In-State Recruiting Success Rate
In-state recruiting doesn’t matter very much. Traverse City, Toledo, Tampa, or Timbuktu - it’s all (more or less) the same once they’re in Ann Arbor. A 4-star from Illinois is just as good as a 4-star from Michigan. John Beilein doesn't care about that imaginary line and neither should our football coach. But locals care about 'turf' and it’s an interesting topic for message boards, radio, etc.
The following numbers reflect Michigan’s historical success at landing elite in-state prospects. Here “Elite” is defined by being ranked in the top 5 in-state (according to 247 composite rankings) AND getting a Michigan offer (per Rivals). Not perfect methodology (it skips guys like Mike Martin, Danny O’Brien, Onewu, and Falcon whose offer lists merit a better rank) and inherently favors Michigan by excluding guys it doesn't bother to offer (e.g., Kyonta Stallworth), but it’s a consistent approach over many years.
- 88% for Lloyd Carr: Lloyd landed almost everyone he wanted from 2002-2006 (15/17). Some lean in-state talent years, so overall numbers are low.
- 77% under 'normal' circumstances: Put on your Maize-colored glasses and scrub away the Rodriguez years, along with the shoulder year on each side (Carr’s I’m-trying-to-retire-here 2007 class and Hoke’s I-just-walked-here-anyone-got-a-jacket? 2011 class). Outside of these dark years, Michigan has landed nearly 4 out of 5 elite in-state prospects.
- 64% for Brady Hoke - Hoke got 9/14 between 2012 and 2014, even as the storm clouds started looming in 2014.
- 57% overall - Michigan’s overall historical success rate between 2002 and 2014. By my count Michigan landed 31 of the top 54 elite prospects that it offered.
- 33% (projected) for Harbaugh* - Our hero's estimated success rate across the 2015 and 2016 classes presumes Michigan gets 1 out of Kareem, Corley, or (flips) Hill. If you're an optimist they can get to 7/9 if Michigan has a great year and flips Hill and Hayes, lands Corley and Kareem, and/or Falcon or Onwenu bump up ahead of Jordan. That'd get Michigan back up to the where we'd like to see things.
- 31% for Rich Rodriguez - While Rodriguez was distracted by pursuits in Florida (actually mostly Ohio, but details...) he only managed to land only 4/13 from 2008-2010.
Perhaps this small sample size snapshot is contributing to some of the overall consternation about recent recruiting and rankings. Michigan fans have been taught to EXPECT getting/keeping 3 out of every 5 elite in-state prospects. MSU, USC, OSU, ND will steal a few, but the majority should stay 'home'. When Michigan's done worse than that (Rodriguez), it's coincided with bad results.
Table:
| Year | Success Rate | Hit | Miss | Not offered | ||
| 2002 | 75% | Gabe Watson, Will Cooper, Carl Tabb | 3 | Drew Stanton (MSU) | 1 | Kyle Brown (MSU) |
| 2003 | 80% | Lamar Woodley, Jim Presley, Jake Long, Jerome Jackson | 4 | Doug Van Dyke (Purdue) | 1 | None |
| 2004 | 100% | Will Johnson, Alex Mitchell, Morgan Trent, Roger Allison | 4 | None | 0 | Justin Hostkins (ND) |
| 2005 | 100% | Kevin Grady, Antonio Bass, Terrance Taylor | 3 | None | 0 | Evan Sharpley (ND), Ryan Allison (MSU) |
| 2006 | 100% | Brandon Graham | 1 | None | 0 | Jeff Lindsay (Purdue), John Maddox (WVU), Pat Rigan (MSU), Anthoney Bowman (Iowa) |
| 2007 | 20% | Ryan Van Bergen | 1 | Ronald Johnson (USC), Dionte Allen (FSU), Joe Barksdale (LSU), Darris Sawtelle (Tenn) | 4 | None |
| 2008 | 40% | Dann O'Neill, Boubacar Cissoko | 2 | Nick Perry (USC), Jonas Gray (ND), Fred Smith (MSU) | 3 | None |
| 2009 | 25% | Will Campbell | 1 | Edwin Baker (MSU), Larry Caper (MSU), Chris Norman (MSU) | 3 | James Jackson (OSU) |
| 2010 | 25% | Devin Gardner | 1 | Will Gholson (MSU), Dior Mathis (OR), CJ Olaniyan (PSU) | 3 | Robert Bolden (PSU) |
| 2011 | 40% | Justice Hayes, Brennen Bayer | 2 | DeAnthony Arnett (Tenn), Lawrence Thomas (MSU), Anthony Zettel (PSU) | 3 | None |
| 2012 | 80% | Richardson, Ross, RJS, Norfleet | 4 | Aaron Burbridge (MSU) | 1 | None |
| 2013 | 60% | Morris, Dawson, Lewis | 3 | Steve Elmer (ND), Jon Reschke (MSU) | 2 | None |
| 2014 | 50% | Harris, Marshall | 2 | Malik McDowell (MSU), Damon Webb (OSU) | 2 | Byron Bullough (MSU) |
| 2015 | 50% | Cole, Malzone | 2 | Mike Weber (OSU), Tyriq Thompson (MSU) | 2 | Kyonta Stallworth (MSU) |
Thanks for collecting the data.
