Michigan Football Currently #1 Class (Average Stars) - Scout **UPDATED**

Submitted by Cold War on

Michigan football is again, very quietly, rolling up an impressive recruiting class for 2015. In terms of average stars, it is #1 in the country at 3.91 at Scout. Due to the relatively small number of recruits the overall class ranking is #17.

http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=14&yr=2015#/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=14&yr=2015

 

**UPDATED**

Information from farther down the thread

Class distribution of players 4* or higher on the roster

2014 - 8

2013 - 19

2012 -  15

2011 - 3

2010 - 1

Total - 46

 

 

 

MGoBoard

MaximusBlue

September 24th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^

One thing you can’t take away from Hoke is his recruiting. He's building a solid team the right way. Problem is the talent looks like it's poorly coached for the most part. You have to win with all this talent. I'm not buying the youth excuse any more.

Joined: 07/31/2012

MGoPoints: 9765

alum96

September 24th, 2014 at 11:08 AM ^

It seems like we've actually done better with lower rated guys than higher rated guys for the most part - our stars today are 3 stars Frank Clark, Devin Funchess, Jake Ryan.  Our next potential star is Henry, also a 3 star.  So I can't just say "we are not developing players" - because we are, it's just that we seem to not be developing the high ranked ones at a very high hit rate.  We seem to do be doing a good job with preferred walk ons (Glasgows) as well.

Lewis, Butt and Bolden are 4 stars and Peppers was obviously a unique case as a 5 star - ridiculous athlete who didnt even need spring camp to win a starting job.  That would be the next group of guys I see as 2015's potential top 4-5 players (with Henry).  And cant say Peppers was "developed" per se just like I dont think Mike Hart was "developed" per se.

I don't know - we are doing very well in the raw rankings but it seems like we are not picking the right players for a system or just dont have excellent position coaching outside of maybe the WRs where generally we have had a nice pipeline of players develop into All Big 10 types.  Good teams have a lot of future NFL players on their team.  The 97 squad had 31 guys who smelled the league - does this team have >15?

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82804

alum96

September 24th, 2014 at 10:48 AM ^

I did a diary on the 7th ranked 2012 class earlier this week and the early results are

http://mgoblog.com/diaries/reranking-2012-recruiting-class-thru-4-games…

  • 1 bona fide star in Funchess which we already are most likely going to lose early (2015) (3 star)
  • 1 potential star in the making in Henry (3 star)
  • Both our 5 stars have been beaten out by a Glasgow brother
  • Front line starters right now from that class that would start for >2/3s of the teams in the country right now are potentially Bolden, Wilson.. and maybe Magnuson
  • Guys who start for us who have shown something but dont seem on the road for star status/1st team or 2nd team all Big 10 types includes Braden, Chesson, Norfleet, Darboh, Clark
  • I am confused by Ross III a very productive player in his first 2 years but marginalized in his new SAM position
  • Rotation players not making huge impacts are guys like Mario O, Wormley, Jenkins-Stone, AJ Williams, Godin
  • Little or no contribution on game day - Richardson, Strobel, Bars, Gant, Johnson

That was the 7th ranked class in the nation in 2012 - our current juniors and RS SOs.  I don't see the bedrock there from these players of a conference champion.  This was supposed to be Brady's bedrock class to 'compete with Alabama in 2015/2016'.

While I am happy about the recruiting success I am in the camp I'd rather have a staff who recruits in the teens and is excellent at development.  We are very mixed in development.  I am taking a lot of the Rivals rankings with big grains of salt outside of the top 10 players like a Peppers.  And even then some salt (Green).

/EMO

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82804

LSAClassOf2000

September 24th, 2014 at 11:29 AM ^

I continually update my data on average ratings within the Big Ten using Rivals rankings, but going al the way back to 2002. One thing that always astounds me in the data is just how closely our average ranking parallels Ohio State most years - in the 13 complete cycles of this data, the differential in average rankings has never been more than about 0.4 in either direction. That tells me - and I could be wrong - that the quality is comparable in the eyes of the people making the judgments most years, and that we are more or less as successful in acquiring that talent (slightly less most years recently, of course). Then you have Michigan State, where the average rankings typically sit in the nebulous midrange of Big Ten recruiting, and look at that performance relative to rating. It's interesting to think about the prospect of development being an issue if you start doing a broad comparison of average ratings. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130831

alum96

September 24th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^

I've done the same with OSU and Oregon the past 8-9 years and Michigan's average rank over that time was "a tiny bit" behind OSU and equal to Oregon.  Now Oregon has a specific system it recruits to so a 3/4 star tweener that doesnt work in a pro style set might work perfect for them but the larger picture is it's not about procuring talent.  We've always done that.  You need to do something past procure. 

