The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(01-03-2018 08:18 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  Can you give any examples of a bad recruiter and good coach?

MSU does more with less every year. Some of their classes are borderline G5 level by the "experts". U of M does less with more, like less the last 15 years.

(01-04-2018 11:09 AM)BuickBronco Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 08:18 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  Can you give any examples of a bad recruiter and good coach?

MSU does more with less every year. Some of their classes are borderline G5 level by the "experts". U of M does less with more, like less the last 15 years.

See, now this is the response I was fishing for when I asked that question.

By no means can you honestly say Mark Dantonio is a "bad recruiter"... his last 10 recruiting classes have generally been within the #20-#35 range.

The whole narrative about MSU never being good at recruiting is something Sparty fans like to create, but in actuality Dantonio has always been a pretty good recruiter. More with less? Maybe. But not as much as people are led to believe.

Not to mention all the rumors/allegations of heavy PED/steroid usage in that program. Could be a factor on why they are over-achieving.

(01-04-2018 11:30 AM)GRBRONCO Wrote:  Not to mention all the rumors/allegations of heavy PED/steroid usage in that program. Could be a factor on why they are over-achieving.

Touche!

MSU is a dirty program and Dantonio is a phony. The way he left Cincy makes Flecks' disturbing departure look clean by comparison. Beat Michigan and you can do whatever you want in East Lansing, even become a rape apologist.

(01-04-2018 11:52 AM)GullLake Wrote:  

(01-04-2018 11:30 AM)GRBRONCO Wrote:  Not to mention all the rumors/allegations of heavy PED/steroid usage in that program. Could be a factor on why they are over-achieving.

Touche!

MSU is a dirty program and Dantonio is a phony. The way he left Cincy makes Flecks' disturbing departure look clean by comparison. Beat Michigan and you can do whatever you want in East Lansing, even become a rape apologist.

Dang. You don't like MSU do you? It seemed that most felt that MSU handled that situation properly. You know what situation didn't get handled properly, the Brendon Gleason thing in Ann Arbor. Cover up city.

(01-03-2018 07:04 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 05:46 PM)george14 Wrote:  I have never paid any attention to recruiting because there is not a big correlation with success in the MAC.

The five teams who have consistently had the best recruiting classes over the course of the last 4-5 years are WMU, Toledo, NIU, Ohio, and Miami. The worst have been Ball State, BGSU, Kent St, and EMU. The rest have fallen somewhere in the middle.

Besides the standard anomaly/exception (there’s always 1 or 2), it’s not really a coincidence. I’d say it’s closer to 75% recruiting, 25% coaching.

I'm not sure if you really understood your own post because it proves my point.

In the last 5 years, BGSU has 2 MAC titles and 4 bowl games. BSU has been to 2 bowl games. That's 50% of the bottom recruiting teams you listed. Miami has been to 1 bowl game during that time and they are listed as a good recruiting team. Toledo is the only team with consistent success in the 5 year span considering they have been to 4 bowl games and have a MAC title. Ohio plays in the MACE and they always have a padded record. WMU was horrible in 2013 and average this year, so I wouldn't call it sustained success even though they were amazing last year and good the previous 2 seasons.

While your point does show there is a correlation with regards to success and recruiting, it's hardly notable. BGSU and Miami both disprove that. I would argue coaching is the separation because Campbell, Fleck, and Solich are good coaches. Recruiting at the MAC level is all relatively close and no one is getting 5 star guys. I stand by my comment of 75% coaching and 25% recruiting.

(01-05-2018 01:12 PM)george14 Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 07:04 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 05:46 PM)george14 Wrote:  I have never paid any attention to recruiting because there is not a big correlation with success in the MAC.

The five teams who have consistently had the best recruiting classes over the course of the last 4-5 years are WMU, Toledo, NIU, Ohio, and Miami. The worst have been Ball State, BGSU, Kent St, and EMU. The rest have fallen somewhere in the middle.

Besides the standard anomaly/exception (there’s always 1 or 2), it’s not really a coincidence. I’d say it’s closer to 75% recruiting, 25% coaching.

I'm not sure if you really understood your own post because it proves my point.