- - - - -
With all respect, I see significant flaws in your reasoning.
Look at the awesome numbers in '04, '05, and '06. One would expect Michigan to do well in the prime (4th/5th) years for those guys, right? Not so much -- look at what happened in '08, '09, and '10.
Obviously coaching (especially on defense) had something to do with that.
- - - - -
To put it another way, the success/failure of a recruiting class has little to do with the product the following autumn. There's lag time to consider.
- - - - -
Finally, correlation does not equal causation (overused, but appropriate here). Would you trade a bunch of out-of-state 4/5-stars for some Michigander 3/4s just to improve your Michigan numbers?
I didn't mean to imply that recruiting results immediatly manifest in on-field results. I agree that there is a lag in the tides that pull the two worlds in the same direction. On field results influence a 16 year old more than an 18 year old and most snaps go to kids aged 20 or 21.
But our minds don't necessarily work that way. People got mad at Rodriguez's Ohio-centric recruiting strategy in large part because the team lost. People expected great things from Hoke's recruits quickly because the team was winning and they were highly ranked, etc. I don't think people think (as much) that a great season will really help recruiting "in a couple years" and they don't say "I can't wait to see Shane Morris in year 5" on signing day. We tend to view the recruiting and on-field results in real time, even though there is a huge gap of 4-6 years between when a future recruit is most influenced by results and actually influencing them on the field.
In-state recruiting does matter.
Why? Because it's reliable. Every year a state like Michigan is going to produce a few elite recruits. And every year a school like Michigan should be able to count on easily getting more than half of them (if we don't screw things up).
There are going to be years like we've seen in the past where we take a shot on a bunch of elite national guys . . . and finish second for their services. It happens.
When you have a relaible pipeline in your own state, you can always count on that safety net of a few elite recruits. That in turn lets you be more adventurous in your national pursuits.
In 2006 the state of Michigan produced Brandon Graham and... Michigan offered no one else and none of them particularly stand out as mistakes. Meanwhile, in 2016 it seems to be a bountiful year where the 6th and 7th best ranked guys in the state (Onwenu and Falcon) have offers from all over the country including elite programs.
I don't think it's consistent/reliable at all, and that's part of why Rodriguez/Harbaugh/Carr/Hoke have all been right to seek out recruits all across the nation. Michigan doesn't supply enough, Ohio isn't reliable enough, so Michigan has to be flexible. I think we "take a shot" at elite national prospects every year -- the question is how much effort you put into it and how you handle the other guys.
I do agree that Michigan should typically get more than half of the in-state elites and that our odds of landing local players is better than the geographically distant ones -- though I'm not sure we're not better off in that regard with an Ohio kid from Toledo compared to a Michigan kid from Benton Harbor.
It's hard to argue the benefit of 'pipelines' and the consistency of talent when even our best (only?) pipeline school - Cass Tech - has seen it's best prospects go elsewhere the last couple years.
Is there a reason Mark Ingram isn't on the list?
Flint, MI class of 2008
http://247sports.com/Season/2008-Football/CompositeRecruitRankings?Stat…
He was ranked 7th in the state (Mike Martin was 6th and also didn't chart in this exercise).
I don't think Michigan offered him either - Mike Shaw and Sam McGuffie were higher rated prospects.
Ahh gotcha.
Surprising he didn't even get an M offer.
RichRod could have flipped his "spread" offense to a "power" offense just by inserting him into certain plays alone.
Comments