This is not anything new - Notre Dame was recruiting well through the Davie, Weiss, Willingham eras. Tennessee's recruiting has not fallen off a cliff.   They had the wrong coaches.  As we have lately.

Wisconsin, MSU and Stanford now routinely have classes from mid 20s to 40ish.  Kansas State in the mid 50s to mid 60s.  There is a reason they are successful.

Which is why i could care less if our recruiting falls to #23 one year or #27 the next.  You can build nationally competitive teams anywhere from #1 class to #40 class if you have the right staff. (the whole staff, not just the HC)  If you have the wrong staff you could be top 5 every year and it doesnt mean squat. 

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82804

Tuebor

September 24th, 2014 at 12:07 PM ^

No doubt.  Wisconsin and MSU make a their living off Frank Clark type guys.  Safety in high school weighs 220 lbs.  Puts 2 years into the program and weight room comes out a 280 lbs monster with all conference potential.  Wisconsin OL recruiting is all about whether or not a guy has the right frame not what his star ranking is.

 

Star ratings and recruiting class rankings are for fans not for coaches.

Joined: 03/14/2011

MGoPoints: 17467

Voltron is Handsome

September 24th, 2014 at 11:06 AM ^

No. Seven won't get it done, even with a bowl win to make it eight. We should be getting 10+ per year at this point with nine being acceptable. Yeah, it's never a bad thing to get these high profile recruits, but they are worthless if they cannot be developed and help get wins.

Joined: 05/12/2014

MGoPoints: 3908

alum96

September 24th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^

Utah has 2 star players - Nate Orchard and Dres Anderson.  Their 2nd WR and their 2 safeties are good players. They have a rapidly improving QB under a new OC who last year threw 16 TD and 16 INT.  This year he is something like 7 TD 0 INT.  Their RBs are ok, nothing special.  Their OL had 2 very young guys on the right side and ok Pac 12 players on the left side.  They lost almost their entire front 7 on defense to graduation or injury (5 of the 7)  Their DTs were first year starters as were their 2 corners - 1 of their corners was a converted WR.  Their best LB was hurt.  The remaining LBs are new dudes and they have no depth. 

On paper that is nothing great.  But they traveled a few thousand miles, into a different time zone, and won.  And they looked frigging well coached doing it.  They dont have elite athletes that out ran us, out jumped out, out anythinged us, other than outfootballed us (mostly our offense and special teams, our defense was solid)

For a school that has a basketball coach that shows you a well coached group of players with a mix of a few stars and a bunch of "quality not star" players can succeed at the highest level I am surprised so many still get drunk on our recruiting rankings.  These players are just raw material.  Outside of 10 players a year nationally ala Peppers, they need to be molded.

Utah's recruiting rankings from 2009-2013 i.e. the basis of their 2014 team.  A team I think that would finish about 5th in the Big 10, and 8th in the Pac 12...

  • 2009: 44
  • 2010: 32
  • 2011: 37
  • 2012: 28
  • 2013: 44

This is basically 5-7 spots behind Wisconsin every year other than 2012 and 2010 where they recruited at MSU/Wisconsin level. 

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82804

alum96

September 24th, 2014 at 3:35 PM ^

With a brand new OC.  On the road.

'nuff said

I cannot believe people are saying "we need 1 more year to evaluate what is happening so all our 4/5 stars can be upperclassmen."

We are not evaluating if this team can be playoff material this year.  We are evaluating if we can put out a product that can finish in the top third of the Big 10 (the worst major conference) with the "2nd most talent" (behind OSU) in the league.  Or at worst 3rd most "talent". 

We are evaluating if we can field a team that competes with teams ranked #15 thru #30 in the country, not #1 thru #8.  Early returns on those front are bad.  Just bad.

