national champs baby
Is this current recruiting class as good as we think?
Filed under:
This year's recruiting class to date has drawn near unanimous praise, and some M fans are damn near ecstatic over the results so far. In particular, the last month's or so results have been undeniably strong. The dominance of Michigan based talent, in-roads into Ohio, and the list of top ranked recruits still listing us highly are all seen (rightly so) as a terrific start for the coaching staff. But is the overall quality of the recruits as top notch as the consensus estimates of the fan base?
To examine that, I looked at Rivals data for every year since 2002, when they first started rating. I looked at the total number of 4 and 5 star recruits each year, and then calculated that as a percentage of the overall class. As we know, 4 and 5 star recruits are what fans think of as "elite" recruits, and if you look at elite recruits as a percentage of the overall class, you can get a rough idea of the "quality" of that year's class.
There are major caveats with this approach, starting with a huge one; this year's class isn't finished being rated, since none of have even played a game as a senior in H.S. Also, the class isn't, like, complete. Finally, the usual caveats of recruiting ratings apply as well. But since fans are typically using ratings to proclaim their happiness with recruiting, it seems fair to at least look at the early ones, just as we do around here in Tim's "Hello' posts. So here goes:
YEAR- #4/5* of # in class (%)
2002- 11 of 21 (52%)
2003- 13 of 17 (77%!)
2004- 13 of 22 (59%)
2005- 10 of 23 (44%)
2006- 11 of 19 (58%)
2007- 7 of 20 (35%)
2008- 17 of 24 (71%)
2009- 14 of 22 (64%)
2010- 6 of 27 (23%)
2011- 6 of 20 (30%)
2012 to date- 7 of 16 (45%)
So of the 11 years that Rivals has recruiting rated, there have been 4 of those years that, by looking at 4 and 5 star percentage of class, this year's class so far has beaten. And of course 6 that had a higher percentage of the class rated as elite by Rivals. Again, I don't draw any conclusions here because of the above caveats, but I do find it interesting. What do you think?
EDIT: some asked about how this would compare to Scout's ratings. Here goes:
2002- 8 of 21 (39%) 2003-11 of 17 (65%) 2004- 10 of 22 (44%) 2005- 14 of 23 (65%) 2006- 10 of 19 (53%) 2007- 14 of 20 (70%, major outlier vs. Rivals) 2008- 15 of 24 (62%) 2009- 9 of 22 (40%) 2010- 9 of 27 (33%) 2011- 5 of 20 (25%) 2012 (56%)
So M this year so far, has a quality rating that has beaten 6 of it's past year's ratings, and trails 4 years.
June 13th, 2011 at 1:57 PM | 
so far, and given the
so far, and given the
June 13th, 2011 at 6:17 PM |
Reality check
Reality check
according to the info from Rivals 2008 would have been our second best year (71%). What exactly did those recruits produce? Even those who have transferred haven't done much on the field in their new homes. Out of the 17 4 stars the major contributors have been Mike Martin, Stonum, Roundtree, and to a lesser extent Koger, Shaw, and Demens.
This class has tremendous potential, but they need to turn that potential into results. Best class ever needs to be proved on the field. I do have to give the staff kudos as I was a little worried about our recruiting when they took over and those worries are no longer a concern. Hopefully the results on the field are as good.
June 13th, 2011 at 6:24 PM |
In retrospect, 2008 was kind
In retrospect, 2008 was kind
In retrospect, 2008 was kind of a crappy recruiting class. Between all the guys who bombed out, underperformed, or just haven't seen the field much...there isn't a whole lot left.
Martin, Omameh, and Roundtree are arguably the three best players from the class, and Omameh was a 2-star. After that it's a bunch of mediocrity (and some people would probably argue that Roundtree himself is mediocre, considering all the drops; I'm not one of those people, but that argument probably exists).
June 13th, 2011 at 7:23 PM |
I agree with this post, but
I agree with this post, but
I agree with this post, but it's too early to fully judge this class, since the guys who redshirted (a good handful) have yet to play their junior and senior years, and those are the years you expect players to play well. Guys like Ricky Barnum and Rocko Khoury could end up being good to very good O-linemen, they've just been playing behind Schilling and Molk.