In the last 5 years, BGSU has 2 MAC titles and 4 bowl games. BSU has been to 2 bowl games. That's 50% of the bottom recruiting teams you listed. Miami has been to 1 bowl game during that time and they are listed as a good recruiting team. Toledo is the only team with consistent success in the 5 year span considering they have been to 4 bowl games and have a MAC title. Ohio plays in the MACE and they always have a padded record. WMU was horrible in 2013 and average this year, so I wouldn't call it sustained success even though they were amazing last year and good the previous 2 seasons.

While your point does show there is a correlation with regards to success and recruiting, it's hardly notable. BGSU and Miami both disprove that. I would argue coaching is the separation because Campbell, Fleck, and Solich are good coaches. Recruiting at the MAC level is all relatively close and no one is getting 5 star guys. I stand by my comment of 75% coaching and 25% recruiting.

I'm talking about TODAY'S teams from previous recruiting classes. BGSU's 2013 & 2015 championship teams were not composed of 2014-2017 recruiting classes.

Miami is the "exception" as I noted multiple times.

To say the correlation is "hardly notable" is again naive and not using common sense.

(01-05-2018 02:49 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 01:12 PM)george14 Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 07:04 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 05:46 PM)george14 Wrote:  I have never paid any attention to recruiting because there is not a big correlation with success in the MAC.

The five teams who have consistently had the best recruiting classes over the course of the last 4-5 years are WMU, Toledo, NIU, Ohio, and Miami. The worst have been Ball State, BGSU, Kent St, and EMU. The rest have fallen somewhere in the middle.

Besides the standard anomaly/exception (there’s always 1 or 2), it’s not really a coincidence. I’d say it’s closer to 75% recruiting, 25% coaching.

I'm not sure if you really understood your own post because it proves my point.

In the last 5 years, BGSU has 2 MAC titles and 4 bowl games. BSU has been to 2 bowl games. That's 50% of the bottom recruiting teams you listed. Miami has been to 1 bowl game during that time and they are listed as a good recruiting team. Toledo is the only team with consistent success in the 5 year span considering they have been to 4 bowl games and have a MAC title. Ohio plays in the MACE and they always have a padded record. WMU was horrible in 2013 and average this year, so I wouldn't call it sustained success even though they were amazing last year and good the previous 2 seasons.

While your point does show there is a correlation with regards to success and recruiting, it's hardly notable. BGSU and Miami both disprove that. I would argue coaching is the separation because Campbell, Fleck, and Solich are good coaches. Recruiting at the MAC level is all relatively close and no one is getting 5 star guys. I stand by my comment of 75% coaching and 25% recruiting.

I'm talking about TODAY'S teams from previous recruiting classes. BGSU's 2013 & 2015 championship teams were not composed of 2014-2017 recruiting classes.

Miami is the "exception" as I noted multiple times.

To say the correlation is "hardly notable" is again naive and not using common sense.

And NIU's MAC championship teams weren't composed of 2014-2017 recruits either. At least they weren't on the field.

BG won because they had decent talent coupled with a very good QB. Which is why they won the 2 years he played and didn't win the year he didn't.

(01-05-2018 03:10 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 02:49 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 01:12 PM)george14 Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 07:04 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-03-2018 05:46 PM)george14 Wrote:  I have never paid any attention to recruiting because there is not a big correlation with success in the MAC.

The five teams who have consistently had the best recruiting classes over the course of the last 4-5 years are WMU, Toledo, NIU, Ohio, and Miami. The worst have been Ball State, BGSU, Kent St, and EMU. The rest have fallen somewhere in the middle.

Besides the standard anomaly/exception (there’s always 1 or 2), it’s not really a coincidence. I’d say it’s closer to 75% recruiting, 25% coaching.

I'm not sure if you really understood your own post because it proves my point.

In the last 5 years, BGSU has 2 MAC titles and 4 bowl games. BSU has been to 2 bowl games. That's 50% of the bottom recruiting teams you listed. Miami has been to 1 bowl game during that time and they are listed as a good recruiting team. Toledo is the only team with consistent success in the 5 year span considering they have been to 4 bowl games and have a MAC title. Ohio plays in the MACE and they always have a padded record. WMU was horrible in 2013 and average this year, so I wouldn't call it sustained success even though they were amazing last year and good the previous 2 seasons.

