247 Team Talent Composite: UM #17
For anyone that doesn't know, 247 creates a total team talent composite ranking each year. This year's version is here. It is relatively new. They have only been doing it since 2015. I thought it was worth noting that UM has it's lowest ranking in the history of the composite. The question is does it matter? Well, that's debatable. I think there are several key factors that influence how successful a team is in addition to recruiting rankings. However, recruiting clearly matters as has been shown many times over. I think the QB position at UM in particular has limited their success relative to their team talent composite score. So, there's potential to believe that if we get better QB play this year despite less talent we could still have a successful year. But, that's an unknown. Let's look at UM's team talent composite and compare to their final records to see if there's a correlation. And, as an ever present litmus test, let's also look at OSU's team talent composite and the scores of The Game relative to each.
2020 Team Talent Composite Rankings
1. UGA
2. Bama
3. OSU
4. Clemson
5. Texas
6. LSU
7. Florida
8. Notre Dame
9. Oklahoma
10. USC
13. PSU
17. UM
27. Wisconsin
32. Maryland
MSU
The Game
2015: UM #9 (10-3), OSU #3 (12-1), (42-13)
2016: UM #8 (10-3), OSU #6 (11-2), (30-27)
2017: UM #7 (8-5), OSU #2 (12-2), (31-20)
2018: UM #8 (10-3), OSU #1 (13-1), (62-39)
2019: UM #11 (9-4), OSU #2 (13-1), (56-27)
2020: UM #17, OSU #3
Observations
- UM's best team talent composite ranking was 2016 which was also the closest score against OSU.
- OSU's worst team talent composite ranking was 2016 which was also the closest score against UM.
- The only year OSU didn't win 12 games or more was when they were not in the top 5 in the team talent composite (2016).
- The closest score in the game was when the team talent composite had the least difference between UM/OSU in 2016 and the second closest score was when the second least difference between the two in 2017.
- The worst losses to OSU were when the team talent composite were farthest apart in 2018, 2019, and 2015.
- UM's worst record was 2017 when it actually had its best team talent composite score, but UM played their 3rd string QB much of the year.
- UM has gotten worse in the team talent composite each of the last 4 years.
- OSU has not been outside the top 3 in the team talent composite during this time except the one year (2016).
- The talent difference between UM & OSU in 2020 is the worst it has been since the team talent composite has been in existence and probably a ways before that if I had to guess.
- This does not look for the outlook of The Game this year unless Milton can overcome a significant talent discrepancy, but OSU possesses a Heisman candidate QB.
October 10th, 2020 at 10:17 AM ^
Number 17 is better than number 18.
October 10th, 2020 at 10:31 AM ^
It's not good
October 10th, 2020 at 10:38 AM ^
I’d be curious to see what this list looks like if only the starters and rotational guys were included.
Anyone who puts stock in these rankings shouldn’t be worried about Minnesota. They’re further behind UM than UM is behind osu.
October 10th, 2020 at 10:58 AM ^
I’d be curious to see what this list looks like if only the starters and rotational guys were included.
I've seen the UM/OSU projected starters compared by recruiting rankings by a poster on 11W, but I can't put my finger on it. This also wouldn't compare it to previous years.
Anyone who puts stock in these rankings shouldn’t be worried about Minnesota. They’re further behind UM than UM is behind osu.
Agreed about Minnesota vs UM, which is why I'm not overly concerned about them. But, I think the difference between #2 and #10 is much more significant than #32 vs #40 although it's the same number of places in the rankings. But, as I mentioned the QB position is the one spot where a team can play above or below their ranking. See UM performing below their rankings most of this time, particularly 2017. But, I also think if you use that very same comparison over say, the past 10 years you'd find it pans out. That's no guarantee it will pan out every year...see 2019. However, Minnesota also didn't play OSU or UM, although they did beat PSU. Let's look at who they beat last year and compare their composite score.
