Online Now 199

Wolverine247 Board

The place for discussion on the Michigan Wolverines

Online now 346
Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)

Reply

Urbie making a run a Armani Reeves

  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    The B10 is not the SEC. We limit the number of LOI's a team can sign to three more than the total number of schollies that team has room for under NCAA rules. And every team has to submit paperwork to the B10 offices to explain any discrepancies. So, Urbie can't have room for 19 on NSD and sign 25 with the plan to run off the extras between NSD and August. The B10 will not allow it. You can deny RS juniors a fifth year, but other than that you are stuck with the numbers you have on NSD. With the three player cushion the B10 permits, maybe you can get above 22 in this class, but it's going to be very difficult unless you are releasing most/all of your fifth year seniors. Good luck.

    so how about this scenario, Graham is transferring, J Berry will not be back, Fellows and McVey are likely to go the medical hardship route, Chris Carter and Tommy Brown won't make it through the next couple of weeks or conditioning, there's six more.

  • I don't think PSU hiring Ted Roof as DC is gonna help keep Reeves (or Williams). Hopefully one of you Penn State guys are still following this thread and can confirm or deny my suspicions.

    It almost seems like PSU is just hiring a few placeholders while the Sandusky disaster fades from memory. I bet PSU is involved in another coaching search within 2-3 years.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    I've seen tape on our guys and they are all very good. Moreover, Scout and Rivals have Bolden, Ross and RJS ranked higher. Bolden was a standout at the recent Army AA game (and at practices) and might even see a further bump up in his ranking soon. Ross and RJS also played in the game. Also, Williams played in the Semper Fidelis game, which is the newest and least prestigious of the three such games, and that fact also is another data point.

    I was clear when giving my opinion that it was based on not having seen tape on Williams. You can ignore it if you wish. But it is very consistent with the opinions/rankings given by all of the professional recruiting services, which presumably have reviewed Williams' tape and even seen him in person. FWIW, even OSU was not recruiting Williams heavily until very recently, so apparently most of your own coaching staff (Luke Fickell, former HC (now co-DC), and Mike Vrabel, former LB coach (now DL coach), did not think highly enough of him to make him a priority earlier.

    Fair enough...just wondering what you were using to judge that Williams wasn't as good as Bolden, Ross and RJS.

    tOSU didn't offer Bolden, Ross, and RJS either but that doesn't mean they are not worthy of the offer... guessing there prob was not mutual interest until meltdown at PSU in Williams case.

    FWIW I watched Bolden in the UA All American game and he looked like a stud, def good pick up there. Haven't seen the other two play.

  • psubills62 said... (original post)

    Just curious, are those visits set or are they guesses?

    I believe the M visit is set...OSU visit by Reeves is speculation and only happens if OSU offers...Williams 1/20 unofficial visit to OSU with his mother is confirmed...

  • MrBuckeyeBenny said... (original post)

    What you are failing to realize is the 82 scholarship cap doesn't take affect till next year...and by my count with current commits we are at 79 scholarships...that's not even counting attrition before NSD...So we have room for Reeves and Cam along with a few tackles if we so choose!

    The 82 cap that the NCAA has placed on OSU matters beginning on NSD. Why? The way the B10 rule works is each team must calculate on NSD how many players it can sign without going over the 85 max for the next school year. That number is 85 for all of the teams in the B10, but it is 82 for OSU. Each team can then sign up to three more on NSD, but must report to the B10 to the extent that it does so with an explanation of how it plans to get down to the total 85 allowed (82 for OSU) by next fall. And the plan cannot be "we are going to kick X number of kids to the curb". It must be something like "player X is planning to transfer out" or "player Y is leaving early for the NFL" or "player Z is expected to get a medical hardship".

    I do not know whether your number of 79 is accurate or not, but it sounds high to me based on the sized of your classes the past four years and the likelihood that you will be asking some number of 5th year seniors to return. Here are your class sizes:

    2008: 20 (potential 5th year seniors)
    2009: 25
    2010: 19
    2011: 23
    2012: 19 (current verbal commitments)

    Total: 106

    Now, certain players will not be returning from the 2008 class (e.g., TP), but others likely are (e.g., Sabino, Stoneburner). And I'm sure you have lost a handful from the 2009-2011 classes due to misbehavior, grades, etc., but to get down to 79 with the current number of verbals you have for 2012 would mean that you would have to lose 27 players from your last four classes. It's not impossible, but it's a tall order.

    This post was edited by MrWoodson 2 years ago

  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    The 82 cap that the NCAA has placed on OSU matters beginning on NSD. Why? The way the B10 rule works is each team must calculate on NSD how many players it can sign without going over the 85 max for the next school year. That number is 85 for all of the teams in the B10, but it is 82 for OSU. Each team can then sign up to three more on NSD, but must report to the B10 to the extent that it does so with an explanation of how it plans to get down to the total 85 allowed (82 for OSU) by next fall. And the plan cannot be "we are going to kick X number of kids to the curb". It must be something like "player X is planning to transfer out" or "player Y is leaving early for the NFL" or "player Z is expected to get a medical hardship".

