Movin' on up! With a couple good weeks in a row, we could pass ND.
Mike Lantry, 1972
Busy, busy week, with a Michigan commitment. I'm not sure when the recruiting sites will post their post-summer, pre-season rankings, but keep an eye out for that soon. Action since last rankings:
7-25-10 Illinois gains commitment from Ted Karras. Minnesota gains commitment from Peter Westerhaus. Penn State gains commitment from Angelo Mangiro.
7-26-10 Michigan State gains commitment from Arjen Colquhoun. Nebraska loses commitment from Dylan Admire.
7-27-10 Illinois gains commitment from Daniel Rhodes. Michigan State gains commitment from Mikail McCall.
7-29-10 Michigan gains commitment from Kellen Jones. Minnesota gains commitment from Mike Moore.
7-30-10 Iowa loses commitment from JaCorey Shepherd. Iowa gains commitment from Cole Fisher. Wisconsin gains commitment from Terrance Floyd. Notre Dame gains commitments from Justice Hayes and Anthony Rabasa.
7-31-10 Notre Dame gains commitments from Aaron Lynch and Jalen Brown. Indiana gains commitment from Bernard Taylor. Wisconsin gains commitment from Makinton Dorleant. Nebraska gains commitment from David Santos.
|Big Ten+ Recruiting Class Rankings|
|Rank||School||# Commits||Rivals Avg||Scout Avg||ESPN Avg|
Rivals rankings have been converted to their "RR" scale, which is on a scale from about 5 to about 6.1. Unrated prospects are given a 5.1 rating, on par with the worst of any Big Ten commit last year. Scout is on the 5-star system (unranked players earn star), and ESPN uses grades out of 100 (unranked is 40 or 45).
|#1 Ohio State - 17 Commits|
Buckeyes stay atop the heap, though they did miss out on instate LB Trey DePriest this week. DePriest committed to Alabama.
|#2 Notre Dame - 16 Commits|
The Irish end their drought with a huge week, picking up four commits. They've solidified their hold on the second position.
|#3 Michigan - 9 Commits|
The Wolverines pick up Kellen Jones. I've moved them past Nebraska in the rankings, because they're starting to come close in number of commits, but are significantly higher in the quality of those players. Is Michigan on track to get another commit or two soon?
|#4 Nebraska - 13 Commits|
The Huskers trade OL Dylan Admire (decommitted in favor of Kansas) for LB David Santos. Nebraska's averages might improve a bit once all of their commits are ranked.
|#5 Indiana - 21 Commits|
Hoosiers pick up another Michigan prospect in the conference's (+ Notre Dame and Nebraska, of course) largest class. I've rewarded them by moving them past Michigan State. Once other teams come closer in number of commits, IU should fall down the rankings.
|#6 Michigan State - 11 Commits|
No change for MSU. They move behind Indiana on the basis of total commits, mostly because their overall numbers aren't that far off from the other few teams behind the Hoosiers (Northwestern, Iowa, et al).
|#7 Northwestern - 11 Commits|
No change for the Wildcats, except they're now looking up at Michigan State.
|#8 Iowa - 11 Commits|
Scout gives Orloff a 2-star ranking. No other changes for the Hawkeyes.
|#9 Minnesota - 13 Commits|
No change for Minnesota. They're due for a jump once that other half of their class gets Rivals rankings.
|#10 Wisconsin - 8 Commits|
Boooooo grabbing a couple guys who are neither from Wisconsin nor TE/LBs.
|#11 Penn State - 4 Commits|
Penn State's class is no longer the laughingstock of the conference, as they pick up a good offensive lineman in Angelo Mangiro. They still have a long way to go in terms of numbers, but their averages are way above the other teams near them.
|#12 Illinois - 11 Commits|
Illinois picks up a couple prospects, and that moves them past Purdue (while getting jumped by Penn State).
|#13 Purdue - 6 Commits|
Purdue becomes the bottom-dweller in Big Ten recruiting.
Movin' on up! With a couple good weeks in a row, we could pass ND.
I don't see how we could actually consider our recruiting class to be better than ND's unless things change drastically sometime soon. If you look at the numbers, we're getting doubled up by then. Also, we've only got a handful of defensive recruits, and if that doesn't change we'll be sunk for several more years to come.
