Charlie Weis: "To Hell with Michigan"

[Revering4Blue]

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/49613


A video clip shows Charlie Weis has taken a shot at Michigan in a speech sometime around the Blue and Gold scrimmage last month. Weis made a speech to fans and claimed the Wolverines would make excuses about their new coaching regime under Rich Rodriguez. "I always been one to never make excuses and not go about airing it," Weis said. "We're going to start on September 6 with San Diego State. I think that the first opportunity we're really gonna have to make a statement is that day. "And then we'll listen to Michigan have all their excuses as they come running in and saying how they have a new coaching staff and there's changes. To hell with Michigan!" Notre Dame plays Michigan in its second game, Sept. 13 at South Bend.

Detroit Free Press

Early bulletin board material.

[WMR]

Seems to me like Charlie should keep his BIG mouth shut until he wins a few games himself.

I'm no Michigan fan, but he doesn't have half the college coaching resume of Rich Rodriguez.

[Highlifeman21]

Michigan and Notre Dame, two storied programs both in disarray.

Notre Dame will probably right the ship sooner, but I would hate to be fans of either school having to stomach what they put on the field for the next 2-3 years.

[WMR]

Michigan and Notre Dame, two storied programs both in disarray.

Notre Dame will probably right the ship sooner, but I would hate to be fans of either school having to stomach what they put on the field for the next 2-3 years.

Rich will do much more at Michigan than Weis will at Notre Dame.

Michigan is a sleeping giant who fell off under Carr the past few seasons. They will be a consistent national champion contender before Notre Dame is.

[GoReds33]

Rich will do much more at Michigan than Weis will at Notre Dame.

Michigan is a sleeping giant who fell off under Carr the past few seasons. They will be a consistent national champion contender before Notre Dame is.Arguibly both teams are sleeping giants. Both annually pull in top 10 recruiting classes, so neither is short on talent. Both have tremendous history. I just think that Michigan has the edge because of their head coach.

[MasonBuzz3]

glad to see Weis copy Bo's "To hell with notre dame," very original for the fat man

[guttle11]

Notice he didn't mention USC...

[*BaseClogger*]

I love it! :D Both Dantonio and Weis have declared war on Michigan! Even Tress is talking smack!

[Spring~Fields]

Seems to me like Charlie should keep his BIG mouth shut until he wins a few games himself.

I'm no Michigan fan, but he doesn't have half the college coaching resume of Rich Rodriguez.

"And then we'll listen to Michigan have all their excuses as they come running in and saying how they have a new coaching staff and there's changes. To hell with Michigan!"

I am a Michigan fan now, and will be rooting for them, well until the last game of the season.

Michigan will be just fine.

[WVRed]

The comments by Weis will be widely echoed in this state.

Rich doesn't even have a QB yet, does he?;)

[MasonBuzz3]

Rich doesn't even have a QB yet, does he?;)

it could be argued that he never had one at WVU and did just fine....White is a hell of an athlete but no QB

[15fan]

Arguibly both teams are sleeping giants. Both annually pull in top 10 recruiting classes, so neither is short on talent.

Ah. College football recruiting rankings. One of the great ruses of our time.

[Chip R]

I wonder what Weis would think if someone said, "To hell with donuts"

[dougdirt]

I don't care for Weis or ND.... but I agree with that line.

[MWM]

Come on, folks. He was speaking to a bunch of 80+ year old boosters. This stuff gets said all the time at these things. Heck, it would be disappointing for those in attendance if he didn't. But for some reason this was captured on video and put on youtube. But it's harmless and is a common occurrence in these types of meetings for any school. Much ado about nothing here.

[gonelong]

Ah. College football recruiting rankings. One of the great ruses of our time.

Agreed, sort of. The only college football recruiting rankings I pay any attention to are Phil Steeles. I get his college magazine each pre-season and I just love it. It it directed towards gamblers, but I use it for a college fantasy league I am in.