    I do not know whether your number of 79 is accurate or not, but it sounds high to me based on the sized of your classes the past four years and the likelihood that you will be asking some number of 5th year seniors to return. Here are your class sizes:

    2008: 20 (potential 5th year seniors) 2009: 25 2010: 19 2011: 23 2012: 19 (current verbal commitments)

    Total: 106

    Now, certain players will not be returning from the 2008 class (e.g., TP), but others likely are (e.g., Sabino, Stoneburner). And I'm sure you have lost a handful from the 2009-2011 classes due to misbehavior, grades, etc., but to get down to 79 with the current number of verbals you have for 2012 would mean that you would have to lose 27 players from the above five classes. It's not impossible, but it's a tall order.

    It's not a tall order at all. We have had a lot of players already leave, like Berry, or have medicals (like McVey and Fellows), and are expecting to lose at least 6 more by the spring game.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

  • Buckeye Warrior said... (original post)

    It's not a tall order at all. We have had a lot of players already leave, like Berry, or have medicals (like McVey and Fellows), and are expecting to lose at least 6 more by the spring game.

    Ok. But, just to get technical, you have to lose them by NSD. You at least need to know which players and have a "good" reason for each by NSD so you can report it to the B10. Under the B10 rule, you are not allowed to oversign on NSD with the plan that you are going to weed out enough players later. That is what the SEC does and it is not allowed by the B10.

    This post was edited by MrWoodson 2 years ago

  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    The B10 is not the SEC. We limit the number of LOI's a team can sign to three more than the total number of schollies that team has room for under NCAA rules. And every team has to submit paperwork to the B10 offices to explain any discrepancies. So, Urbie can't have room for 19 on NSD and sign 25 with the plan to run off the extras between NSD and August. The B10 will not allow it. You can deny RS juniors a fifth year, but other than that you are stuck with the numbers you have on NSD. With the three player cushion the B10 permits, maybe you can get above 22 in this class, but it's going to be very difficult unless you are releasing most/all of your fifth year seniors. Good luck.

    informative response...have no idea how Meyer expects everything to play out...a lot of offers out there...expect a minimum of 2 OT, 1LB, 1 S or CB and 1 WR added to the current 19 commits...this adds up to 24...I really see another LB and OL included...no idea on how this is going to work but we will know in the next 2-3 weeks...

  • pondo171 said... (original post)

    informative response...have no idea how Meyer expects everything to play out...a lot of offers out there...expect a minimum of 2 OT, 1LB, 1 S or CB and 1 WR added to the current 19 commits...this adds up to 24...I really see another LB and OL included...no idea on how this is going to work but we will know in the next 2-3 weeks...

    Also, if I were Urbie, I would want more than two more OL. You only have 13 and you don't have a single OT in this class. Michigan is signing at least seven in our 2012 class and you are at least as thin as we are. Even four OL seem too few for you guys, but maybe Urbie has another perspective.

    This post has been edited 4 times, most recently by MrWoodson 2 years ago

  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    Ok. But, just to get technical, you have to lose them by NSD. You at least need to know which players and have a "good" reason for each by NSD so you can report it to the B10. Under the B10 rule, you are not allowed to oversign on NSD with the plan that you are going to weed out enough players later. That is what the SEC does and it is not allowed by the B10.

    I am not sure that there is anything the B1G can do about it. What are they going to do? Kids leave when they want, not on a coaches schedule. Some of the players may stay in school until after the spring game and then leave over the summer. Nothing the B1G can do about it.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

  • Buckeye Warrior said... (original post)

    I am not sure that there is anything the B1G can do about it. What are they going to do? Kids leave when they want, not on a coaches schedule. Some of the players may stay in school until after the spring game and then leave over the summer. Nothing the B1G can do about it.

    That is a total head in the sand response. The B10 can do a lot. And the proof is in the fact that teams follow the rule. If they didn't, B10 teams would be signing like the SEC for the past 20 years because there would be nothing holding them back. Trust me, the B10 is not going to let Urban Meyer come in and decide he doesn't need to follow the rules because, well, he is Urban Meyer. It just doesn't work that way.

  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    That is a total head in the sand response. The B10 can do a lot. And the proof is in the fact that teams follow the rule. If they didn't, B10 teams would be signing like the SEC for the past 20 years because there would be nothing holding them back. Trust me, the B10 is not going to let Urban Meyer come in and decide he doesn't need to follow the rules because, well, he is Urban Meyer. It just doesn't work that way.

