The Clemson men's basketball staff will try to put the finishing touch on its recruitment of a top-100 forward when 6-8 Donte Grantham visits on Saturday for the Wake Forest football game.Grantham, a native of Martinsville, West Virginia, is attending Hargrave Military Prep School this fall.
Grantham has narrowed his choices to Clemson and Michigan, and has also visited Cincinnati. His visit to campus this weekend will be his second in a month.
Not feeling good about this. I won’t mention the site, but there have been insiders that have conveyed Cincy was never the true competition, that we should only worry if Grantham takes another visit to Clemson…don’t like how this is trending. Never a good sign when a recruit is supposed to be a lock within a 2-3 day timeframe and ends up postponing the decision in order to visit another schoo.
This is indeed a concerning sign… I had just started getting really excited by the prospect of him being in the class. I will hold out hope however. Obviously Crystal Balls can be wrong on 247, but in this case I sure hope they are right.
…the positive side of me is hoping he views this as a big decision and just wants to make certain that Michigan is the right choice.
…the negative side of me is worried he views this as a big decision and just wants to make certain that Clemson is the right choice.
Yeah I am afraid we might have lost him since he is taking a third visit to Clemson.
Chad Brendel(Cincy insider that first broke news Cincy was no longer recruiting Grantham) just switched his prediction to Clemson on 247. I’ve pretty much accepted that Grantham is not going to choose Michigan at this point. I’m afraid we’ve lost out on another good prospect…but to Clemson? Wow, I wonder what Clemson can possibly offer that Michigan can’t?
Well I am still hoping he commits to Michigan, despite him taking a third visit to Clemson.
As for your comment, MattD, “I wonder what Clemson can possibly offer that Michigan can’t?” Clemson might have less competition for immediate playing time in the 2014-2015 season and Clemson is probably closer to home for Donte than Michigan. Those two things are the only things I can think of if he committed to Clemson over Michigan.
Well I am still hoping he commits to Michigan, despite him taking a third visit to Clemson.As for your comment, MattD, “I wonder what Clemson can possibly offer that Michigan can’t?” Clemson might have less competition for immediate playing time in the 2014-2015 season and Clemson is probably closer to home for Donte than Michigan. Those two things are the only things I can think of if he committed to Clemson over Michigan.
Perhaps playing time is a factor, however I can’t fathom a prospect wanting to go to a sub .500 program vs coming into a program fresh off a final 4.
With regards to proximity to home, that is irrelevant considering Ann Arbor is actually closer to Martinsburg, WV than Clemson.
Yeah I made myself look dumb on the proximity statement. Thanks for correcting me.
Clemson has been recruiting him the longest, and that counts for something. It’s one of the reasons we were able to snag McGary over a couple big time schools.
Clemson has been recruiting him the longest, and that counts for something. It's one of the reasons we were able to snag McGary over a couple big time schools.
That may be an argument for some prospects but I don’t necessarily believe that holds true for the majority. When I see players like Booker, Bluiett, Kennard, Diop, Ulis, etc that favor/commit to programs that literally began recruiting them 2-3 months ago it leads me to believe that how long a particular school has been recruiting them is a small factor.
I think that Michigan academics can be intimidating to certain prospects, and we are not the “it” college right now(that would be UK). Combine that with the fact that Michigan/Coach B are on the straight and narrow and I think it limits the pool of elite prospects for which we have a legitimate shot with. Today’s college basketball recruiting landscape is geared toward elite level talent that usually equates to players leaving after 1-2 years. Some of these prospects want a high profile school that produces NBA players while not being all that challenging academically, with good nightlife.
I don’t believe Michigan is viewed in that manner, and I believe we fall victim to that occasionally
Clemson has been recruiting him the longest, and that counts for something. It's one of the reasons we were able to snag McGary over a couple big time schools.That may be an argument for some prospects but I don’t necessarily believe that holds true for the majority. When I see players like Booker, Bluiett, Kennard, Diop, Ulis, etc that favor/commit to programs that literally began recruiting them 2-3 months ago it leads me to believe that how long a particular school has been recruiting them is a small factor.
I think that Michigan academics can be intimidating to certain prospects, and we are not the “it” college right now(that would be UK). Combine that with the fact that Michigan/Coach B are on the straight and narrow and I think it limits the pool of elite prospects for which we have a legitimate shot with. Today’s college basketball recruiting landscape is geared toward elite level talent that usually equates to players leaving after 1-2 years. Some of these prospects want a high profile school that produces NBA players while not being all that challenging academically, with good nightlife.
