We're going back to the 90's

[orangepassion]

Only instead of having a directional Connecticut staff, we now have a directional Michigan staff. I hope we branch out a bit for the sake of recruiting.

 

[Orangetradition44]

Well, we WERE better than 25-25 in the 90's

Only instead of having a directional Connecticut staff, now we have a directional Michigan staff. I hope we branch out a bit for the sake of recruiting.

 

[xc84]

Can we just stop all the f-ing whining?

 

[Cuseman78]

Can we just stop all the f-ing whining?

Guys, there is nothing whiny about having questions about the seemingly 15 offensive position coaches that need to be filled. We all have opinions on how we believe the staff should be constructed. My idea of a perfect staff isn't loading up on midwesterners when we are moving into a conference based on the eastern seaboard. Its not whiny to hope that some of our staff at least has some experience in recruiting areas in which we will play the majority of our games (i.e the Northeast, Va, Fl, Ga etc).

 

[690West]

We're going back to the 90's

Yes please

 

[Townie72]

Guys, there is nothing whiny about having questions about the seemingly 15 offensive position coaches that need to be filled. We all have opinions on how we believe the staff should be constructed. My idea of a perfect staff isn't loading up on midwesterners when we are moving into a conference based on the eastern seaboard. Its not whiny to hope that some of our staff at least has some experience in recruiting areas in which we will play the majority of our games (i.e the Northeast, Va, Fl, Ga etc).

Could it be that you have somehow convinced yourself that in order to effectively recruit an area, a coach must be from that area or have contacts in that area?

Suppose that weren't true? Or that it was true ... but that it was a minor, minor factor in determining how successful a coach would be in a particular area? Would your comments about not having coaches from a particular area have any importance?

Twenty or thirty years ago, colleges depended much more on high school coaches to identify kids that they thought could play D1 football and coaches had a much bigger role in steering kids towards programs. In my experience that's much less true than it was. They have some influence, but not much.

First, because of the net and recruiting services and more newspaper coverage, there are no secrets anymore. Everybody knows who and where the prospects are. So the colleges don't need the high school coaches to tell them who can play. Especially, since the parents have already created highlight tapes of their sons to share with colleges.

Secondly, the parents pretty much think the high school coaches are either stupid or interested in only their stake in where the recruit goes. The parents think the coach is dumb because they can't recognize just how good or how much potential their progeny actually has. So the high school coaches influence in where a prospect goes is way, way down.

I wouldn't worry too much about where a coach is from. Can they coach? Can they recruit ... in today's world? That's what we should worry about and not where the coach is from and where he has previously recruited.

 

[orangepassion]

Could it be that you have somehow convinced yourself that in order to effectively recruit an area, a coach must be from that area or have contacts in that area?

Suppose that weren't true? Or that it was true ... but that it was a minor, minor factor in determining how successful a coach would be in a particular area? Would your comments about not having coaches from a particular area have any importance?

Twenty or thirty years ago, colleges depended much more on high school coaches to identify kids that they thought could play D1 football and coaches had a much bigger role in steering kids towards programs. In my experience that's much less true than it was. They have some influence, but not much.

First, because of the net and recruiting services and more newspaper coverage, there are no secrets anymore. Everybody knows who and where the prospects are. So the colleges don't need the high school coaches to tell them who can play. Especially, since the parents have already created highlight tapes of their sons to share with colleges.

Secondly, the parents pretty much think the high school coaches are either stupid or interested in only their stake in where the recruit goes. The parents think the coach is dumb because they can't recognize just how good or how much potential their progeny actually has. So the high school coaches influence in where a prospect goes is way, way down.

I wouldn't worry too much about where a coach is from. Can they coach? Can they recruit ... in today's world? That's what we should worry about and not where the coach is from and where he has previously recruited.

How do you think we got our good JC guys like Goggins, MPB? Greg Adkins has good contacts, meaning he'll find out early about some guys and could get help from their coaches in recruiting them because they know him and trust him. Other guys can become good recruiters, but then you're starting from square one and it'll take time to build relationships. If you don't think contacts are huge for recruiting, I don't know what to say.

 

[orangepassion]

Can we just stop all the f-ing whining?

Can we stop whining about others allegedly whining?

 

[Townie72]

How do you think we got our good JC guys like Goggins, MPB? Greg Adkins has good contacts, meaning he'll find out early about some guys and could get help from their coaches in recruiting them because they know him and trust him. Other guys can become good recruiters, but then you're starting from square one and it'll take time to build relationships. If you don't think contacts are huge for recruiting, I don't know what to say.

If I didn't have direct experience in this, I'd probably agree with you.

The contacts aren't all that important because the high school coach's role in the process has steadily shrunk to where it hardly counts at all.

I'm a lot more familiar with how it works in DI lacrosse, but I'm not unfamiliar with D1 football. The same dynamics are going on.

Let me give you the case with which I am most familiar. I am very close to one of the top 10 lacrosse high schools in the country.

The head lacrosse coach there is a Notre Dame supporter through and through. He loves Notre Dame, the coach, Corrigan, and everything about the school. He give unparalleled access to his players by ND assistants recruiting. He recommends the school to the kids and the parents, etc., etc., etc. And he tries to screen off schools that are ND competitors for talent like UVA, JHU and Georgetown.

In spite of all this access and pressure, how many kids do you think the school has sent to ND in the past 20 years? The answer is almost none. And he's sent none of the really good impact players. That's changed a little because ND did end up with a couple players who are now recommending it to their friends who are being recruited. That's because the kids listen to other kids ... but not to the head coach or any of the high school assistant coaches.

The parents --- who play the second most important role --- listen to no one except maybe other parents.

Contacts aren't what they used to be. They used to be "huge". They aren't anymore. Ask a recruiter or even a high school head coach or someone who has a kid being recruited who knew what the world looked like 20 years ago.