- Minnesota (#46) 40 vs Illinois (#37) 17
- Minnesota (#46) 34 vs Nebraska (#24) 7
- Minnesota (#46) 52 vs Maryland (#27) 10
- Minnesota (#46) 31 vs PSU (#10) 26
- Minnesota (#46) 19 vs Iowa (#43) 23
- Minnesota (#46) 17 vs Wisconsin (#33) 38
So they were a bit of a mixed bag beating several teams ranked ahead of them, namely PSU in a close home game. They also lost to two teams ranked significantly worse in Iowa & Wisconsin than several other teams they beat.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:37 PM ^
Michigan plays terrible on the road and it is the first start for Milton. I will be very surprised if Michigan beats Minnesota.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:04 PM ^
Each year's road games:
2015: 4-1 (loss was Harbaugh first game at Utah)
2016: 2-2 (1 loss was of course to osu the other was a night game in Iowa)
2017: 4-2 (This is the worst team Harbaugh has had so far. losses were to psu and uw)
2018: 3-2 (losses to ND on opening night and of course osu)
2019: 3-2 (losses to uw and psu)
So under Harbaugh they're 16-9 on the road. Removing osu (since everyone here assumes that a loss no matter what) he's 16-7. The only loss to a lower-ranked team was the Iowa night game. That's 70%. Not sure what the average is but I doubt that number makes them "terrible." You might look at the Utah and ND losses on opening day and think its the same situation. But this isn't Milton first year in the program like Shea at ND and Rudock at Utah. Milton also isn't some no talent scrub. He was a 4 star with a 92 rating on 247 and was the #9 pro-style QB in the country.
Could they lose to Minnesota? Yes. But to expect them to is just feelingsball.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:03 PM ^
No it's not. Who was the best team Michigan has beat on the road under Harbaugh? 2018 NW was the only team we beat that ended the season ranked. (finished 9-5), and is any game @NW an actual road game?
Besides that we've beaten a plethora of 7-6 teams (2018 MSU, 2017 Purdue, 2015 PSU) and last year Indiana was 8-5. Unless you think Minnesota is a 7-6 (5-4 in a short season) type team next year, you really shouldn't expect us to beat them. Obvious caveat being no fans.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:17 PM ^
Doesn't matter who the best team they've beaten is. As I noted Harbaugh has only lost on the road to a team ranked lower than UM once in the regular season. Minnesota is ranked lower than UM. So based on past performance, there is more to suggest they'll win than lose.
His losses have come against top 15 teams except for Iowa and Utah at night. And I'm not sure what to do with Utah since it was his first game with the team. Unless you think Minnesota is actually a top 10-15 team, don't worry. They're not guaranteed to win but I'm also not expecting a loss.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:36 PM ^
I'm not sure we're comparing apples to apples. You're using a different metric (W/L record). I'd counter that with how often has UM lost to a team outside the top 50 in team talent on the road? Obviously they've lost to OSU, PSU, & Wisconsin several times on the road and few others sprinkled in with Iowa, MSU, ND & Utah. But, I doubt any of those teams were outside the top 50 in team talent. This would be more similar to losing to NW, Purdue, Indiana, or Illinois on the road if we are maintaining the same metric in the argument.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:45 PM ^
Michigan plays terrible on the road and it is the first start for Milton. I will be very surprised if Michigan beats Minnesota.
I agree about UM's road woes, but I think there is more to tease out to get a good indicator of this year's game against Minnesota. One major part of playing on the road is noise and fans which won't be a big factor this year.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:17 PM ^
Disagree about your point re: Minnesota. This metric is most valuable in assessing teams with top end talent. Look at the first few teams who all have nearly a dozen or more 5 stars on the roster. Then look at the rest. You can’t just say this team has a higher ranking so they are better, that is true. But the bell curve here is a ton of teams somewhere in the big “we have mixes of three and four stars” and just a handful of teams on the tail end in the “we can’t count all our five stars on our fingers” category.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:17 PM ^
Disagree about your point re: Minnesota. This metric is most valuable in assessing teams with top end talent. Look at the first few teams who all have nearly a dozen or more 5 stars on the roster. Then look at the rest. You can’t just say this team has a higher ranking so they are better, that is true.
I think you'd have to dive a little further into the stats to say with certainty. Minnesota doesn't appear in the top 50 in 2020. Let's say hypothetically they are #51. We know UM is #17. How often does a top 20 team lose to a team outside the top 50 in team talent? I'd guess maybe only 20% of the time. I'd guess the numbers are in UM's favor.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:51 PM ^
Man, this fanbase just never learns does it? How did that game where we had a higher talent composite than Wisconsin last year go?
October 10th, 2020 at 2:26 PM ^
Man, this fanbase just never learns does it? How did that game where we had a higher talent composite than Wisconsin last year go?
That's one game. No one is suggestion this is 100%. UM went 8-1 versus teams they were more talented than and 1-3 versus teams they were less talented than last year. The metric predicted the correct team to win 11/13 times or roughly 85% of the time.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:40 PM ^
Does anyone here think Purdue has better talent than OH St?
Shit happens.
October 10th, 2020 at 4:53 PM ^
Shit happens.
Yes, there's a 15% chance of shit happening.
October 10th, 2020 at 7:54 PM ^
I’d be curious to see what this list looks like if only the starters and rotational guys were included.
