forums

Donell Harris Decommits

Status
Not open for further replies.
ssvir said:
Actually I did. I went to Miami from 90-94 and been a season ticket holder and avid follow of the program since the 80's.

Every one of those players was likely paid/given extra benefits by Miami which we can no longer do while at the same time all those $EC programs used to pay and obviously continue to pay.

It still proves my point that out of all of the great players that came through Miami from 2000-2005 that the only south FL guys (even counting Palm Beach Cty which was not considered an extension of Dade/Broward like it is today) that were real 5* rated type players were ....

Johnson
Hester
Willie Williams
McGahee (top 50 but not sure if considered 5*)
Charlie Jones

The reality is that your "win and they will come" mantra will apply to the 4* south FL guys but the 5* guys we will continue to regularly miss on b/c of the ca$h.
Click to expand...
Even that rat shapiro said he never gave recruits money to come to miami because he didn't have to. He also said he never got involved in it because they wouldn't be able to outbid the sec. I'm sure once they were here guys looked out for them as matter a fact i know they did because luke was one of them.
 
Advertisement
ssvir said:
You got me. None of the recruits/players in 1999-2006 got any payments whatsoever
Click to expand...

But I thought the bag game is a new "revolution?" That is what @OriginalCanesCanesCanes is trying to peddle. You guys can't get your stories straight.

Colleges have been buying players for decades. It is nothing new. Miami has never been the big spender in terms of buying recruits. Even Nevin Shapiro admitted it. But it didn't stop us from signing the majority of five-star South Florida recruits when we were still a relevant program.
 
DMoney said:
But I thought the bag game is a new "revolution?" That is what @OriginalCanesCanesCanes is trying to peddle. You guys can't get your stories straight.

Colleges have been buying players for decades. It is nothing new. Miami has never been the big spender in terms of buying recruits. Even Nevin Shapiro admitted it. But it didn't stop us from signing the majority of five-star South Florida recruits when we were still a relevant program.
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree that we EVER got the majority of SFL 5* guys.
 
Advertisement
ssvir said:
We'll have to agree to disagree that we EVER got the majority of SFL 5* guys.
Click to expand...

I don't know about "5*"....In our best years, I'd give UM the "slight" majority of high 4 and 5* types (top 20 kids in the state for instance), but obv those best years haven't been seen in a while

I think over the years this has been a nice rate of success and a realistic goal for UM recruiting (not just the 5*) maybe slightly worse than this because even without bags, it's a smaller world today and staying home means less than ever:
65% of Dade offers
40-50% of Broward offers
30-40% of Palm Beach offers

Try to land about HALF of the total try-county kids you offer. And the legit offers number should be somewhere between 17 and 25 or maybe even a few more depending on needs and whether it's a big class/up-down year in the trip county.? The last 5-7 offers are for locals if you miss on your first tier...JMO on the strategy, but I think the goals have proven to be realistic over the last 25 years
 
DMoney said:
But I thought the bag game is a new "revolution?" That is what @OriginalCanesCanesCanes is trying to peddle. You guys can't get your stories straight.

Colleges have been buying players for decades. It is nothing new. Miami has never been the big spender in terms of buying recruits. Even Nevin Shapiro admitted it. But it didn't stop us from signing the majority of five-star South Florida recruits when we were still a relevant program.
Click to expand...

Wow.

The bag game has been around since forever.

But apparently you’ve missed all the significant changes in the recruiting landscape, and the bag game, in the last 20 years since we won our last NC.

You're either playing a troll game or....
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
If you think things are like they were twenty years ago, you lose all credibility.

Where have you been the last twenty years? You missed the revolution. It’s like you don’t get what’s happened the last 20 years.

It’s a different game now, and to deny it, is to deny reality.
Click to expand...
The thing that's different is not the bags. I knew guys that got bags in the 70s and I'm sure there are people who can go back farther.

The biggest change are the camps, recruiting sites, and internet enabled apps that let recruits self-promote. It makes it harder to find under the radar guys (that are still out there). For a school like Miami, it puts evaluation skills at a premium. And of course, you have to develop them, as demonstrated by results on the field which undeniably we've been lacking.
 
DMoney said:
But I thought the bag game is a new "revolution?" That is what @OriginalCanesCanesCanes is trying to peddle. You guys can't get your stories straight.

Colleges have been buying players for decades. It is nothing new. Miami has never been the big spender in terms of buying recruits. Even Nevin Shapiro admitted it. But it didn't stop us from signing the majority of five-star South Florida recruits when we were still a relevant program.
Click to expand...
See this I cant argue against this is true and a good post
 
Advertisement
College football now plays under a totally different media system than 20 years ago. No one can argue that, right? The fact some schools, like Alabama, are critical drivers of media companies' bottom lines goes a long freakin' way in this entire scheme.