Young talented well coached teams in a BAD conference should do well.  Even if they dont win the conference.  They should look proficient at basic things like "offense" or "punting".  They should pull an upset against a superior team every so often.  They should be fun to watch as they improve. 

Next year we lose our star LB, our star DE, and our star WR.  And they will say "we need 1 more year to evaluate because how can any coaching staff deal with losses of players!"

Fergodsakes some people are still in denial.

 

Joined: 04/28/2012

MGoPoints: 82804

Arizona Blue

September 24th, 2014 at 11:33 AM ^

Who gives a shit at this point, recruiting is only relevant if you can translate recruiting classes to wins. We HAZ no Wins. I will likely only plug back into recruiting when we have a new coach

Joined: 06/17/2009

MGoPoints: 2281

Padog

September 24th, 2014 at 11:34 AM ^

Does anybody else feel like we are outplaying everybody? We out gained Utah and Notre Dame. Yes, out gaining means nothing. But I feel like the talent does show. Utah wasn't out running us, they were out coaching us. That is telling. We need a game manager that can recruit. Not a game manager that can develop. With this talent and future talent we could be really good. Again hoke is holding us back.


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 08/27/2010

MGoPoints: 8510

Sten Carlson

September 24th, 2014 at 1:00 PM ^

Yep! Here comes the word we hear continually from the players and coaches: CONSISTENCY! In every game, especially the two losses, the offense was doing fine and then has self-inflicted wounds that stall it out. Add to that silly turnovers and you loss to decent teams like ND and Utah. Consistency is a combo of coaching and player execution, not just coaching. I know a lot of posters in here get irate with the whole, "blame the players" meme, but as Fleet said, they're the ones that have to take what they're taught and execute. Now, people will beat the, "coaches aren't teaching them the right things..." drums but I don't know that that is the case, and neither do any of you. Hoke, GMAT, and Nuss have all said they have to do a better job of coaching, of getting the players to execute, but the players need to step it up. People think there is some messianic figure out there that will swoop down from the heavens and instantly make the players execute. That is a pipe dream. The players are failing at doing their jobs as a unit. When the OL gives DG time to throw, he throws and DF short arms it and it's an INT, that's not "bad coaching" like many scream. That's bad player execution. One guy makes a mistake and it's going the other way.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

Padog

September 24th, 2014 at 1:14 PM ^

Many valid points, I think that in a year after only like 9 guys graduate, that the team will be very solid. I know we've been saying that forever but this year is even more escalated. We lose an inconsistent QB, a walk-on G, A good DE, a decent DE, A great MLB, A really good LB, a decent CB, a good CB, a decent kicker, and a really inconsistent Punter. Most of these are more than replaceable. Frank Clark might be the only irreplaceable guy. This is promising.


Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 08/27/2010

MGoPoints: 8510

westwardwolverine

September 24th, 2014 at 3:55 PM ^

Our offense as a whole has been pretty good. However, when your QB play has been as poor as Michigan's has been, there isn't much you can do. 

I'll say it again: If Devin was 70% of the guy from Notre Dame last year, we are undefeated right now. He's a shell of what he used to be. He can't do basic QB things. I feel for the guy, wish him nothing but the best, but its true. 

Joined: 11/26/2013

MGoPoints: 9007

Sten Carlson

September 24th, 2014 at 5:33 PM ^

Well said Westward!

Our offense has been shooting itself in the foot over and over, and many of these shots have been drive stallers/killers.

As you aptly point out, a great deal of this is on DG unfortunately.  Turnovers are killers, set the defense up on short fields (often times) and get the defense gassed.

Joined: 11/16/2009

MGoPoints: -56

westwardwolverine

September 24th, 2014 at 3:52 PM ^

Notre Dame is why I'm not in any way sold on our defense. 

On their first seven drives, they had four touchdown drives of 50 yards or more. We only slowed them down when it was 28-0. That's why I roll my eyes when people are saying defense isn't the problem. They are good, but they aren't great. Nothing better (and maybe seemingly worse) than the 2011 or 2012 defense. Hell, Utah put together back to back scoring drives that basically put the game out of reach on either side of the half. When teams have needed to score on us, they have done so without much effort. 

