our program. But again, many of our message board posters don’t seem to have that same level of confidence in JB. Finally, (I hope), I’ll say one more time, I don’t mean this to be an argument, just a point of view. I certainly hope I didn’t rankle the ire of any of our fellow message board posters.
My only point in mentioning this is that often, names come up on this board as guys people think JB “should be” recruiting, and when he doesn’t, often people seem to draw the conclusion that he was too lazy to pursue the kid, or doesn’t want to recruit athletes, or whatever. Our vetting process is more strenuous than say, Louisville’s, and sometimes we don’t offer kids who otherwise have the talent to play for us.
I think you see the Harbaugh offer situation quite a bit more in football (making room come signing day). I don’t think Michigan is going to over-offer in the sense of offering kids that they aren’t sure are good enough.
I do think they need to be more aggressive in over recruiting by about 1 scholarship just because that’s how basketball is going these days.
So I guess the question is which 18s are good enough for an early offer in everyone’s eyes. And which seem to have significant mutual interest and have/will visit.
Hence, I said ‘no brainer’ offers. Flat out - we need to widen the pool of legit talent that we make early contact with. And stop it with the ‘you must visit first’ policy, it’s nonsense in contemporary times
You can’t do the “sort out” in basketball the same way you can in football because there is an early signing period in basketball. A situation like Eric Swenson who didn’t play well as a senior and was “processed” before signing day could never occur in hoops because the guy who regressed as a senior would already have signed a LOI. In addition, there are no AAU programs in football to blackball a team if a Swenson situation occurs as there are in basketball–if, for example, Jamal Cain committed to Michigan and we thereafter got commitments from Wilkes, Jackson and another highly rated forward and decided to “Harbaugh” Jamal, do you think we’d ever get a kid from The Family again? It’s all well and good to say do the same as Harbaugh, but you surely know that the same caveats do not apply.
Obviously you wouldn’t do it post LOI, but theoretically if you’re not feeling as good about a kid as you did when you initially offered, and the kid calls to commit, you politely inform the kid that the offer is no longer committable. I can tell you factually, that something very similar occurred with Cassius Winston.
There’s a huge difference between pulling an offer before a kid commits and pulling one after. The former is something JB has done often and for a variety of reasons (see e.g. Coleman-Lands, Winston, Towns, etc.). He hasn’t done the pull it after a commit like JH has, probably in part because he doesn’t like that concept, but also because it would have consequences that pulling a football offer after a commitment would not.
I have confidence in JB. But if he offers a player that I don’t think is good enough to play up to subjective standard of play, I will criticize the offer. I think that’s fine. As long as the critique is held to his basketball play. Or scholarship crunch or position of need or JB’s utilization of his specific skill set etc etc. Just don’t think we need to be looking at character or “coachability” of the recruits because that’s something that probably none of us have real knowledge of. But we are privy to their play on the court via highlights, scouts etc.
I don’t think WE should be looking at “coachability” or character either, but I do think JB should and does, and I DON’T think we should criticize him when he does. I actually think we agree on much of this, Bacon. I absolutely am NOT into disparaging kids, and I’m pretty confident you aren’t either. How about this, if we have any further discussions on this let’s do it via private messaging. I’m pretty sure folks don’t click on a thread entitled 2018 Recruiting Notes to read about our discussion on this issue and I’m positive Dylan doesn’t particularly like it either. Peace!
“Coachability” is obviously very nebulous; their grades, interest in school, and whether they are likely to be around after a year are all of interest, I think.
How is it nonsense? I’m sure prior to the visit guys are made well aware that if and when they visit they will have an offer. It’s not like Beilein would even accept a commit before he visits anyway.
I think JB is under the impression that he has the leverage in the scenario, when the exact opposite is true. In a climate where kids want constant attention and pampering, can you not see where this archaic requirement is a turnoff to most recruits? This is the equivalent of JB saying - you come running to me, and I’ll have something to reward you for it. It’s a joke, and I think most here agree that the ‘visit first’ policy is outdated, and probably hinders our recruiting efforts to a certain degree. It’s just plain non-sense IMO
This discussion should probably bleed into the recruiting philosophy thread, but I think this is part of the mentality that JB has in “coachability.” If the kid is a diva during the recruiting process and isnt subject to JB’s authority and rules then why would the kid adhere to them while being coached at Michigan?
Well, I can tell you factually, that about 90% of prospects aren’t coachable if that is the standard. I think somehow people think the burden is on the player to conform to the coaching staff’s wants rather than vice versa. Its called recruiting for a reason, because you have to actually recruit the player, which functionally translates to begging and selling the coaching staff, team, role, school, environment. Let’s be realistic people, we’re talking about kids with an abundance of options, and if one team/staff sticks out as not being overly inviting, the results are not likely to be good.
I am not making a judgement on JB’s recruiting policy. I am just trying to make the logical outgrowth of JB’s practice and words. We are also talking past one another a bit. I am trying to rationalize his approach. Is JB limiting himself? Most definitely! I am also trying to speak to the practice of not offering prior to checking a bunch of boxes. I dont think that is inherently a bad thing. JB is very clear that he has criteria that needs to be fulfilled before an offer comes. What i think you are speaking to is that lack of personality and attention that is shown to the athletes in the recruiting process. And that is the problem that should be addressed. I think if the “love” is shown better despite having to go through the full academic review there is nothing wrong with it. JB has room to be more charismatic in this process while still having players fall into line with his mentality. You say that he is eliminating 90% of prospects, I would argue that it might be closer to 50% if he actually showed the “love” to players in the recruiting process but still had his clear criteria. I think the 50% that we eliminate in this (hypothetical) process is ok.
Didn’t say that he eliminated 90%, what I did say that is 90% of recruits want that constant attention. Bottom line is that kids want offers before visiting, that’s really all there is to it. I do agree with you for the most part though.
MattD - honest question, do most of the Tier 2 (non blue blood) schools offer before a kid visits campus unofficially?
And how much - in your opinion - do we lack in our contact with the kids before those visits? In other words, do they only hear from JB and see him courtside once or twice, or do they have conversations on a periodic basis but just not as frequently as the kids would prefer.
I can’t speak intelligently as to the offer timing practices of other schools, but I’d suspect they do offer without a full academic tour. Without getting into to much detail, or any recruit in particular, contact is an issue (if any). We simply don’t press kids the way other schools do, the contact is simply too infrequent.