OSU adds a low ranked cb. Hopefully this continues, building a foundation for mediocrity in columbus in the coming years. *evil laugh*
Big Ten Recruiting Class Rankings 6-19-11
Rivals has updated most of their 3-stars, so that update is reflected in these rankings. Action since last rankings:
6-8-11 Indiana gains commitment(!) from Alex Todd.
6-12-11 Ohio State gains commitment from Najee Murray.
6-13-11 Wisconsin gains commitment from Kyle Dodson.
6-14-11 Northwestern gains commitments from Connor Mahoney and Mike McHugh. Illinois gains commitment from Cody Quinn.
6-15-11 Illinois gains commitment from Tajarvis Fuller.
6-16-11 Indiana gains commitment from Nick Mangieri.
6-17-11 Minnesota gains commitment from Scott Ekpe.
|Big Ten+ Recruiting Class Rankings|
|Rank||School||# Commits||Rivals Avg||Scout Avg||ESPN Avg||24/7 Avg|
ESPN's initial rankings are finally out, so their numbers in the table above have switched to star averages, rather than 150 Watchlist prospects.
Full data after the jump.
|#1 Michigan - 16 Commits|
Mario Ojemudia, despite being one of only two future Wolverines already committed to the US Army All-American Bowl, is the lowest-rated recruit to Rivals. They're tweener-haters.
|#2 Ohio State - 9 Commits|
Buckeyes add low-rated DB Najee Murray to the class.
|#3 Penn State - 8 Commits|
No change for Penn State.
|#4 Notre Dame - 10 Commits|
Irish holding steady. Their averages may be slightly dinged by the fact that they have a long-snapper committed.
|#5 Wisconsin - 5 Commits|
Big pull for the Badgers, as Kyle Dodson got his long-awaited Ohio State offer - and picked Wisconsin instead.
The Wildcats pick up a couple low-rated guys, but their comparable averages and greater volume in comparison to Minnesota move them past the Gophers.
|#7 Minnesota - 7 Commits|
Minnesota picks up another sleeper prospect. I get the vibe that they'll shoot down the rankings once other teams start getting caught up in volume.
|#8 Michigan State - 5 Commits|
No change for Michigan State. If they start getting camp commits, they're very upwardly mobile. They're just about even with Minnesota as-is.
Illinois picks up a couple of commits, and they move past Nebraska on volume alone.
|#10 Nebraska - 2 Commits|
No change for the Huskers.
|#11 Indiana - 2 Commits|
Not only do the Hoosier have commits(!), they're good enough prospects to move IU out of last place in the conference, as well.
|#12 Purdue - 1 Commit|
No change for the Boilers.
|#13 Iowa - 1 Commit|
No change for Iowa. Now at the rear of the pack, thanks to Indiana's newfound competence.
Apparently he was very good at their camp, so I don't think you can dismiss the offer just because he is a 3 star. I know MIchigan has had commits over the past few years who were low rated but everyone felt good about becuase they were camp offers.
Although I agree with you that UM has been excited about camp offers before, we're usually not as excited about them as we are about the universally heralded recruits, which is who OSU has been getting the last few years.
This OSU commit is their Courtney Avery, when they're used to getting Blake Countess's and Terry Richardsons. It's totally possible that Courtney Avery ends up being better than Blake Countess or Terry Richardson, but it's less than 50-50, I would argue. So if I had to pick between OSU picking up a high 4-star CB or a low 3-star who impressed at their camp, I'd pick the latter every time.
In fairness, Avery was committed to Harbaugh-era Stanford at the time (who knows how good they'll be under the new coach). Murray literally did not have a non-MAC offer before immediately jumping on the Ohio State scholarship.
Courtney Avery is a terrible example to use. He was in the same class as 4* Christian and consistently outplayed him. Thats a same class, same school real life example of how a 3* that actually impresses at camp can be better than a 4* that coaches only know from film. I think you have zero ground to say that Avery has a greater than 50/50 shot to be worse than Countess or Richardson considering Avery got plenty of experience as a true freshman and looks to be a starter for the foreseeable future.
Wisconsin's class, thus far, is pretty darned impressive. It will be interesting to see if they can maintain this pace for an entire class, but even if they don't land another 4* prospect they already have about as many 4*'s as you usually see in a Badger class.
Conversely, MSU, who had the same record as Wisconsin last year, hasn't seen any real benefit thus far in their recruiting efforts, although I think McGowan may be a little underrated. I believe that Sparty is holding a camp right now for prospects; perhaps they will net a few good ones soon.
In regards to Penn State, I can't help but wonder what they are telling recruits about the JoePa situation. I seriously doubt he will still be the HC by the time the 2012 class has been on campus a few years. Will PSU promote an assistant to HC and keep the bulk of the staff? It just seems like there would be a lot of uncertainty at PSU and it is hard to believe they are recruiting as well as they are with the coaching uncertainty combined with the 7-6 season.
is "Good News"? Just curious.
Probably because it means he'll come with Washington instead.
Well, according to MSU slappies, these rankings mean nothing. We'll see when the score will be 45-10 Michigan. Go Blue!
This is the beginning of Michigan PWNING tOSU for the next decade. Engage payback for last 8 years... now.
Look out for Indiana! They're blazing the recruiting trail now!
It probably doesn't speak so well for their recruiting and their recent success level that I am actually relieved on their behalf . . .
If (and that's a HUGE if) they are really a finalist for Kiel, they must be doing something right over there. A 5* would definitely bump them up the list, not to mention the potential guys he could bring with him.
Wait, I just realized I'm talking about Indiana football. I really can't wait for the Western game!!
I mean, WTF? What are they telling recruits? "Come to Iowa and get a STD"?
Must be no joke in Iowa.
Here's something I've wondered about for a while. How is the "ranking" column determined (the ranking of each school's class compared to the other B1G+ schools)? I'm assuming it's a combination of both number of commits and average commit ratings but is there a specific formula you use? I'm sure this has been explained in the past but I don't usually read all the comments, so feel free to ignore me... :)
It looks like Ohio State will now start reeling in a bunch of recruits we have never heard of. I like to see them land NR's