We did not outplay Notre Dame. We did not outplay Utah. We barely outplayed Miami. 

Joined: 11/26/2013

MGoPoints: 9007

Brags123

September 24th, 2014 at 11:46 AM ^

Western Michigan is coming in at 49 sandwiched between iillinois and rutgers. Another nice looking class for a Mid-Major team. Hopefully it translates to a turn around but they already look better this year. Also their Freshman Runningback is a stud (almost 600 yards and 9 touchdowns in only 3 games) Go Broncos

Joined: 01/21/2014

MGoPoints: 217

Tuebor

September 24th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^

How good can our recruiting really be if PSU has 2 more wins and 4 less losses than us since they announced their sanctions which impacted recruiting.

Joined: 03/14/2011

MGoPoints: 17467

WalterMitty

September 24th, 2014 at 12:35 PM ^

C'mon Hoke! Maybe, just maybe, they can get it turned around this year? The "pattern" has to start paying off for us soon? So many good, smart kids in this program. Crazy they haven't been able to turn the corner yet, but I think they will soon.

Joined: 07/03/2008

MGoPoints: 921

Padog

September 24th, 2014 at 2:03 PM ^

There is the telling stat. 1 player from 2010, 3 from 2011. That is four players 4 stars are better that are seniors on this team. In a couple of years, when the team is loaded even more so with talent it wll be much better.  We have 9 more on schedule for this next year. Next year, the roster will look like this.

2015: 9 (Maybe more)

2014: 8

2013: 19

2012: 15

That is outstanding talent. Up there with the higher ups of the SEC. At that point if we still can't win, it is most definietly a coaching issue. Right now, I can still put up with the talent defiency arguments.

Joined: 08/27/2010

MGoPoints: 8510

markusr2007

September 24th, 2014 at 2:20 PM ^

Michigan is the only college football team in the nation that consistently achieves less with more in terms of recruited football talent. This is a fact, and has remain a fact since 1998, when Michigan landed the No. 1 recruiting class in the nation.

Has anyone comparatively analyzed the recruiting rankings of teams like Wisconsin and Michigan State and Iowa over the last 10 to 15 years. Just look at the talent they recruit to that of Michigan.  Now why not ask the question just how in the fuck Michigan football can consistently lose football games to these teams over the last several years after kicking the shit out of them so decisively on the recruiting trail?

My theory:

1. There is simply too much deviation and bias in recruit rankings.  MSU, Wiscy, Iowa are getting short schrift for their recruiting achievements, while Michigan is getting way too much press and credit.

2. Michigan has always recruited quite well overall, and will continue to do so because it's academics and facilities are kick ass, and many others are far from that.

3. The biggest difference has been in football coaching staff consistency over the last 10 years, and achievements in player development.  Michigan doesn't develop talent like it used too.  Other teams are better at it.

 

Joined: 10/21/2008

MGoPoints: 19372

Bez

September 24th, 2014 at 2:55 PM ^

3. The biggest difference has been in football coaching staff consistency over the last 10 years, and achievements in player development.  Michigan doesn't develop talent like it used too.  Other teams are better at it.

Who are the other teams? the others cited in your post? MSU, WI, Iowa? Because those teams have been running their respective systems much longer than Brady Hoke has at Michigan.

Joined: 12/31/2010

MGoPoints: 450

Bez

September 24th, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^

What will people think of player development if we can finish multiple drives against good teams by the end of the season? 

Doesn't seem like that is going to happen, but if it does, how will people respond to that?  Too little too late? Something to get excited about?

Joined: 12/31/2010

MGoPoints: 450

BornInA2

September 24th, 2014 at 6:29 PM ^

Apparently RR *should* have stopped the bus on the way to Happy Valley and everywhere else to do some...any...recruiting. Yes, Jake Ryan and Denard and Devin Gardner (wait, jury has gone back out on DG), but seriously. WTH was going on in 09 an 10??

So yeah, the kids from Hoke's first real year of recruiting are sophomores. Damnit! Why aren't they playing like seniors???! WTH is wrong with the team, the coaches, the AD, then University President, the governor, ad nauseum?

I'll now quietly return to my lemons. And Everclear.

Joined: 02/15/2014

MGoPoints: 12802