This was a banner week for the BIG. Marchie Murdock, De'Niro Laster, Dallas Hinkhouse,Skai Moore, Tiquention Coleman. Wow
i refuse to even consider this a possibility
With Michigan picking up two commits—and jumping back into first place—the recruiting rankings are front-paged this week. Also of note: Indiana and Wisconsin essentially changing places in the standings. Changes since the last rankings:
12-6-12: Rutgers picks up Dean Crozier.
12-9-12: Illinois picks up Marchie Murdock. Penn State picks up DaeSean Hamilton. Minnesota picks up De'Niro Laster.
12-10-12: Illinois picks up Dallas Hinkhouse. Indiana picks up Kristopher Smith.
12-11-12: Rutgers picks up Skai Moore. Indiana picks up Steven Funderburk.
12-12-12: Tiquention Coleman decommits from Wisconsin. Minnesota picks up Damien Wilson.
12-14-12: Penn State picks up Tyler Ferguson. Iowa picks up LeShun Daniels.
12-15-12: Delano Hill decommits from Iowa. Michigan picks up David Dawson and Delano Hill. Jonathan Cook decommits from Nebraska. Nebraska picks up D.J Singleton. Indiana picks up Noel Padmore.
|Big Ten+ Recruiting Class Rankings|
|Rank||School||# Commits||Rivals Avg||Scout Avg||24/7 Avg||ESPN Avg||Avg Avg^||POINTS*|
^The average of the average rankings of the four recruiting services (the previous four columns). The figure is calculated based on the raw numbers and then rounded, so the numbers above may not average out exactly.
*The product of number of Commits and Average Average
NOTE: Unranked recruits are counted as two-star players.
On to the full data after the jump.
|#1 Michigan - 24 Commits|
|Maurice Hurst Jr.||DT||MA||3||4||4||3|
The Wolverines add Cass Tech teammates David Dawson and Delano Hill, passing Notre Dame to regain the top spot in the rankings.
|#2 Notre Dame - 22 Commits|
|Torii Hunter Jr.||WR||TX||4||4||4||4|
No change for the Irish.
|#3 Illinois - 26 Commits|
The Illini pick up JuCo IA OL Dallas Hinkhouse and TX WR Marchie Murdock, edging past Ohio State for third place.
|#4 Ohio State - 19 Commits|
No change for the Buckeyes.
|#5 Rutgers - 22 Commits|
The Scarlet Knights gain commitments from FL LB Skai Moore and Australian punter Dean Crozier.
|#6 Northwestern - 20 Commits|
|Anthony Walker Jr.||LB||FL||3||3||3||3|
Raymond Davison gets three stars from 247 and Marcus McShepard gets three stars from ESPN.
|#7 Penn State - 18 Commits|
The Nittany Lions add VA WR DaeSean Hamilton and JuCo CA QB Tyler Ferguson, vaulting past Nebraska, Maryland, and Wisconsin into seventh place.
|#8 Nebraska - 16 Commits|
The Huskers lose CB Jonathan Cook to Alabama but gain a commitment from NJ S D.J. Singleton, who will enroll in January after originally being a 2012 recruit.
|#9 Indiana - 19 Commits|
The Hoosiers land GA LB Kristopher Smith, GA CB Noel Padmore, and JuCo IA LB Steven Funderburk. Indiana—yes, Indiana—leaps past Maryland, Iowa, Michigan State, and Wisconsin.
|#10 Maryland - 17 Commits|
No change for the Terrapins.
|#11 Michigan State - 15 Commits|
No change for the Spartans; they pass Wisconsin anyway.
|T-#12 Iowa - 16 Commits|
|Derrick Mitchell Jr.||S||MO||3||3||3||3|
The Hawkeyes lose Delano Hill to Michigan but pick up OH RB LeShun Daniels. Ike Boetgger and Damond Powell each get three stars from Rivals; Powell also gets two and three stars, respectively, from Scout and 247.
|T-#12 Wisconsin - 15 Commits|
GA CB Tiquention Coleman decommits from Wisconsin and follows Bret Bielema to Arkansas. The Badgers fall behind MSU and into a tie with Iowa.
|#14 Minnesota - 14 Commits|
The Gophers pick up OH WR De'Niro Laster and JuCo MS LB Damien Wilson.
|#15 Purdue - 12 Commits|
The Boilermakers add FL CB Leroy Clark.