If NBC had been even a quarter as powerful as Disney/ESPN/CBS are now when they struck their '91 deal with Notre Dame, would anyone argue that didn't provide Notre Dame with cover to do virtually anything they liked? Buying players isn't new. The magnitude and alignment of the interests are different, however.

The argument here can go on forever, but it cannot be reasonably argued today's landscape is anything like it was when I started following recruiting in 1996-97 out of a **** computer lab in my old school.
 
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
Wow.

The bag game has been around since forever.

But apparently you’ve missed all the significant changes in the recruiting landscape, and the bag game, last 20 years since we won our last NC.

You're either playing a troll game or....
Click to expand...

You keep dancing around the topic because you have nothing. Explain what's changed, and why that's significant.

Alabama paid $200K to sign Albert Means in 2001. The price tag for Tyrique Stevenson wasn't even close to that.
 
NorthEastCane said:
The thing that's different is not the bags. I knew guys that got bags in the 70s and I'm sure there are people who can go back farther.

The biggest change are the camps, recruiting sites, and internet enabled apps that let recruits self-promote. It makes it harder to find under the radar guys (that are still out there). For a school like Miami, it puts evaluation skills at a premium. And of course, you have to develop them, as demonstrated by results on the field which undeniably we've been lacking.
Click to expand...

And that’s just a small part of the changes, there are many many more. But apparently it’s just a simple as winning according to Dmoney.

It ain’t.
 
LuCane said:
College football now plays under a totally different media system than 20 years ago. No one can argue that, right? The fact some schools, like Alabama, are critical drivers of media companies' bottom lines goes a long freakin' way in this entire scheme.

If NBC had been even a quarter as powerful as Disney/ESPN/CBS when they struck their '91 deal with Notre Dame, would anyone argue that didn't provide Notre Dame with cover to do virtually anything they liked?

The argument here can go on forever, but it cannot be reasonably argued today's landscape is anything like it was when I started following recruiting in 1996-97 out of a **** computer lab in my old school.
Click to expand...

The landscape has changed for sure-- paying coaches, facilities, under-the-radar recruits. All of that has changed tremendously.

But paying players has been around forever. And the difference between the haves and have-nots in the bag game has always been huge.
 
Advertisement
86Gang said:
So why is Bama still doing it now? Did you see the yahoo and espn special calling for the death penalty for Bama? I didn’t either but I saw it for Miami tho.
Click to expand...
Maybe they got cover from the NCAA. Isn't the head of the NCAA the former president of LSU and in Saban's pocket?
 
DMoney said:
The landscape has changed for sure-- paying coaches, facilities, under-the-radar recruits. All of that has changed tremendously.

But paying players has been around forever. And the difference between the haves and have-nots in the bag game has always been huge.
Click to expand...
The difference is the magnitude and the cover to do these things. The times when UM basketball was doing its thing with Stevie Edwards has really changed. It's an insane system now.

It's like the change from distributing weed in the late 60s and 70s to the billion dollar cocaine industry just 15 years later. **** is far more elaborate now and we're on the outside looking in.

I'm not arguing with you about needing to win. I'm not arguing with you about controlling what we can control: do more with less before we ***** about getting more bigtime players. I'm just plainly stating this is a far different and more elaborately rigged system.
 
DMoney said:
You keep dancing around the topic because you have nothing. Explain what's changed, and why that's significant.

Alabama paid $200K to sign Albert Means in 2001. The price tag for Tyrique Stevenson wasn't even close to that.
Click to expand...

You’re actually proving my point.

Keep going.
 
Advertisement
LuCane said:
I'm just plainly stating this is a far different and more elaborately rigged system.
Click to expand...

The system evolves, but the bag schools have always had the same advantage. It's gone from Switzer to Stallings to Saban.

The difference now is that we are fighting the war on two fronts: they are negative recruiting our performance while dangling the bag. That's tough to beat.
 
LuCane said:
I'm just plainly stating this is a far different and more elaborately rigged system.
Click to expand...

He doesn’t seem to get that.

Of course we will get more and better recruits if we win. That’s not who is in play and who I’m talking about.

We should already be at the 9 to 11 win threshold. With what we have now.

All we need is competent coaching on both sides of the ball. But the devil is in the details to get from that, to a playoff team. And that’s what I’m talking about.

This “winning and they will come” ain’t happening. Not for the divas that are going to get you over the hump, unless they are a Duke Johnson type.

Not to mention the changes that have going on in Dade/Broward with the street agent game and the 7 on 7s. That’s a whole other thing that’s changed significantly over the last 20 years.

Can we get over the hump? I think we can. But it’s going to take some really creative recruiting and some innovative approaches. I’m hoping Manny is the guy to get us there. Because just winning alone isn’t going to get us the guys that we actually need to be dominant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement
Back
Top