And even though Roundtree has been productive so far, we can't really judge him or Brandon Moore just year because they both have their junior and senior years ahead of them.
And Odoms wasn't even mentioned, even though he has been one of the more productive members of that class, especially when healthy.
Now, the fact that 8 of those guys left the team prematurely, 6 of whom were 4 stars (possibly 9 and 7, pending Stonum's situation) certainly plays as big a role as anything else.
June 13th, 2011 at 8:00 PM |
That's the biggest problem
That's the biggest problem
That's the biggest problem with the 2008 class, IMO. A ton of those guys bombed out and either never contributed anything (O'Neill, Witherspoon, Hill, Smith, etc.) or played a little bit and turned out to be troublemakers (Cissoko, Feagin).
June 14th, 2011 at 11:04 AM |
Well, you just qualified that
Well, you just qualified that
Well, you just qualified that yes, did you not?
"I hope I can get a bunch of championships - like 15"
June 13th, 2011 at 1:58 PM |
Yes, next question.
Yes, next question.
Yes, next question.
"I tried to but a pencil in the light socket but it was too wide and didn't fit so I used a paperclip."-Terrelle Pryor, Future Rhodes Scholar
June 13th, 2011 at 2:03 PM |
Yes
Yes
Lets keep it moving
"Look up, get up, and don't ever give up"
June 13th, 2011 at 2:38 PM |
Why so flippant? The point
Why so flippant? The point
Why so flippant? The point of this board is discussion. The OP produced a cogent post comparing this year's recruiting class to previous years' classes. The post wasn't trolling, traducing current or former players or coaches, beating a dead horse, a re-post, etc. etc. etc. I see no reason to be so dismissive.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:22 PM |
Great call.
Great call.
I like the post.. Gives us a great idea of where we have been the past few years and where we are currently.
Personally, I thikn Devin Funchess, Godin Braden and Ojemudia will also end up as 4 stars.. but thats just my opinion.
On the fifth night—possibly the sixth—a breeze arose.
It was cool and dewy.
June 13th, 2011 at 4:43 PM |
Is your avatar
Is your avatar
Is your avatar Rufio?
Rufio...Rufio...RUFI-O!
Football is both an identity and a terminal illness. A rhythm and a chaos and an opiate for the mind all at once.
-Johnny Danbury (umichedme.blogspot.com)
June 14th, 2011 at 3:26 AM |
I agree.
I agree.
I like this post as well, only it is far too early to go through this analysis.
All four main recruiting sites have different opinions on the kids, especially for the midwest region. 7 four stars currently, I could think of 3 other commits that could easily gain a fourth, not to mention the other ten prospects will all be of a pretty high caliber. (Am I the only one who is still unsure with how we went from a down year on available scholarships, to 26 in a year, whatever...we will leave it to the magic A-word..."attrition."
Give it time, most of these kids got a full summer, a full season and another full offseason before they step foot on campus. I am excited to have 16 future wolverines to follow through senior seasons though, and one qb for his junior and senior season.
"This might sound arrogant and if it is, it is .... but we're Michigan." -Brady Hoke
June 14th, 2011 at 10:33 AM |
I agree (with your agreement)
I agree (with your agreement)
It's too early - I would expect that a few of the highly ranked 4 stars and a large number (possibly the majority?) of 5 stars are likely to wait until late to declare --- as I think most classes will 'find' room for a 5 star who wants to commit at the last minute.
Italy, really? Why can't they at least move me to Paris. Damn it.
Detroit Born Michigan Bred Go Blue! Class of '95
June 14th, 2011 at 1:14 PM |
I also agree it's too early-except
I also agree it's too early-except
that all of the pronouncements about how great this class is may also be considered, potentially, to be too early as well. Also remember that while guys indeed go from 3-4 stars as ratings get adjusted, they also go down from 4 to 3. Again, I'm pleased with recruiting, my OP is just asking a question.
"Everyone gets dumped Gabe. Let me give you some advice: a little coverup on your Adams Apple will make it appear smaller. Which will make you appear less like a transvestite."
