The headline could read: Stars and Coaching do matter. The last chart and your top 5 favorites clearly reflect the importance of both. And your chart highlights why Brown, Kiffin & Chizik are gone while Richt & Muschamp are on the hot seat. Under-achievers. So Hoke has clearly gathered the stars for elite status. This year seems critical to his coaching rank as UM has the stars for potential 11-1 - that's a high bar to avoid Under-achiever status.

I won't even go through the boring details of how so many coaches at premier programs have paid their due in the same manner. I am looking solely at Brady.  His coaching bio points to programs that were, of course, non-BCS level, but nonetheless in piss-poor condition when he took over. After his third or fourth year, he had built programs to basically the same level as the one he inherited at Michigan in his inagaural season. If you look at his first year at MI, it's easy to see his defense contained the type of leadership and experience that he had to work three seasons to attain at his previous stops. He inherited Martin, Kovacs, VanBergen, and some lbers that, through Mattison's teaching, were able to actually read keys and act accordingly. I think we can all close our eyes and recall Ryan VanBergen not only chasing down an opposing RB headed for the end zone, but also stopping him and stripping him of the ball, thereby allowing Denard and Co. one more opportunity to put points on the board for UM. This type of play was typical of 2011 and why we went from one of the worst to one of the best defenses in the nation.  Leadership, which can only be developed through experience and belief in the system, were on display every Saturday. I cannot recall the last time we had a turnover ratio in our favor to that degree. We all suffered while watching and probably all bitched while watching these young(key word) players suffer through wins over teams, that as far as star watch, should not have been on the field with us, and then worse, losses to teams like PSU that were as equally ill-equipped as those teams we somehow beat. But, we also watched Mattison, and you have to love him for this, toss almost his entire roster into every game to get them the invaluable PT that their talent, lessons learned while playing against far more experienced players, no matter their star ratings, is going to pay off handsomely as suddenly, they will be the team similar to the 2011 unit, only far more talented as an entire 42-44 man unit. No one can discount Kovacs value to the team, but because of Hoke's recruiting, we won't see too many more walk-ons be co-captains and major contributors. And if they are, although it will be rare, it will be a bonus.      And just as the subject-matter of the initiator of this thread stated, those recruiting classes full of blue chippers, many of which are now upper-classmen will execute in the manner their numerous offers of top D1 BCS coaches throughout the land suggested they would during their recruiting cycle.                              ^And the offense is no different.  Hell, as difficult as it was for Greg to watch his kids go through that learning curve, remember the record setting offense from 2011, although headed by one of our most exciting offensive players ever, along with another 1,000 yard rusher-two in the same backfield is always a good sign- and soon to be the single season receiver in M history, Jeremy Gallon, that offense also contained an AA center, a LT that would become a two time AA and arguably the best in the nation at his particular position, but buffered by experience throughout, and actual honest-to-goodness experienced depth. We were solid, and these were kids recruited for a completely different brand of football.    The production, or lack thereof, of last season's oh-so-young OL was probably something we should have expected, not unlike the disaster that was 2008 when we only fielded one returning starter among the entire eleven. And this brings me back to the original point. At both of Brady's last two HC stints his teams went from cellar-dwellers to the top of the league based almost exclusively on his ability to outrecruit every other coach in his respective conference. But that took three to four years to accomplish. His first season here was basically a bonus in terms of talent inherited, but at the same time we all knew how thin we were going to be where the game is decided for the next couple of seasons, that being in the trenches, and even accepting that truth, I don't believe I am out of line by saying we should have easily beaten OSU twice out of the gate when considering Al's inexplicable second half play calling in 2012 when we continuously picked up an easy 8 on first down and his refusal to keep pushing it until stopped and instead displaying an almost Lloyd Carr stubbornness, continuously bashing ahead on the ground on 2nd and 2 and again on 3rd and 2 to keep coming up with the same results. Yes, we all are aware of Einstein's famous quote.  To hold them to six for an entire half and still lose is something you can't do at Michigan, thus the "Adios Coach Borges. Then again, maybe there were a couple, i.e., the ND end results that could have just as easily turned out in the opposite manner.                 ^But as the initiator of this thread suggested, stars matter, and other than OSU, Brady has been able to separate himself from the rest of the league. Inasmuch as this is his fourth year at the helm, this is his statement year. Aside from gathering the necessary talent, something he has been very successful in, it's now time for him to make a personal statement, one that says, "I'm as good as anyone in this league."  There are some very good to great coaches in this league. And as much as so many wanted Harbaugh, and to a far lesser degree, Miles, Brady has met the challenge at every level he's coached. He has the staff, he has the players and he's had the time. And I believe I did mention his wins and losses in his very first season here with far more many three stars than four and fives. I think this season will be a fun one for all of us.

5 star QB is far more valuable than a 5 star gaurd.  If Hoke follows the script and the ball bounces our direction, we should get 10-11 wins.

I always wondered what happened to him?  He seemed to be doing well at Minnesota then he wasn't there anymore.   I never understood why, and I never really researched it.  But if anyone knows the story, please fill me in!

Great stuff, as usual.

I guess my only quibble is that we've come to realize that star rankings are based on a specific view of what is a "good" player, and doesn't usually take into account the system he will be playing in except, I guess, the pro/spread QB split.  So with teams like Wiscy and Boise, you probably see some of this disparity because the ranking sites are comparing apples to apples when those teams are definitely looking for oranges.  Obviously coaching has an impact, but Wiscy has a very specific style of play that works for them, and they recruit to it regardless of what the star rankings say.

are almost a perfect example of why stars matter.  When they were in the mid major conferences Patterson was one of the hottest names in the coaching circle and TCU was almost an annual BCS buster.

Since they moved to the Big 12, they've been nothing special.  Their two years in the Big 12 have seen seasons of:  7-6 (4-5 in conference) and 4-8 (2-7).

I suspect that you're right re: Franklin and sample size is important (I don't think that any number of stars could overcome a Threet / Sheridan QB combo, for example), but this is fantastic data nonetheless.  Thanks for the effort.

Just for clarity, Hoke's +1.4 (and all ratings) were based only on home games, correct? If that's true, is that surprisingly low given the 19-2 home record (often against poor competition), and how scared should we be based on @ND, @MSU and @OH in 2014?

Great post like always. I think the true measure of a great coaches is what you do with lesser talent than your competitors.