I don’t believe Michigan is viewed in that manner, and I believe we fall victim to that occasionally
Grantham may not be every prospect. It doesn’t matter to every prospect, but it matters to some. Each recruit is an individual. You can’t generalize with them. If you could, then why would McGary in his right mind choose us over Duke, Kentucky etc etc?
I don’t think Michigan is that intimidating academically. Yeah, it is a tough school. But athletes get a ton more help than the average student and generally take fewer credits as well to compensate for the time lost to practices and workouts and travel. I have no doubt that athletes get filtered into the classes with the professors with a lighter work load. Nothing wrong with that, absolutely every school does that. I’m sure most of the for sure one and done guys at Kentucky are just taking the lightest work load they can and they’d do the same if they went to Michigan.
I think we go after a more limited pool because the B1G standards are a little bit higher than the SEC, and JB is head of the ethics committee and isn’t going to go after certain recruits.
Clemson has been recruiting him the longest, and that counts for something. It's one of the reasons we were able to snag McGary over a couple big time schools.That may be an argument for some prospects but I don’t necessarily believe that holds true for the majority. When I see players like Booker, Bluiett, Kennard, Diop, Ulis, etc that favor/commit to programs that literally began recruiting them 2-3 months ago it leads me to believe that how long a particular school has been recruiting them is a small factor.
I think that Michigan academics can be intimidating to certain prospects, and we are not the “it” college right now(that would be UK). Combine that with the fact that Michigan/Coach B are on the straight and narrow and I think it limits the pool of elite prospects for which we have a legitimate shot with. Today’s college basketball recruiting landscape is geared toward elite level talent that usually equates to players leaving after 1-2 years. Some of these prospects want a high profile school that produces NBA players while not being all that challenging academically, with good nightlife.
I don’t believe Michigan is viewed in that manner, and I believe we fall victim to that occasionally
Grantham may not be every prospect. It doesn’t matter to every prospect, but it matters to some. Each recruit is an individual. You can’t generalize with them. If you could, then why would McGary in his right mind choose us over Duke, Kentucky etc etc?
I don’t think Michigan is that intimidating academically. Yeah, it is a tough school. But athletes get a ton more help than the average student and generally take fewer credits as well to compensate for the time lost to practices and workouts and travel. I have no doubt that athletes get filtered into the classes with the professors with a lighter work load. Nothing wrong with that, absolutely every school does that. I’m sure most of the for sure one and done guys at Kentucky are just taking the lightest work load they can and they’d do the same if they went to Michigan.
I think we go after a more limited pool because the B1G standards are a little bit higher than the SEC, and JB is head of the ethics committee and isn’t going to go after certain recruits.
Didn’t mean to generalize all recruits if that is how my previous post came across, just trying to convey the fact that factors such as “first to the party” and “loyalty” no longer carry the same weight as they once did.
I totally agree regarding athletes’ access to preferential schedules/academic help being able to mitigate the difficulty in transitioning from High School to college, however that doesn’t negate the stigma that Michigan has with some prospects as being an academics first type of institution. In essence what I’m trying to convey is some prospects don’t care about the practical aspect of the academic program in terms of tutoring/scheduling, because they’ve already pre-determined that Michigan is a tough school academically. What you and I consider as a challenging curriculum is most likely very different relative to the standards of a good portion of elite prospects, who often come from high schools/communities that are underprivileged with substandard academics.
Clemson has been recruiting him the longest, and that counts for something. It's one of the reasons we were able to snag McGary over a couple big time schools.That may be an argument for some prospects but I don’t necessarily believe that holds true for the majority. When I see players like Booker, Bluiett, Kennard, Diop, Ulis, etc that favor/commit to programs that literally began recruiting them 2-3 months ago it leads me to believe that how long a particular school has been recruiting them is a small factor.
I think that Michigan academics can be intimidating to certain prospects, and we are not the “it” college right now(that would be UK). Combine that with the fact that Michigan/Coach B are on the straight and narrow and I think it limits the pool of elite prospects for which we have a legitimate shot with. Today’s college basketball recruiting landscape is geared toward elite level talent that usually equates to players leaving after 1-2 years. Some of these prospects want a high profile school that produces NBA players while not being all that challenging academically, with good nightlife.