June 14th, 2011 at 1:39 PM |
I agree
I agree
and unlike the first poster, I think your post clearly shows that this class currently is only rougly average for UM and even possibly slightly below average. And the qualifier is that it is very early to make a pronouncement in either direction. So I would say it is a qualified promising class.
We're all excited because we have a number of commits from some quality athletes and are being considered by a number more elite prospects - which is awesome as we all agree. But it's still early; they're still only verbals or prospective commits.
Coffee is for closers.
June 13th, 2011 at 4:50 PM |
Yes it is because:
Yes it is because:
-As important as stars maybe they are only half the battle. You can't overlook quantity. Remember their is a certain quality to quantity.
-The coaches have mostly filled their needs and only going to take high-end prospects now (4 stars or greater).
-Alot of the prospects they have taken have really good versatility and can move around within their position group.
-Many of them are not finished products which is good thing because they have room to grow and develop. And some of them (Pharoh Brown for example) have immeasurable upside.
So as long as they end up with the prospects we expect to get and a few more then this a great class. Plus it is Top 5 on ESPN (it was 6 before Magnuson and Strobel committed so I am assuming on that aspect).
EDIT: I didn't want to create its own thread so I will just throw it in here. I saw on RCMB that Ondre Pipkens has eliminated MSU.
"I tried to but a pencil in the light socket but it was too wide and didn't fit so I used a paperclip."-Terrelle Pryor, Future Rhodes Scholar
June 13th, 2011 at 4:52 PM |
Is your first paragraph serious or
Is your first paragraph serious or
an attempt at humor? Real question, because well, never mind. If you are serious, the issue contained in your paragraph was already caveated in my OP. As for each of your other points, they are true for every year's recruits, there is no distinction you can really legitimately make that these recruits either have more versatility or potential than any other class. Lastly, I was careful not to claim that this is either a great class or an over-rated class, I simply put the numbers there with caveats. People will make their own conclusions, but based upon the numbers so far it would be very hard to claim that the class is "great," if by great you mean by M's past standards.
"Everyone gets dumped Gabe. Let me give you some advice: a little coverup on your Adams Apple will make it appear smaller. Which will make you appear less like a transvestite."
June 13th, 2011 at 5:35 PM |
It is very serious. Large
It is very serious. Large
It is very serious. Large classes promote depth and competitiveness within the team. And can't forget that every recruit you get is one less that can hurt you later.
To address your versatility point I can only go on the flimsy evidence we have. The linebackers committed seem to be able to play both inside or outside. On the O-line Braden and Stacy are considered to be Tackles but one or both may move inside. TE AJ Williams may end up being a run blocking TE or Tackle. Mario Ojemudia was recruited to be an OLB/DE hybrid. DEs Matt Godin and Tom Strobel both can play DT at the next level (I personally think Godin will). And quite a few of our prospects have had the tag "versatile" associated with them.
Great is a year by year basis and it looks like this is going to be a top 10 class out of 120 teams which would classify it as great.
"I tried to but a pencil in the light socket but it was too wide and didn't fit so I used a paperclip."-Terrelle Pryor, Future Rhodes Scholar
June 13th, 2011 at 1:58 PM |
You are also forgetting that
You are also forgetting that
You are also forgetting that as the year goes on the amount of 4 and 5 star players almost double-so its "safe" to assume that most of the high 3 star rated prospects will be given a 4th star.
June 13th, 2011 at 1:59 PM |
Double sorry.
Double sorry.
Double sorry.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:02 PM |
A few points
A few points
A few points:
1) Chances are, some of the three stars will move up to 4 stars before signing day (Standifer, Mario, etc..)
2) Going forward, Hoke and co. will be honing in on top prospects so that % will increase for our final 9.
3) I don't think the excitment is suggesting this is a top 3 class or the best class ever in Michigan history (though on defense, it could get close). But that, given the recent struggles in recruiting (see your chart), we are rebounding strongly before even achieving any on-field success. Of course, that will generate optimism.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:33 PM |
Don't forget that a strong
Don't forget that a strong
Don't forget that a strong class gives top prospects a reason to play for us...as well as allows the coaching staff to focus on 2013 and build relationships with top prospects before other teams. This is what makes Texas so hard to beat on the recruiting trail.