I agree that ND would be tough to pass, but our best is definitely yet to come in 2011 recruiting. Also, a few of our current commits are very likely to be ranked higher on NSD.
ND probably only has 3-4 more spots left in the class unless something drastic unexpected attrition happens. Kelly will probably hold out and only accept commitments from elite guys at this point, as ND has satisfied most of their recruiting needs and can afford to wait. If ND has a good season (8 wins or more) I don't think Michigan or anyone else on the list will be passing them.
ND fans who follow recruiting would also make the argument that some of their guys are very likely to be ranked higher on NSD, especially Jordan Prestwood (playing OT for the first time this year with offers from everyone), Clay Burton, and Anthony Rabasa. Plus Jalen Brown and Kyle Brindza will also be ranked at some point too.
Plus they all get the advantage of committing to Notre Dame and having their rankings inflated.
hahaha, you mean like some random recruit with no other offer than UM getting a 3 star rating.
Just in case you were serious about what you posted up there: Brindza (K) is rated in the top 15 of michigan prospects easily a 3star player. Grace (LB) has offers from Bama and OSU among many others, definitely enough to be considered for a 4th star. Brown (DB) will be a 3 star, TAM, TT and Nebraska easily qualifies him. Prestwood (OT) has one of the most impressive offers lists for an OT, FSU, UF, Bama, USC and Auburn. He was a 4star player before he announced for ND, eventually rivals will figure it out like scout and espn did back in march. Rabasa a florida LB chose ND over UF, UMiami, FSU, LSU, Nebraska and UCLA, quite the list for a mere 3 star.
I don't care if rivals figures this out or not, but if they do its not because they picked ND.
their rankings deflate because rivals/scout get more readers from more schools if they have highly ranked UNCOMMITTED kids. lots of texas kids commit early and lose their opportunity to move into the 5* range because rivals/scout dont want committed kids where only one fanbase will read about them highly ranked. much more profitable to have uncommitted kids who take until NSD highly ranked so you have people from multiple schools checking the same prospect for updates on his commitment status. it goes both ways basically.
yep thats one of the reasons I really like texas recruits. Scouting services don't really seem to pay attention to the state after texas is done offering and there is a lot of talent in there that goes under appreciated imo
Basically none of the ND defensive front seven recruits are ranked properly because they are being recruited for the 3-4 not a 4-3 which is how they are graded by the recruiting services. Rabasa, Burton, and Councell are all DE/OLB tweeners but great fits as 3-4 OLB. Carrico and Springmann are really poor fits in a 4-3 line so they are graded as OL, but they have the necessary bulk and athleticism to play as 3-4 DE. Even Aaron Lynch would probably end up as a DT in a 4-3 but is a great fit as a 3-4 DE. Jarrett Lynch isn't going to be a sideline to sideline 4-3 MLB but can absolutely excel as a 3-4 ILB (see Alabama offer).
Looks good, but a couple things: you've got Matt Hegarty listed under both OSU and ND (I assume a copy/paste error) and you state "no change for MSU", but they got a commitment from Arjen Colquhoun.
At any rate, ND and UM are starting to move up on OSU. Depending on how many more recruits we can take, we might get passed by the time all is said and done.
on this board including yourself believes this statement " Depending on how many more recruits we can take, we might get passed by the time all is said and done."
ND is running out of spots too, absolute max will be 21 right now.
I think that these rankings are flawed since it is using the average.
In example, it shows Michigan ahead of Notre Dame in the ESPN rankings...only because the ND kicker is evaluated at a 45. Notre Dame has 5 players evaluated at an 80 or higher, Michigan has 0. According to ESPN, Notre Dame has a better class so far and has far more elite players (higher probability to be elite in college as well).
I don't know if you should adjust the rankings or not to measure in elite players, but the current system seems flawed.
Unranked prospects should at least be a 55 (not 45). 55 is the lowest grade given to an evaluated prospect. That would improve some of the ESPN averages somewhat.
In the future I wish the compiler would consider taking kickers and s/t players out of the average... there's really no point to include them, it just skews the whole average system. Without the kicker, ND's espn average is 79. Pretty good for 15 commits.