I don’t believe Michigan is viewed in that manner, and I believe we fall victim to that occasionally
Grantham may not be every prospect. It doesn’t matter to every prospect, but it matters to some. Each recruit is an individual. You can’t generalize with them. If you could, then why would McGary in his right mind choose us over Duke, Kentucky etc etc?
I don’t think Michigan is that intimidating academically. Yeah, it is a tough school. But athletes get a ton more help than the average student and generally take fewer credits as well to compensate for the time lost to practices and workouts and travel. I have no doubt that athletes get filtered into the classes with the professors with a lighter work load. Nothing wrong with that, absolutely every school does that. I’m sure most of the for sure one and done guys at Kentucky are just taking the lightest work load they can and they’d do the same if they went to Michigan.
I think we go after a more limited pool because the B1G standards are a little bit higher than the SEC, and JB is head of the ethics committee and isn’t going to go after certain recruits.
Didn’t mean to generalize all recruits if that is how my previous post came across, just trying to convey the fact that factors such as “first to the party” and “loyalty” no longer carry the same weight as they once did.
I totally agree regarding athletes’ access to preferential schedules/academic help being able to mitigate the difficulty in transitioning from High School to college, however that doesn’t negate the stigma that Michigan has with some prospects as being an academics first type of institution. In essence what I’m trying to convey is some prospects don’t care about the practical aspect of the academic program in terms of tutoring/scheduling, because they’ve already pre-determined that Michigan is a tough school academically. What you and I consider as a challenging curriculum is most likely very different relative to the standards of a good portion of elite prospects, who often come from high schools/communities that are underprivileged with substandard academics.
But it’s subjective for each recruit. I don’t know how you can say that loyalty is less of a factor than it once was. No way to really measure that. For one guy, it might mean everything. The next, nothing. Who knows which one Grantham is?
I work with kids in Toledo Public Schools, so I know what kind of academic support and challenges these kids face. And yes, it can be intimidating. But it can be intimidating at a Kentucky too. It’s not like other BCS schools are community colleges. You can still get a damn good education at every one of these schools. And they know how to market themselves. They’re not going to present academics on visits as an almost unassailable mountain. They’re going to say they’re tough, but doable and we give plenty of support. The academic standards and challenges are going to viewed as a huge positive to all, especially the parents.
Clemson has been recruiting him the longest, and that counts for something. It's one of the reasons we were able to snag McGary over a couple big time schools.That may be an argument for some prospects but I don’t necessarily believe that holds true for the majority. When I see players like Booker, Bluiett, Kennard, Diop, Ulis, etc that favor/commit to programs that literally began recruiting them 2-3 months ago it leads me to believe that how long a particular school has been recruiting them is a small factor.
I think that Michigan academics can be intimidating to certain prospects, and we are not the “it” college right now(that would be UK). Combine that with the fact that Michigan/Coach B are on the straight and narrow and I think it limits the pool of elite prospects for which we have a legitimate shot with. Today’s college basketball recruiting landscape is geared toward elite level talent that usually equates to players leaving after 1-2 years. Some of these prospects want a high profile school that produces NBA players while not being all that challenging academically, with good nightlife.
I don’t believe Michigan is viewed in that manner, and I believe we fall victim to that occasionally
Grantham may not be every prospect. It doesn’t matter to every prospect, but it matters to some. Each recruit is an individual. You can’t generalize with them. If you could, then why would McGary in his right mind choose us over Duke, Kentucky etc etc?
I don’t think Michigan is that intimidating academically. Yeah, it is a tough school. But athletes get a ton more help than the average student and generally take fewer credits as well to compensate for the time lost to practices and workouts and travel. I have no doubt that athletes get filtered into the classes with the professors with a lighter work load. Nothing wrong with that, absolutely every school does that. I’m sure most of the for sure one and done guys at Kentucky are just taking the lightest work load they can and they’d do the same if they went to Michigan.
I think we go after a more limited pool because the B1G standards are a little bit higher than the SEC, and JB is head of the ethics committee and isn’t going to go after certain recruits.
Didn’t mean to generalize all recruits if that is how my previous post came across, just trying to convey the fact that factors such as “first to the party” and “loyalty” no longer carry the same weight as they once did.