This was a banner week for the BIG. Marchie Murdock, De'Niro Laster, Dallas Hinkhouse,Skai Moore, Tiquention Coleman. Wow
#1, #1, #1!!!
In the Big xxx now? I missed that. Not sure why they are reflected in this summary. Add Oklahoma. Nebraska is listed. Maybe Pitt since Penn St listed. Oh yah, husk ers and lions are members of the Big xx.
I wonder if it got there for appropriate meme, or appropriate hotness.
It's been this way since well before you first signed up here, so yeah, I guess you missed it.
I feel like after the class of 2014, Notre Dame will no longer be necessary as we will not be playing incoming recruits for the four or five years after that cycle. For now, Notre Dame is still a relevant part of these rankings even though they aren't actually in the B1G.
This might be my favorite unintentional mgoblog meme.
You have had some very interesting posts the past few days. Are you using drugs?
/asked in a concerned sort of way
Going to take some time for the new recruiting grounds to become fertile for old and new BIG teams.
Rutgers and Maryland not taking advantage of recruiting the midwest now that they are in the BIG.
Rutgers has no recruits from west of Pennsylvania
Maryland has one recruit from west of Pennsylvania, an Iowa Juco, who played his HS ball in DC, so he doesn't really count. Maryland does have a couple kids from Georgia, so they do have that going for themselves.
Penn State doesn't have a single recruit from the midwest, which seems a bit strange to me.
Michigan is one of the few current BIG schools with a player from Maryland (Henry Poggi), but he came aboard long before the merger.
And there's something like 9 recruits from NJ in B1G classes.
I feel like everyone in the Treadwell thread that's freaking out should come here, see how we're doing recruiting-wise and calm the fuck down. We have a great QB, a solid RB, and plenty of awesomeness in the trenches, where games tend to be won. We're fine.
we need all of the 5 stars though, otherwise it means Hoke sucks at recruiting and can't close.
Wow, Illinois, way be embrace the fact you are mediocre and gorge on the 3* players early.
But games are won and lost in the trenches. If you put good skill players behind great lines they will thrive. I hope we can eventually get our d-line to an elite level that seems to be what makes a good defense great. It's been a while since we generated a lot of pressure with just our front four.
Wasnt Hart a 3*?
He was??!?!?!?!?!?11?!??!?! NO WAI !!!!!!!!!11!!!!!!!11!!!!!1!1!!!!1!!!!!
Next thing you'll tell me that Jordan Kovacs was a walk-on.
Settles it. We should only recruit 3 stars from now on.
Im still confused with Sypniewski. Was he offered a football scholarship or not?
Yes he was
Probably a bunch of contributors by 2014 as the trench guys, LBs and TEs need a little development.
If Shane delivers, this could be a great class.
Skai Moore would be a great name for a basketball player.
Michigan might not have the star power at RB and WR just yet, but that's less of a concern for me in the near term. Rebuilding the lines, creating depth across the board and picking up solid recuits with an emphasis on character is the answer to long term sustained excellence. When the overall talent has been replenished with kids suited to the staff's schemes, then I'll worry about the staff's ability to cherry pick the top talents. In the meantime I am going to enjoy the incredibly deep and incredibly talented bunch of kids brought in over the last two years. They're going to be great fun to watch.
Just a matter of time for Beckman anyway, but that program is gonna crater and suck for years.
I feel like I'm the only one that thinks Beckman will turn it around. I have met the man a few times @ Toledo and he is passionate as coach can get and really recruits well. I was very skeptical of the hire at first because he was OKST D cordinator and well we all know they don't play D but he won me over pretty quickly. I feel like if he brings that same passion to Illinios, he can be successful.