However, if we fall on our faces this year, we can see a few decommits.If we win...we will be in a great position for a monster class.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:33 PM |
Don't forget that a strong
Don't forget that a strong
Don't forget that a strong class gives top prospects a reason to play for us...as well as allows the coaching staff to focus on 2013 and build relationships with top prospects before other teams. This is what makes Texas so hard to beat on the recruiting trail.
However, if we fall on our faces this year, we can see a few decommits.If we win...we will be in a great position for a monster class.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:01 PM |
I think that by the end of
I think that by the end of
I think that by the end of the year the percentage is going to go considerably higher. There's a great chance that every new recruit we get from here on out is going to be a 4/5 star. Plus some three stars could get a 4th.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:03 PM |
Interesting
Interesting
Just looking at the situation, I think this class is AWESOME. Not only are we coming of 3 sub-par (to say the least) years, but also a complete revamp of the coaching staff. What this staff has been able to do over the past 80-85 days in bringing in top-end talent is amazing. With a select number of open spots, I think it is safe to imagine the staff will be very selective from here on out.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:04 PM |
Well your first mistake was
Well your first mistake was
Well your first mistake was using Rivals... personally I'd go off of scout as they actually have someone dedicated to scouting the midwest and as noted above a lot of guys we have will be moving up in the rankings and with not very many spots left the coaches can pick and choose who they want so I'm assuming more 4 stars will be coming.
"And they'll never catch him..."
June 13th, 2011 at 3:01 PM |
That's the only
That's the only
thing I'm wondering about our class too. Will Godin and Funchess and Ringer and Braden end up low 4 stars or high 3 stars. I know how I feel about them, but it's always nice to pull a slightly higher class in the eyes of the media. If Gant and Williams and Stacey (and maybe a qb) are our only 3 stars then we'll have 22-23 4+stars and maybe the #1 class in America. I wouldn't have dared to say that a month ago because I would have looked like I went full-retard, but now it looks possible.
How many times have you been on the freeway and had someone fly by you at 100 mph then end up 2 cars ahead of you at the off ramp? What's the point? -Mark Harmon
June 13th, 2011 at 3:19 PM |
The number of 5-stars
The number of 5-stars
The number of 5-stars increases significantly by the end of each recruiting cycle, but just as many guys drop from the 4-star level as move up from the 3-star level. I believe Ricardo Miller and Jeremy Jackson were both 4-star recruits at one point, and each one ended up as a 3-star. Marvin Robinson was a 4-star safety, became a 3-star linebacker, and then bumped up to a 4-star linebacker.
So while some of us might think that Standifer, Ojemudia, etc. might become 4-stars, there's also a chance that a guy like Pharaoh Brown or Joe Bolden might drop.
June 13th, 2011 at 4:12 PM |
True, I won't
True, I won't
write that off, but the sheer number of kids will keep us near the top this year. Last year Florida State had 28 kids,13were 4 star kids, 13 were 3 star recruits and only 2 were 5 star kids and they were # 2 nationally according to Rivals. Every year the top classes have both quality and volume. Even if 6 or 8 of the kids in this class end up 3 stars we'll still have 18 -20 at 4 stars or above. I can't find a class with those numbers outside of the top 3 on Rivals.
How many times have you been on the freeway and had someone fly by you at 100 mph then end up 2 cars ahead of you at the off ramp? What's the point? -Mark Harmon
June 13th, 2011 at 2:04 PM |
Well,
Well,
On Scout, 9 of the 16 are given 4 stars, which is 56%. That puts us mich closer to our old barometers of success than our recent failings. So yeah, it's as good as we think
June 13th, 2011 at 3:22 PM |
But, but, but...
But, but, but...
if you're gonna use Scout for this year, you also have to go back and apply the same standard for the other years. "Apples to apples" and all that.
Edit: DOH! You guys are way ahead of me, as usual.