    No one has said that Urban is breaking any rules or even planning to break rules. Not sure where people get that from. What is the B1G going to do if a kid decides to leave after spring practice?

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

  • Buckeye Warrior said... (original post)

    I am not sure that there is anything the B1G can do about it. What are they going to do? Kids leave when they want, not on a coaches schedule. Some of the players may stay in school until after the spring game and then leave over the summer. Nothing the B1G can do about it.

    They would not allow OSU to sign more recruits, pretty obvious if you ask me.

    signature image signature image

    This is Michigan, fergodsakes.

  • Buckeye Warrior said... (original post)

    No one has said that Urban is breaking any rules or even planning to break rules. Not sure where people get that from. What is the B1G going to do if a kid decides to leave after spring practice?

    The B10 rule does not prevent a kid from leaving after Spring practice or at any other time. It regulates the number of players you can sign on NSD.

  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    The B10 rule does not prevent a kid from leaving after Spring practice or at any other time. It regulates the number of players you can sign on NSD.

    I guess all I can say is sit tight and lets see what the B1G does.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

  • Buckeye Warrior said... (original post)

    I guess all I can say is sit tight and lets see what the B1G does.

    I'm pretty sure Urbie will follow the B10 rule. I am sure Gee & Co. and compliance are not going to let him play fast and loose with the rules. Don't take this the wrong way, because it is not meant as a flame, but the last thing OSU needs is some sort of mini-scandal because Urbie is trying to skirt the B10 rules on oversigning. It's not going to happen.

  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    I'm pretty sure Urbie will follow the B10 rule. I am sure Gee & Co. and compliance are not going to let him play fast and loose with the rules. Don't take this the wrong way, because it is not meant as a flame, but the last thing OSU needs is some sort of mini-scandal because Urbie is trying to skirt the B10 rules on oversigning. It's not going to happen.

    When has Urban oversigned?

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

  • Buckeye Warrior said... (original post)

    When has Urban oversigned?

    He isn't saying he has?

    signature image signature image

    This is Michigan, fergodsakes.

  • MrWoodson said... (original post)

    Ok. But, just to get technical, you have to lose them by NSD. You at least need to know which players and have a "good" reason for each by NSD so you can report it to the B10. Under the B10 rule, you are not allowed to oversign on NSD with the plan that you are going to weed out enough players later. That is what the SEC does and it is not allowed by the B10.

    After re-reading this, I am asking on Bucknuts what the actual rule is. I misunderstood the first time I read it.

    signature image

    www.miamiproject.miami.edu/

  • Never Lose Hoke said... (original post)

    He isn't saying he has?

    Let it go. This is why you can't have a rational conversation with the Nuts.

  • thebuckeyeguy said... (original post)

    Fair enough...just wondering what you were using to judge that Williams wasn't as good as Bolden, Ross and RJS.

    tOSU didn't offer Bolden, Ross, and RJS either but that doesn't mean they are not worthy of the offer... guessing there prob was not mutual interest until meltdown at PSU in Williams case.

    FWIW I watched Bolden in the UA All American game and he looked like a stud, def good pick up there. Haven't seen the other two play.

    Ohio offered Ross, but your point still stands.

  • Mr Mxyzptlk said... (original post)

    I don't think PSU hiring Ted Roof as DC is gonna help keep Reeves (or Williams). Hopefully one of you Penn State guys are still following this thread and can confirm or deny my suspicions.

    It almost seems like PSU is just hiring a few placeholders while the Sandusky disaster fades from memory. I bet PSU is involved in another coaching search within 2-3 years.

    I don't think Roof is much of a factor either way for Reeves or Williams. The thing is, our scheme for DB's at PSU the last 10-15 years has been Cover 3 all the way. Very few good DB's are willing to come play in that system - they want to hear that they'll be mano e mano, be able to show off their skills, etc. 100% zone is not what they want. Another thing is that he has a championship ring. Whether his D earned it or not isn't always something recruits think about - it's probably still a potential selling point.

    I read an article recently saying Roof prefers to run man coverage. So in theory, that would actually help bring in DB's. And Vanderlinden is remaining the LB coach. Again, in theory, Cam could see that and know he'll be with a top notch linebacker coach at Penn State.

    Maybe these are the kinds of things our new staff can sell to Reeves and Williams. But at the same time, I know that both of them and their families were very close to Bill Kenney, who is no longer on staff. And I think that, along with the scandal, is having a significant impact on their decisions. We'll have to see how they interact with the new staff - some PSU people don't expect them to visit PSU again, except as future opponents.

    All that to say: Roof will help in the sales pitch, but shouldn't help or hurt in any other way.

    Regarding the placeholder theory: certainly possible. Wouldn't be shocked at all if O'Brien takes off for an NFL HC position.

    signature image