I totally agree regarding athletes’ access to preferential schedules/academic help being able to mitigate the difficulty in transitioning from High School to college, however that doesn’t negate the stigma that Michigan has with some prospects as being an academics first type of institution. In essence what I’m trying to convey is some prospects don’t care about the practical aspect of the academic program in terms of tutoring/scheduling, because they’ve already pre-determined that Michigan is a tough school academically. What you and I consider as a challenging curriculum is most likely very different relative to the standards of a good portion of elite prospects, who often come from high schools/communities that are underprivileged with substandard academics.
But it’s subjective for each recruit. I don’t know how you can say that loyalty is less of a factor than it once was. No way to really measure that. For one guy, it might mean everything. The next, nothing. Who knows which one Grantham is?
I work with kids in Toledo Public Schools, so I know what kind of academic support and challenges these kids face. And yes, it can be intimidating. But it can be intimidating at a Kentucky too. It’s not like other BCS schools are community colleges. You can still get a damn good education at every one of these schools. And they know how to market themselves. They’re not going to present academics on visits as an almost unassailable mountain. They’re going to say they’re tough, but doable and we give plenty of support. The academic standards and challenges are going to viewed as a huge positive to all, especially the parents.
Fair enough, if it is indeed subjective and impossible to quantify, it is impossible to determine if it is actually a factor at all. That being said, I think that is actually the case for decent portion of prospects.
Totally agree that you can get a damn good education from UK/OSU/Clemson, but there is simply no way in hell that a degree from any of those respective institutions carries the prestige that a UM degree does and we’d be foolish to say otherwise.
I understand the academic marketing perspective, but that still doesn’t account for the negative stigma that schools like Michigan face with some recruits. You can sell yourself as much as want, but kids and parents have access to US News rankings just like the rest of us, and they have some idea of where a particular school stands in terms of academic standards and the corresponding degree of difficulty that is attached to that school. Michigan doesn’t have to sell the fact that it will be a challenging curriculum, for most parents it is simply understood. UK on the other hand…not so much.
Fair enough, if it is indeed subjective and impossible to quantify, it is impossible to determine if it is actually a factor at all. That being said, I think that is actually the case for decent portion of prospects.
Totally agree that you can get a damn good education from UK/OSU/Clemson, but there is simply no way in hell that a degree from any of those respective institutions carries the prestige that a UM degree does and we’d be foolish to say otherwise.
I understand the academic marketing perspective, but that still doesn’t account for the negative stigma that schools like Michigan face with some recruits. You can sell yourself as much as want, but kids and parents have access to US News rankings just like the rest of us, and they have some idea of where a particular school stands in terms of academic standards and the corresponding degree of difficulty that is attached to that school. Michigan doesn’t have to sell the fact that it will be a challenging curriculum, for most parents it is simply understood. UK on the other hand…not so much.
Quality of education (which is what the academic rankings are trying to determine) don’t necessarily mean difficulty, however that would be measured in each subject area. The tough reputation of Michigan is more about admissions, which the recruits don’t have to worry about if they meet the B1G minimums. Honestly, I don’t think academics are as big of a factor as it is made out to be, unless recruits are looking at a specific major and one school is elite at it while another is not. I have never seen a recruit turn away from a school because they believe it to be too tough. Not that they’d admit it anyways I suppose.
And I’m not saying that schools have to sell themselves on being tough. They’re not going to emphasize that aspect whether they’re extremely difficult or a cakewalk. They’re going to emphasize how much academic support they have for the student athletes and if their child is struggling, they’ll get all the help they need.
It is true that quality of education doesn’t necessarily equal difficulty, but that is not the perception of the general public, which is my essential point. For instance, Harvard is generally considered a top 3 school by any publication or average Joe from x or y community, but does that inherently dictate that Harvard has a more challenging curriculum relative to Michigan or even UK? The answer to that would be no. That being said, name me one recruit or average Joe from any community that would think Michigan or UK has a more challenging curriculum relative to Harvard and I’ll sell you my oceanfront property in Iowa. Key point - perception = reality to a large degree.
It is true that quality of education doesn't necessarily equal difficulty, but that is not the perception of the general public, which is my essential point. For instance, Harvard is generally considered a top 3 school by any publication or average Joe from x or y community, but does that inherently dictate that Harvard has a more challenging curriculum relative to Michigan or even UK? The answer to that would be no. That being said, name me one recruit or average Joe from any community that would think Michigan or UK has a more challenging curriculum relative to Harvard and I'll sell you my oceanfront property in Iowa. Key point - perception = reality to a large degree.