"I promise you we would have walked to the University of Michigan." - Brady Hoke
June 13th, 2011 at 2:04 PM |
posted from iPhone
posted from iPhone
Thanks for posting this. Any chance I could talk you into doing the same with Scout rankings? Lots of claims around here that Rivals' coverage of the Midwest is weak this year.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:58 PM |
Done. I went to Scout and
Done. I went to Scout and
edited as above. More fun than actual work.
"Everyone gets dumped Gabe. Let me give you some advice: a little coverup on your Adams Apple will make it appear smaller. Which will make you appear less like a transvestite."
June 13th, 2011 at 2:04 PM |
Well,
Well,
On Scout, 9 of the 16 are given 4 stars, which is 56%. That puts us mich closer to our old barometers of success than our recent failings. So yeah, it's as good as we think
June 13th, 2011 at 2:07 PM |
posted from iPhone
posted from iPhone
On rankings alone, that 2010 class is pretty brutal. Occupying 21 spots with relatively low-ranked recruits can have serious long-term consequences.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:32 PM |
6 of those 21 guys are
6 of those 21 guys are
6 of those 21 guys are already gone (as are two of the six 4 star guys). So that class now consists of four 4 stars out of 19 players (21%). But, a lot of those 3 star guys have done well thus far, including Jibreel Black, Carvin Johnson, Jake Ryan, Courtney Avery, Stephen Hopkins, and Will Hagerup. It is certainly not a doomed class
"I think you are my favorite poster. The polar bear avatar definitely helps." - ShockFX
June 13th, 2011 at 2:17 PM |
2007 was a pretty tough year
2007 was a pretty tough year
2007 was a pretty tough year sice we were coming off a nation title run.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:27 PM |
Usually there is a 2 year
Usually there is a 2 year
Usually there is a 2 year delay from successful season to strong recruiting class, so the strong 2008 class can be attributed, at least partly, so the strong 2006 season. The weak 2007 class is more due to the underwelming 2005 season. As we see in this class, most kids are either decided or narrowed down before the college season immediately prior to their signing day happens.
If we went 11-2 this year (2011), it wouldn't have much effect on the 201 class, but you can bet your ass it would get 2013 kids excited.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:10 PM |
I don't agree with that.
I don't agree with that.
I don't agree with that. Usually, a strong season translates into good recruiting the following class, if not even that same year's class (as was the case in 1997-98). However, in our case in 2007, it was an open secret that Carr was near retirement, and it was unclear who would succeed him. This obviously hurt our recruiting efforts. (It did not help that there were rumors about Carr having health issues swirling around, allegedly spread by Les Miles.) OTOH, in 2008 we had a new coach in place, which resolved that uncertainty. New coaches often see a bump in recruiting, as we're seeing right now.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:16 PM |
I'm not sure you are looking
I'm not sure you are looking
I'm not sure you are looking at the classes in the correct way. The 2007 class was signed 3 months after the 2006 season ended, the 2008 class was signed shortly after the 2007 season. By the end of a good season, like 2006, most recruits have either committed already, or have narrowed down their list considerably. At that point it's hard to get recruits who hadn't looked before to give you a shot. That's why there is usually a delay in the recruiting bump from a good season. Much of the getting interested stage takes place during the spring/summer following a good season. And because the class isn't signed until after the end of the year, it's a 2 year lag in recruiting classes from a good season, though timewise it's closer to 1 year.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:39 PM |
I'm familiar with how this
I'm familiar with how this
I'm familiar with how this goes. In basketball, yes, there can be a lag from a successful season to recruiting success, because that process drags out for years and years. But in football, it's much more condensed. Football players will suddenly commit out of the blue, just days after getting to know a coach. (Carlos Brown, for instance, surprised even Carr's staff when he committed here.) In 2008, many of the players Rodriguez brought in weren't even considering us before the coaching change. Likewise, many of the guys we're landing now have gone on the record saying that they didn't like Rodriguez and didn't want to play for him. If the 2-year lag thing really were true in football, our recruiting would probably suck right now, given that we finished in last place in the Big Ten in 2009. Instead we're cleaning up. (If Sparty is counting on a "2-year lag" to save its recruiting in 2013, they'll be in for a rude awakening.)