He turned a team of moderate talent into... whatever the hell we saw this year. A fatal indictment? Maybe not. But a great big red flag? Wooo boy howdy, you're damn skippy it is.
Illinois is the poster child for underperforming talent. Look at all the guys theyve put in the NFL the last few years and then look at their record over the same time period
I really appreciate these posts and the work you do to compile it. However, Notre Dame at number 2 and Illinois at number 3 should be enough to get you to change the point system you are using. There is no way Michigan's class should be above Notre Dame and Illinois is way, way to high. I know Illinois has more committs, but they average less than a three star on every service. Nobody would take that class over Ohio's.
Something to think about.
He has thought about it. People whine no matter what he does. The data are right there. Construct a different ranking if you don't like his. If it's better, people will upvote it.
Why should ND be ahead of us? Our class is basically their class, plus a couple three stars. That's makes it better.
Exactly, take out the 2* LS and another consensus 3* and we're at 84 "points" just .25 behind ND.
I suggest taking a look at the discussions for past week's recruiting rankings. In essence, the rankings represent a snapshot of where the classes stand relative to one another, not where they will end up at the end of the year, this Illinois' ranking relative to Ohio.
As for ND versus Michigan, it's a similar matter. Michigan has two more recruits—will ND bring in two more recruits that will sustain their average? Maybe. Maybe they'll bring in a couple long snappers and their avg will plummet? One of the recruiting sites makes a point of only evaluating the top twenty recruits for each school to equalize class size (and not let a Texas Tech size class skew things). Try that comparison with Michigan and ND and Michigan's class holds the advantage. This also "corrects" for (or compensates for?) a school taking a position of need (special teams) that typically don't receive high ratings.
Then do the same for Ohio State. Michigan has an AWESOME class.
Okay Ace, here's the new plan: you need to come up with an objective rating system that calculates the subjective desirability of each class.
It should be roughly based on the 1-10 "would you bang that person" scale.
Long snappers go to 12 though, because -- well, it should be obvious.
but when you get to be my age, you simply adopt a much more direct scale, such as the Binary scale. Either you would bang that person, or you wouldn't.
Create a median-based scale that attempts to rate the depth of the middle of the class. Drop the top 3 and the bottom 5 and use Ace's points system on the rest.
accounts for teams taht get 2-3 blue chippers & loads up on nothing after, and accounts for the kickers/LSs/walk-on tweeners most teams get every year.
I'm not sure if you're serious, but you want to arbitrarily drop 8 people from groups with populations between 15-25 to get better data?
Still, there has to be some way NOT to rank a class of 25 2-stars (50 pts) over a class of 8 5-stars, a 4-star, a 3-star, and a 2-star (49 pts).
Really, which would you rather have?
Not talking to you, Purdue.
I somewhat agree with your point in principle, but there's never going to be an objective way to rank classes with that kind of discrepancy in class size. This is like trying to do the AP poll when some teams have played 10 games and some have played 3. Would you rather be 3-0 or 8-2? You can't really compare.
The point of these rankings is to compare where the classes are right now, not where they might be. And although the 11 member class in your example will likely end up as a great recruiting class, if those two were compared at signing day, I'm not sure it would be that much better.
The nice thing is, in practice, you'll almost never need to compare an 11 member class against a 25 member class since every team signs more than 11 guys and the problem will solve itself. It's harder for you to find a crazy example like that when every team has at least 18-20 kids.
Obviously, Ace should have three different ratings to take into account the various discrepancies. Then, when the three ratings are averaged, you will get a result that no one will question.
I seem to remember them having, like, no commits a couple months ago. Granted I checked out of recruiting during the season, but it seems like they've really gotten some work done.
Don't pass the eyeball test.
come up with your own test and we'll see if it works for us.
Of course, if that's the one we use, you get to maintain it, update it, post about it, and be the object of criticism because of it. Good luck.