And there is no recruit that I’ve ever seen that has said difficulty of academics was a detriment to that school. The perception might make a difference on the recruit’s initial thoughts on the school, but once they visit, they’re gonna get the 411 with academics and see that they get just as much support, if not more, at Michigan.
Maybe it makes a difference with 100% one and dones like Derrick Rose or John Wall, but we’re not gonna have a chance in hell with those guys unless they’re from Indiana, Ohio, or Michigan anyways so that doesn’t really take anything away from our pool of talent to pick from.
Does it
It is true that quality of education doesn’t necessarily equal difficulty, but that is not the perception of the general public, which is my essential point. For instance, Harvard is generally considered a top 3 school by any publication or average Joe from x or y community, but does that inherently dictate that Harvard has a more challenging curriculum relative to Michigan or even UK? The answer to that would be no. That being said, name me one recruit or average Joe from any community that would think Michigan or UK has a more challenging curriculum relative to Harvard and I’ll sell you my oceanfront property in Iowa. Key point - perception = reality to a large degree.And there is no recruit that I’ve ever seen that has said difficulty of academics was a detriment to that school. The perception might make a difference on the recruit’s initial thoughts on the school, but once they visit, they’re gonna get the 411 with academics and see that they get just as much support, if not more, at Michigan.
Maybe it makes a difference with 100% one and dones like Derrick Rose or John Wall, but we’re not gonna have a chance in hell with those guys unless they’re from Indiana, Ohio, or Michigan anyways so that doesn’t really take anything away from our pool of talent to pick from.
Does it really make a difference if a recruit explicitly states “the academics are too difficult” at x school? Point is that while a recruit may not make a public statement to that extent, reality is that challenging curriculum may play a role a certain prospects’ approach to choosing a school.
Have you ever heard a recruit explicitly say “I’m choosing x school because they are paying me thousands of dollars”? The answer is no, but we all know that pay for play happens on a daily basis. Doesn’t matter if a recruit makes his private thoughts/approach public, what matters is that difficult academics can be seen as a negative to certain prospects. A good portion of these kids have been coached to make politically correct statements and play things close to the vest.
I would argue that we MAY have a chance with the John Walls and Derrick Roses of the recruiting scene, as we have become a mini point guard U, where our PGs are going to the NBA. I would argue that our academics play a significant role in those type of scenarios involving 1 and dones as you mention above.
Does itIt is true that quality of education doesn't necessarily equal difficulty, but that is not the perception of the general public, which is my essential point. For instance, Harvard is generally considered a top 3 school by any publication or average Joe from x or y community, but does that inherently dictate that Harvard has a more challenging curriculum relative to Michigan or even UK? The answer to that would be no. That being said, name me one recruit or average Joe from any community that would think Michigan or UK has a more challenging curriculum relative to Harvard and I'll sell you my oceanfront property in Iowa. Key point - perception = reality to a large degree.And there is no recruit that I’ve ever seen that has said difficulty of academics was a detriment to that school. The perception might make a difference on the recruit’s initial thoughts on the school, but once they visit, they’re gonna get the 411 with academics and see that they get just as much support, if not more, at Michigan.
Maybe it makes a difference with 100% one and dones like Derrick Rose or John Wall, but we’re not gonna have a chance in hell with those guys unless they’re from Indiana, Ohio, or Michigan anyways so that doesn’t really take anything away from our pool of talent to pick from.
Does it really make a difference if a recruit explicitly states “the academics are too difficult” at x school? Point is that while a recruit may not make a public statement to that extent, reality is that challenging curriculum may play a role a certain prospects’ approach to choosing a school.
Have you ever heard a recruit explicitly say “I’m choosing x school because they are paying me thousands of dollars”? The answer is no, but we all know that pay for play happens on a daily basis. Doesn’t matter if a recruit makes his private thoughts/approach public, what matters is that difficult academics can be seen as a negative to certain prospects. A good portion of these kids have been coached to make politically correct statements and play things close to the vest.
I would argue that we MAY have a chance with the John Walls and Derrick Roses of the recruiting scene, as we have become a mini point guard U, where our PGs are going to the NBA. I would argue that our academics play a significant role in those type of scenarios involving 1 and dones as you mention above.
You’re arguing something that is not provable. What makes you say that the intimidation of Michigan academics hurts us in recruiting? There’s no evidence for it. If they’re intimidated by Michigan, then they’re intimidated by the rest of the BCS conferences.