The thing that killed us in 2007 was that recruits did not know who would be coaching them if they went to Michigan. Coaching uncertainty is a huge red flag for recruits (and probably also hurt us last year). OTOH, when you hire a new coach, recruits know he'll be in place for at least the next few seasons, which is often more than can be said for rival programs. New coaches usually see a bump in recruiting, regardless of where they go.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:44 PM |
One issue
One issue
If the 2-year lag thing really were true in football, our recruiting would probably suck right now, given that we finished in last place in the Big Ten in 2009. Instead we're cleaning up.
The two year lag compares the current/working class (2012) with the 2010 season.
The 2009 season would relate to the class of 2011. (Which according to the OP wasn't all that strong).
I put up a tough front, but deep down I just want to be held.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:52 PM |
That makes a little more
That makes a little more
That makes a little more sense, but still, we didn't exactly tear it up on the field last season, either. We lost six of our last eight games, all by double-digits.
Michigan is Michigan. Our "brand" is well-known. The last three seasons have done it some damage, but it's still a very attractive program to recruits. As long as we have 100K in the stands every week, some of the most iconic helmets/uniforms in the country, a great fight song, and a terrific academic reputation, we'll get our share of guys. The one big variable is coaching stability. We didn't have that in 2007 or in 2010, and it hurt us.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:17 PM |
Yeah, I think the biggest
Yeah, I think the biggest
Yeah, I think the biggest problem with the OP is using only one service, and (perhaps) coincidentally the service that has our 2012 class ranked the lowest. If you used 247 or Scout (or all three) you'd see that this class is on pace to be as good or better than just about any class UM has signed in the Rivals/Scout era. That's pretty damn good.
Another reason a lot of guys are excited is due to the potential recruits who are likely to commit - Diamond, Wormley, Washington, Pipkins, Stanford, Dunn, maybe Wilson. We won't sign all of those guys, but we'll probably get half of them or more. It's hard to quantify potential commits, but it contributes to the excitement.
Also - Morris.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:20 PM |
Honestly...
Honestly...
I think we get them all... but things change quickly with recruiting. Stay tuned.
June 13th, 2011 at 2:30 PM |
Pace
Pace
I'd like to see some evidence to support his assertion:
"this class is on pace to be as good or better than just about any class UM has signed in the Rivals/Scout era"
I think if you go buy position ranks you'd see a pretty normal Michigan class excluding the 2 down years ('10 and '11) that resulted from 3 and 5 win seasons. I'm not even sure that you can make a case for any single position group being particularly exceptional for Michigan.
I think this assumption is built on conjecture that Pipkins and the others you've named end up at Michigan, but recruiting outcomes change very quickly. It wasn't so long ago that Trey DePriest was a lock to some, Demitrius Hart, Sean Parker, Wayne Morgan...etc.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:03 PM |
I'm not basing it on any
I'm not basing it on any
I'm not basing it on any particular position group - I'm using the same metric the OP used - percentage of recruits who are 4 stars or better. Right now we're at 7-9 out of 16, depending on the service, and it looks like almost any guy who will commit from here on out will be a 4 star. If we get to 25 commits, 6-7 of the next 9 will be 4 stars or better, giving us somewhere from 13-16 out of 25 as 4/5 star players and that's if none of our current 3 stars get an extra star. That's between 52 and 64%, as good or better than we've historically been. That's not a major stretch.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:16 PM |
I guess its how you frame it
I guess its how you frame it
I see a pace of 7/16 or 9/16 and (45-55%) and don't project 6/9 or 7/9 (65-75%).
I see a historical norm (50-60%) and think: "typical" or "average" and you see "as good or better than any".
As an additional note, there aren't any real standouts or 5-stars (YET!). So that would make the 4-star-or-higher methodology a little biased in '12's favor.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:18 PM |
Your point seems to be
Your point seems to be
that if they do better than they have they can do better than they have. Which I agree with.
June 13th, 2011 at 3:05 PM |
Where can I purchase these
Where can I purchase these
Where can I purchase these position ranks?
so far, and given the situation, an unqualified yes.