None of the factors are taken at straight face value. I'm well aware that some teams will have big increases when all of their players are evaluated (as my comments for some of the teams indicate). The averages are taken with a grain of salt, as are other factors.
I would take ND's recruiting class in a minute. Kelly is doing a great job of filling needs with top players.
They would need to be great weeks probably. A little comparison:
Scout: ND has 7 guys that are 4 or 5 star. UM has 3
Rivals: ND has 9 guys that are 5.7 or higher. UM has 5
ESPN: ND has 5 guys 80 or higher. UM has none.
ND also has 2 times as many commits as we do.
But how the hell did MSU get a 5 star LB over Ohio State, Florida, Alabama, Notre Dame, USC, Penn State, Oklahoma, Miami (NTM), Cincinnati, and us?
Oh well, it'll just make it that much sweeter when KJ plays like he deserves 6 stars and Lawrence Thomas plays like 2. Go BLUE!
I was hoping kelly wouldn't be able to recruit nationally, but he is bringing kids in from all over. How the hell did he get a kid from NM?
When was the last time Notre Dame wasn't able to get kids nationally?
When Ty Willie was there they still got players from all over the nation, it was just players that no other BCS teams wanted from all over the nation.
It doesn't make any sense to have our class higher than Nebraska's. According to ESPN rankings we have 9 players 77 or higher, they have 9 78 or higher, plus 4 additional recruits. 1/3 of our recruits are Scout 4 stars, half of their class are scout 4 stars. Their class has more numbers, and, honestly, is probably of higher quality.
If you take only their top 9 recruits against all 9 of our guys, the classes are very even. I staked a bet that we will be able to add some guys who won't be the bottom 4 members of our class at the time they join.
Think we are all excited about the 2011 class. We need to hurry up and get them fast Southern boys signed. But, the class is shaping up to be a great one. Can't wait to see this class when all is said and done...
It's really amazing how Iowa is so good with all their 2 and 3 stars.
There's something to be said for coaching stability, player development, and (to a certain extent, as there's plenty of evidence in support as well) an over-reliance on recruiting rankings.
Iowa's coaching staff has been unpossibly stable--all through the ranks. They bring guys into a system full of players at every level that know exactly what is expected of them. Add to that, the incoming players have the luxury of learning for at least a season or two or three before they see the field.
Now compare that to Michigan, who, out of necessity, is yoinking kids out of high school straight on to the field and no one knows the system.
Iowa has only been good for about the last 18 games. They stunk between 2005 and most of 2008. People use them as an example of "recruiting rankings don't matter", but for the most part, they have performed as expected.
Not to mention, their '05 class (i.e. redshirt seniors from last year) had seven 4* guys and one 5* guy. The rest of their classes are typically middle of the pack Big Ten, but not bottom.
Indiana #5? Sweet. I'm ordering my 2014 Gator Bowl tickets right now.
Is Penn State really in serious danger of cratering the recruiting year? Or are they in the lead for a ton of guys that eventually will drop. Please advice
Great work as always, Tim
No to your second Penn State question. The PSU fans are having a mild internet freakout, because they thought they led for a bunch of kids... until those guys committed to Pitt, Maryland, Ohio State, etc.
They probably won't have a completely horrid class, but challenging for the top few spots would mean getting a lot of dominoes to fall their way first.
I'll be on it all day. Apologies to those who are annoyed by over-tweeting.
I'm not terribly worried about Brian Kelly with this first class. He is in honeymoon city right now. So was RichRod in his first year and RichRod pulled in just as good a class in '09 if not better. The first full class for a coach is often a very strong one.
The fact that we are still basically neck-and-neck with Nebraska after a two year record of 7-16 is pretty encouraging. We're going to be a recruiting powerhouse again when we reach the 10-win level.
This class is starting to look good because most of the players (outside of Jones) should have players ahead of him. That means these kids can step onto campus and not be expected to start from day-one, instead maturing in the system and being legit players in their second and third years.
Jones won't be expected to start from day one either. He'll play backup to Fitzgerald and Demens.
You're probably right there as well. I just looked at the depth chart and saw less substantive depth in front of him compared to other positions. But yes, hopefully Jones won't be expected to step in and start, though I agree with the Hello piece that he'll see some time on special teams.