GL

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Ah. College football recruiting rankings. One of the great ruses of our time.

Not really.

[BuckeyeRedleg]

Agreed, sort of. The only college football recruiting rankings I pay any attention to are Phil Steeles. I get his college magazine each pre-season and I just love it. It it directed towards gamblers, but I use it for a college fantasy league I am in.

GL

All Phil Steele does is take recruiting rankings from all the main sites and averages them out. He admits to not even following recruiting. He just has his a program that pulls all the info and then comes up with a PS#.

[bucksfan2]

Recruiting rankings are sorta useful. No one is really going to argue who has more talent than the next person. The best teams in the country take the recruits and turn them into good football players. The poor teams take their top recruits and jsut spin their wheels. So far Weiss' biggest downfall has been his inability to develop players. You can have the greatest recuriting class in the history of football but unless you improve as your time in college goes along you aren't going to cut it.

[15fan]

I have a variety of beefs with recruiting rankings for football.

The biggest one is that they are never revised to reflect kids who didn't qualify to enroll. If you have a top 10/25 recruiting class, but 3, 4, 5 of the kids don't qualify, is that class still a top 10/25 class?

(But at that point, all of the magazines have already been sold to all of the fans of Big State U all across the country.)

In basketball and baseball, it's also easier to truly get a read on a kid's ability, etc. They play outside the state borders far more often in summer leagues, camps, etc. Thus you have a much better chance to assess whether the kid from State X is better / worse than advertised because you've put him in a different talent pool as a reference point. That crucible is largely absent in football recruiting rankings.

[Spring~Fields]

Come on, folks. He was speaking to a bunch of 80+ year old boosters.

Oh, a little added information helps, you're right that's different.

[gonelong]

All Phil Steele does is take recruiting rankings from all the main sites and averages them out. He admits to not even following recruiting. He just has his a program that pulls all the info and then comes up with a PS#.

I know, I read the thing cover to cover a few times each spring. :D

I think his ratings tend to be pretty decent ... still, its a pretty big crap shoot to determine how many of these kids can make it on the next level. I think it might be as difficult, or more difficult, than projecting how the college kids will do in the NFL.

GL

[BuckeyeRedleg]

I know, I read the thing cover to cover a few times each spring. :D

I think his ratings tend to be pretty decent ... still, its a pretty big crap shoot to determine how many of these kids can make it on the next level. I think it might be as difficult, or more difficult, than projecting how the college kids will do in the NFL.

GL

I agree. He has the best preseason publication and it's not really close. The thing that's good about his recruiting rankings is that it takes out regional biases by adding them all up and dividing. If a kid is decent, he'll show up on a few lists. If he's real good, he'll show up on all of them. If he's a bluechip, he'll be highly ranked in all.

Of course there will be some kids that fall through the cracks that become eventual first round picks, but more 5 star kids make it than 4 star kids and more 4 star kids make it than 3 stars, etc, etc..

USC has finished pretty much on top for the past 7 years and, sure enough, if someone asked you who the top porgram was over the past 6-7 years they would be the one.

And then you have some programs that take in 30+ kids and get a high ranking because of quantity when 5-8 of the kids don't ever step foot on campus. I disregard quantity and focus on quality. That's why when I'm looking at class rankings by rivals or scout, I like to look at average-star rankings. You shouldn't get penalized for having 15 kids in your class if they are all studs.

Ohio State takes smaller classes and finishes around 6th to 12th every year. Nothing that blows anyone's socks off (like USC or Florida), but solid and somewhat under the radar due to the class size. However, they are almost always top 3 when you average out the star rankings. I think it's safe to say that over the past 6-7 years that USC and Ohio State are top 3 programs and both average top 3 every year in average stars.

USC is really on another planet with their recruiting. I think it must get to the point where it doesn't matter, though, because they can't keep all of those blue-chippers happy and will face more attrition that the average big time BCS program.