While your point does show there is a correlation with regards to success and recruiting, it's hardly notable. BGSU and Miami both disprove that. I would argue coaching is the separation because Campbell, Fleck, and Solich are good coaches. Recruiting at the MAC level is all relatively close and no one is getting 5 star guys. I stand by my comment of 75% coaching and 25% recruiting.

I'm talking about TODAY'S teams from previous recruiting classes. BGSU's 2013 & 2015 championship teams were not composed of 2014-2017 recruiting classes.

Miami is the "exception" as I noted multiple times.

To say the correlation is "hardly notable" is again naive and not using common sense.

And NIU's MAC championship teams weren't composed of 2014-2017 recruits either. At least they weren't on the field.

BG won because they had decent talent coupled with a very good QB. Which is why they won the 2 years he played and didn't win the year he didn't.

This seems to always be the recipe... In all honesty which MAC Champion of years past had a poor QB situation...

2017 - Logan Woodside... one of the best MAC QB's in 2017
2016 - Zach Terrell - definitely a top 5 QB that year in the MAC
2015 - Matt Johnson - Tops in the league
2014 - Drew Hare - Likely the outlier here... but he ran for over 900yds that season!
2013 - Matt Johnson
2012 - Jordan Lynch

Point is...we can keep going back and literally the ONE solid requirement is a top notch QB... A great QB in the MAC can make quite a few other holes in your roster manageable...

NIU... the MSU of the MAC in terms of claiming their teams weren't built on very good recruiting. Please. Spare me with that nonsense.

Going back 15 recruiting classes (2003-2017), NIU has had 10 top 5 classes in the MAC. That's pretty darn good.

The 2011 championship team was built on a couple mediocre classes, but it was also built on the heels of two back-to-back #1 classes.

Again, there's going to be anomalies mixed in here and there but to keep saying NIU did it with bad recruiting simply isn't true.

(01-05-2018 03:40 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  NIU... the MSU of the MAC in terms of claiming their teams weren't built on very good recruiting. Please. Spare me with that nonsense.

Going back 15 recruiting classes (2003-2017), NIU has had 10 top 5 classes in the MAC. That's pretty darn good.

The 2011 championship team was built on a couple mediocre classes, but it was also built on the heels of two back-to-back #1 classes.

Again, there's going to be anomalies mixed in here and there but to keep saying NIU did it with bad recruiting simply isn't true.

How many were top 3? Enough to justify winning the West division 6 times in a row? 5 out of 12 teams isn't that great. And what were the rankings when they weren't top 5? And I'm sure there are multiple different rankings for each year depending on where you look.

As the other poster mentioned (and I hinted at), it's based on QB more than anything else. Going back farther - Miami with Roethlisberger, Toledo with Gradkowski, CMU with Levefour, NIU with Harnish and then Lynch. NIU had a good running game lots of years but never won it since we didn't have a good QB until Harnish.

(01-05-2018 03:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  How many were top 3? Enough to justify winning the West division 6 times in a row?

6 of the last 12 classes were Top 3.

(01-05-2018 04:25 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 03:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  How many were top 3? Enough to justify winning the West division 6 times in a row?

6 of the last 12 classes were Top 3.

Which recruiting listing is that?

(01-05-2018 04:41 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 04:25 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 03:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  How many were top 3? Enough to justify winning the West division 6 times in a row?

6 of the last 12 classes were Top 3.

Which recruiting listing is that?

247sports

(01-05-2018 04:54 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 04:41 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 04:25 PM)Hoekjeness Wrote:  

(01-05-2018 03:55 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  How many were top 3? Enough to justify winning the West division 6 times in a row?

6 of the last 12 classes were Top 3.

Which recruiting listing is that?

247sports

Since there can be a mere .5 or 50.0 between 1st and 5th, it's probably more accurate to use aggregate score. If NIU's run was 2010 to 2014, I'd suggest the recruit classes most responsible for that succes would be 2006-2012. Here's the avg. MAC class score over those years for each team:

Buff-83
Ohio-94
Kent-95
Ball-99
BG-99
NIU-100
Akron-102
CMU-102
Mia-110
WMU-111
Tol-129


Total class avg for all mac schools over that time was 102. So NIU was just a shade below avg. take out the high and low and the avg is still 101.