In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 428
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
What undefeated seasons? In 1997, we played loads of ranked teams.
Stealing Sparty's recruits and owning them on the field since 1898
Go back and read.. wasn't talking about the 1997 season
People seem to take your posts out of context a lot.
It's hard to get the right context when his arguments keep changing.
This is Michigan, fergodsakes.
Each argument might develop new legs, and that makes the discussion go in a similar, but different direction
4-5 people keep changing the arguments. He's done a good job keeping up.
He's the one who tried saying Hoke doesn't take 3 stars, when it's proven he does, he changes it to mid and low 3 stars and says he only takes 1 or 2 per class. We then go on to show him that Hoke takes 5-6 mid to low 3 stars per class. Cope still insisted that it's 1-2. Seems like he changed the argument there.
It was shown that Hoke's taken 4-5 mid-low 3stars or less over the last 2 years.
And the entire point of showing that was to prove that MSU's talent wouldn't have really been dropped off from their successful 2010 and 2011 campaigns.. Not sure how you can convince yourself that Hoke would have taken Cousins, Bell, Robinson, martin, BJ and countless others that defined MSU over the last 2 years.
Sure, maybe MSU loses Baker or Caper and Norman - but for the most part- they all would have been overlooked, thus MSU still goes on to have two very good seasons
Actually, it was shown that he takes 5 or 6 per year. Not sure how you insist otherwise.
Hoke has taken 9 "middling" 3 stars over 2012 and 2013- middling = 5.6 or less.
Divided by 2 classes = 4.5 middling 3 stars a class or as I said "It was shown that Hoke's taken 4-5 mid-low 3stars or less over the last 2 years. "
Now you're just taking him out of context.
According to 247 I count 5 this class and 8 last class. If you count 88's as high 3 stars then it becomes 4 this year and 7 last year. Or about 5.5 per class.
No mention of specific rated 3* kids.
This post was edited by xxmgobluexx 21 months ago
I'm not denying the initial argument started with just 3 stars.
And then I took a look and realized that some of Hoke's 3 stars are borderline 4 stars and the majority of MSU's success the last 2 years was dependent on guys rated less than what Hoke typically took as a 3 star- thus why I altered the discussion to just "middling" 3 stars
Already conceded Hoke takes more 3 stars than I initially thought- however, it's the middling 3 stars or lower than mainly contributed to MSU's success in 2010 and 2011, which is why I then looked at just that because UM fans were claiming that they would have taken most of the talent that made MSU successful the past 2 years and that's just not the case
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by CaliSpartan0606 21 months ago
And this thread has come full circle. I'll see you guys on the next lap.
I've never claimed to be going by 247 recruits.
I've always gone by Rivals recruits (and stated as such)- so feel free to use a different service than I to get different numbers.
Not really an apples to apples comparison then
So you did change it, nice to see you admit that.
As shown over and over, you just move the goalpost time and again when your points are proven wrong.
Did you even read what I wrote?
This doesn't change the overlying point of the discussion that UM wouldn't have gotten the majority of talent on MSU's roster the last 2 years if RR years didn't happen. So adjusting the argument to more clearly make my point was needed.
You can talk all you want about how I "move the goalpost" fact still remains that you've yet to refute the fact that UM wouldn't have gotten the majority of MSU's talent that drove the success in 2010 and 2011.
So continue to make fun of me or me changing the stance of my argument- but facts are facts and you've yet to refute that.
Is there a list of these hypothetical specific players?
Per xxmgobluexx in other thread..
Schofner (now Burkland)
And which Michigan players would they have replaced? There has to be a quid pro quo in this hypothetical, right?
Would they have replaced the lowest ranking recruits, or the guys who haven't really produced on the field (regardless of what their star ratings were)?
Thanks, that is the guys with offers from Michigan while RichRod was coach. That doesn't get into the guys that may have received Michigan offers if RichRod wasn't the coach. As shown though, Michigan under Carr and Hoke had no problem taking the 3* kids that MSU also recruits.
As Butte stated, this is just going in circles now.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports