Depth Chart with 247 Composite Ratings
I think we all know that recruiting rankings improved under Hoke and that we finally have some more experienced depth. I thought, however, it might be helpful to lay out the presumed depth chart with the corresponding 247 Composite ratings. What it shows is that we finally have a roster full of experienced talent that we were used to in the 90's and early 2000's.
247's rating system basically breaks down as follows:
98 and above = 5 star.
89-97 =4 star
82-88 = 3 star.
I like the numerical ratings more than the straight stars because you can get a better sense if someone is a generic three star or someone closer to a 4 star, etc. I rounded the numbers after the decimal point.
Obviously, the depth chart will change a bit after the spring and some players may move positions, but this gives a good sense of the talent on the roster.
POSITION | 1ST TEAM | 2ND TEAM | 3RD TEAM |
---|---|---|---|
QB | Morris (97) | Speight (87) | Malzone (90) |
RB | Green (99) | Isaac (97) | Smith (92) |
FB/HB | Kerridge (NR) | Houma (86) | Shalman (90) |
WR1 | Darboh (91) | Ways (87) | Cole (96) |
WR2 | Chessun (86) | Harris (97) | Jones (85) |
SLOT | Norfleet (92) | Canteen (89) | Dever (NR) |
TE | Butt (93) | Bunting (89) | Williams (89) |
OT | Braden (88) | LTT (93) | Newsome (90) |
OG | Kalis (97) | Fox (95) | Samuelson (88) |
C | Miller (85) | Kugler (97) | Runyan (84) |
OG | Glasgow (NR) | Dawson (95) | Bars (86) |
OT | Cole (94) | Magnuson (96) | Bushell-Beaty (90) |
DE | Charlton (94) | Strobel (92) | Poggi (94) |
DT | Glasgow (NR) | Wormley (94) | Hurst (90) |
DT | Henry (84) | Mone (94) | Pipkins (97) |
DE | Ojemudia (91) | Marshall (93) | Johnson (89) |
SLB | Bolden (96) | McCray (94) | Gant (85) |
MLB | Morgan (83) | Gedeon (91) | Furbush (87) |
WLB | Ross (95) | Jenkins-Stone (94) |
Winovich (89) |
CB | Lyons (95) | Countess (93) | Dawson (85) |
FS | Wilson (91) | Clark (87) | Kinnel (92) |
SS | Peppers (100) | Hill (90) | Thomas (97) |
CB | Lewis (95) | Stribling (86) | Watson (85) |
87 or above | 16/24 | 20/24 | 16/24 |
Of course stars are not a gaurantee of individual performance, and we have seen a lot of guys on our roster play above or below their ratings, but on the whole the ratings provide a decent measure of the overall talent on the roster.
We now have a ton of 4 stars and high three stars in the three deep, many of whom have game experience and/or years in the program. I don't see one freshman in the 2-deep at this point unless Malzone or Cole really impresses this spring.
I fully expect this staff to start developing the talent this year and next. Hopefully the results on the field will bear that out.
February 24th, 2015 at 5:29 PM ^
Thank you for pulling this together. I shudder to think what a similar chart would have looked like each of the last 7 years. It will be fun to see what changes the meritocracy creates.
February 24th, 2015 at 5:30 PM ^
The question has never been about the talent level on the team; it certainly isn't elite, but just being Michigan-level recruits should ensure 8-9 wins most years. It's interesting to see this all on paper, but I'm not surprised that this team is aleady one of the more talented ones Harbaugh will have coached in his college career. If he has some early success and can get even a slight upgrade in overall recruits, the rest of the conference save for OSU and maybe PSU is going to be in trouble.
February 24th, 2015 at 5:49 PM ^
about the lack talent on the roster well as a lack of experience in recent years.
That doesn't mean I'm discounting the lack of player development that took place in the last decade either.
All of those things combined to produce one of the worst decades in Michigan football history.
This year we finally seem to have the talent, experience and coaching all going in the right direction for the first time in awhile.
February 27th, 2015 at 3:46 PM ^
That absolutely is elite. I challenge you to find even five other teams in the country with more talent in their two-deep. I'd bet there aren't five teams with a higher 247 Composite average in their two-deep.
I'm sure there are 5, but I agree with your point that that is a high level of talent.
To answer your Q, I'm sure Alabama, OSU, USC, FSU, Georgia, LSU and maybe 5 others have more "stars" in their depth chart.
I would like to see this adjusted for experience as well. That's where I think Michigan's might really look unique as this team is finally getting back to a decent level of experience.
February 24th, 2015 at 6:04 PM ^
Should be a good team.
February 25th, 2015 at 8:05 AM ^
Yes, but only if one of the QBs pans out.
Wonder what the score is for Jake Rudock if it actually happens? (fingers crossed)
February 25th, 2015 at 9:54 AM ^
My wild guess is that if none of the current QB's on the roster look good, we'll see Harbaugh go after a guy like Rudock. I think they'll wait until Spring practices are over to decide. My hunch is that Speight or Morris take the job and although not likely as a true freshman to win the job, I'm not totally counting out Malzone. I'm pretty optimistic now after only seeing a few minutes of practice vid. that real, quality, hands-on coaching is going to make a huge difference.
February 27th, 2015 at 3:47 PM ^
One of the QBs will pan out. We have four guys who are all highly rated, top-20 in their class QBs. Just like any other position, if you have that many talented players, a good coaching staff will get at least one (and probably more) of them to perform.
February 24th, 2015 at 7:42 PM ^
Thanks for doing this. I found it interesting. Hoke didn't leave the cupboard bare. This should be reason for cautious optimism. As always though, the QB is the key to success. Hopefully, that's where coaching will truly make a difference.
February 24th, 2015 at 9:39 PM ^
I had forgotten, after all the misery, that Morris was a legit elite recruit. Here's hoping that Harbaugh can Harbaugh the Hoke out of him.
February 25th, 2015 at 7:54 AM ^
This varies by position and drive in the HS athletes to camp. Morris had a singular drive that drove him to Texas to try out for the Elite 11. Does that make him less a 97 than Peppers is a 100? No, but his rating is a hard earned rating.
Offensive linemen are another world all together. The physical skills required of CFB linemen are nascent to say the most in high school. Ratings in this group are an order of magnitude less legit than at CB or WR.
February 25th, 2015 at 12:26 PM ^
no matter how you slice it, there is no greater indicator of success than a high rating, whether it is success in college, or projecting the number of elite high school prospects to the NFL draft. Nothing is perfect, but the rating is the most consistent system available.
February 24th, 2015 at 10:13 PM ^
I really enjoyed looking at this and the breakdown of the stars. However, I am just curious why you have a guy starting at Quarterback who has a career completion rate of 49.4%(43-87) and has more career tackles than Touchdown passes(not to mention the 5 picks). Not saying Shane will not start all I am asking is how you got to this logic. Again, thank you for putting this together, it is a great read.
February 25th, 2015 at 1:16 AM ^
Well for starters, he has taken more snaps, started more games, thrown more passes, and done more anything than any other (eligible) QB. That seems logical to me. The only QB to even take a snap would probably be my favorite to start before practices even start.
Whether that's how it plays out remains to be seen. But I think Morris as the pre-spring starter is the MOST logical choice.
February 25th, 2015 at 8:06 AM ^
There's a new coach in town who didn't recruit Morris or any of the possible QB cadidates (in spring ball at least) to start in the fall. This in the backdrop of a program and sport where success is directly proportional to your starting QB.
In this context, logic based on past performance or ratings is close to meaningless.
February 25th, 2015 at 9:19 AM ^
But if you, as a fan not a coach, were making a pre-spring depth chart... The logical choice for starting QB would be the ONLY guy who has even taken a snap. He questioned his reasoning and logic for having Morris as the starter. Morris is the ONLY logical one. Nobody else has even taken a snap, let alone attempted a pass.
Now it's a pre-spring chart. The QBs have to go out and earn it just like every player at every position. But as far as the chart goes, why would you NOT put the only guy with any experience as the starter before practices have even started?
February 25th, 2015 at 12:43 PM ^
Because he has more career tackles than touchdowns, under 50 completion percentage. And a pick about every 15.5 times he throws the ball. Just because he has "experience" doesn't mean anything. if anything his struggle are more of a reason to put Malzone or Speight out there.
February 25th, 2015 at 11:52 PM ^
Why would you not, because none of the other QBs have done anything. The only one we have seen is Speight in the spring game last year and he looked worse than Morris. You arent arguing FOR anyone else, you're just arguing against Morris. That's my question for you. Who else do you possibly consider the starter PRE-SPRING? Nobody except him has even played.
So you're telling me Morris can't improve? He's stuck as a 49% passer with 0 TDs and 5 picks? His statistics aren't great. But he still is the ONLY QB to even take a snap. The ONLY QB we have seen play at all. That is the logic behind him behind him being the pre-spring starter.
This is a pre-spring depth chart. Your alternative options are a QB who redshirted or a QB who was taking high school classes 2 months ago. You don't start a kid simply because the current starter isn't lighting it up. You start someone else because he has proven he is better. Problem is, you haven't seen either of the other two even take a snap. You cannot justifiably say they are better.
Your logic to not have Shane as the pre-spring starter, is that he wasn't very good. Problem is, you don't know how good anyone else is, and can't put anyone else as the pre-spring starter.
That is the logic behind it. That doesn't mean Morris will be the starter when it is all said and done. But the fact is, the only QB to even take a snap is going to be the "starter" when you're making a depth chart like this. Again, this means nothing in the long-run, but there is a helluva lot more logic in having Morris as the starter at this point than there is anyone else.
February 27th, 2015 at 8:46 AM ^
I believe Shane could be a good Quarterback if he improves his accuracy and develops better pocket presence. Which under Harbaugh anything is possible. You are right in regards to Speight and Malzone being unproven. Honestly, I would be very happy if Michigan were to get Jake Rudock from Iowa to transfer for his 5th year. I believe that this team has all the pieces in place. The difference between an 8 win season and a big ten title is honestly going to be the quarterback play. If Morris is named the starter going into week 1 at Utah, it will mean that he beat out the competition of Speight, Malzone, Gentry and possibly Rudock if he transfers.
February 28th, 2015 at 8:21 PM ^
I agree. But the question was, what is the logic behind Shane being the starter in this depth chart. The logic is, he is the only one who has even taken a snap. So in a depth chart that is made before the first practice, he is the ONLY logical choice.
You can't make a solid argument for Speight or Malzone because neither of them have played. Neither has shown any indication of being better than Morris. The only arguments I've seen for NOT having Morris as the starter here, are his struggles. But that isn't an argument to start either of the other two, it's just an argument against Morris.
Fact is, until they go out there and earn their spots and shake out a depth chart based on performance, the only logical choice for starter is going to be the only one of the group who has even taken a snap. That may not be how it shakes out after Spring/Fall Camp, but that is the only logical choice before practices have even started (when he made the chart).
Notice how Morris is always referred to by his first name. Thie unearned notoriety he got is troubling and can lead to entitlement, and it shows
February 28th, 2015 at 2:54 PM ^
And, in spite of all that, the prior coaching staff still thought he was better than the next best guy.
February 24th, 2015 at 11:00 PM ^
I think it would be interesting if you went back and showed these rankings compared to the players the past 7 years or so.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 24th, 2015 at 11:05 PM ^
FWIW, Brady Pallante was a composite 3* at .8059.
February 25th, 2015 at 8:03 AM ^
Gosh I want to see Kalis actually mauling people so bad now. His RS freshman year seems so long ago.
February 25th, 2015 at 9:35 AM ^
The interior 3 of the offensive line. The numbers dont lie. By far our biggest weakness last year. Repeatedly got blown up through the middle or lack of push on run plays. A low 3 Star, A "NR" and High 4 star that has under achieved so far. I hope for big things from Kalis this year and the new coaching staff. I'm hoping one of the back ups with a higher ceiling come through and vastly improve under Jimmy and Co. I think Miller is a good leader but not very talented. I hope he is replaced by Kugler.
February 25th, 2015 at 10:15 AM ^
I disagree with you that the interior linemen were our biggest weakness. In fact, I think Miller and Glasgow were probably our two best linemen, with Braden being the greatest liability of the bunch.
On a somewhat separate note, I think the recruiting stars/rankings are somewhat misleading with respect to both glasgows. Those guys were pretty new to football when they graduated high school (i think they had only played there senior years). Had they started at a younger age, I'm betting they would have readily been in the 3-4 star range. Both have legitimate physical talent.
February 25th, 2015 at 11:11 AM ^
Dude... this is awesome. Thank you for doing this.
Looks like a stacked team from the recruiting rankings. I'd kill to see OSU and MSU's as well. Not that I'm not grateful. You've just awoken a hungry beast.
February 26th, 2015 at 12:42 AM ^
Q: When do you want to have a tentative depth chart? At the end of spring or later?
Harbs: “Uh…do you need one at some point? When would you like to have one?”
Q: We’d like to have one today if you have that ready.
Harbs: “We don’t have that list in front of us right now. Check MGoBlog - they'll have it posted tonite. ”
What has (hasn't) happened with Dymonte Thomas . . . can you imagine if he had panned out and was playing the other safety position with Peppers?
TOGETHER WATCH!
Comments