Found this over at 11W
October 10th, 2020 at 10:18 PM ^
Holy shit this has to be one of the most depressing things I've ever seen :/
October 10th, 2020 at 10:52 AM ^
Not sure I understand the methodology of how they come up with their rankings. It doesn’t seem to be based solely off of average recruit rankings.
What is obvious though is that Georgia, O$U, and Bama are on another level when it comes to crootin’ rankings compared to everyone else (even Clemson, surprisingly). We’re never gonna be able to recruit on that level, so just need to find a way to win with the players we do have.
October 10th, 2020 at 11:01 AM ^
What is obvious though is that Georgia, O$U, and Bama are on another level when it comes to crootin’ rankings compared to everyone else (even Clemson, surprisingly). We’re never gonna be able to recruit on that level, so just need to find a way to win with the players we do have.
100%, they are the elite of recruiting rankings since Saban, Meyer, & Smart arrived at each respectively. Clemson prior to 2020 has typically been more of a fringe top 10 more similar to UM or LSU and this is the first time they've cracked the top 5. The past several years they've performed well above their ranking due mostly IMO to high level QB play. UGA is a big underachiever relative to their ranking. OSU & Bama basically do as expected.
October 10th, 2020 at 11:08 AM ^
Osu is also an underachiever along with UGA. They haven’t won a playoff game since their national championship in 14. And in the other 5 years only made it twice.
Unfortunately that has never helped UM beat them.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:54 PM ^
In many ways OSU's struggles post Michigan resemble ours in the Rose Bowl under Bo. We used to be hyper-focused on beating Ohio so any game afterwards was a bit of a let down emotionally. I think OSU might be feeling that as well as we all know they point at the Michigan game like no other.
I wish we still did too.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:13 PM ^
Eh. You could make that argument about 2016. But other than that year they managed to win the Big 10 championship game after beating us. I think the issue under Meyer was that he dropped random games he shouldn't have every season (Psu Iowa Purdue). But maybe that's cus he was looking ahead to us although I'm skeptical of that.
We'll see what Day does in his second year. I do wonder what the reaction in Columbus will be if they fail to make the playoffs this year or lose in round 1 again. Especially if the feeling is they should beat their first-round opponent.
October 10th, 2020 at 4:06 PM ^
It's tough when you are favored in every single game. At that point, every loss is to a team they should beat.
October 11th, 2020 at 8:44 AM ^
If winning the Big Ten every year but two since 2014 is considered underachieving please sign me up.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:54 PM ^
It is 100% based on recruiting rankings. There’s an explanation of their formula on the page with the little information icon.
The problem with it is, it’s not weighted for experience. So a 4* true freshman carries the same value as a 4* senior of similar recruiting ranking. It’s then not adjusted for player performance, as we can all probably agree that Ronnie Bell isn’t the #1473 recruit in his class.
Basing recruiting classes on rankings is an inexact science on its own, but gauging roster talent on recruiting rankings is much worse. As always you can find some correlation, especially with the top end teams (if you recruit extremely well each and every year, odds are you’re going to do well). But you take a school like Michigan that adds a few fliers every year that end up seriously outperforming their rankings (Bell and Paye as an example), add in a couple high ranked transfers (Solomon, McCaffrey, Sims, BSJ, Anthony as examples) and it hurts this ranking too.
Overall, you look at it and Michigan probably isn’t the 17th most talented team. We probably fall somewhere around 10th in terms of actual talent with a few key holes on our roster due to recruiting/transfer issues. So this is another cool tool that doesn’t REALLY tell you anything, but it’s something that generates clicks for these sites.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:13 PM ^
I agree. Seems strange given that Michigan has consistently out-recruited everyone on that list save 4 or 5 programs over the last 5 years. Have they been as low as 17 even once under Harbaugh?
October 10th, 2020 at 4:25 PM ^
Yes. 2018. Last year's class was pretty close to being ranked that low at number 14.
October 10th, 2020 at 5:32 PM ^
It ranks talent on the roster. Michigan’s recruiting classes have graded well in general, but Michigan has also had quite a few high ranked guys flame out and transfer for various reasons. So guys like Aubrey Solomon that helped our recruiting class rank well, but are no longer playing here, don’t impact our ranking here.
October 10th, 2020 at 10:54 AM ^
1. This is why my expectations over the last few years is that we'll never beat OSU again in my lifetime. If we do, great. When we don't, par for the course for me. This talent inequity cannot be overcome without superior coaching, which we don't seem to have. So I see no reason to think we'll beat them unless either of those factors change drastically.
2. USC has had a few rough recruiting years, they should drop quite drastically in this list going forward.
October 10th, 2020 at 11:32 AM ^
Part of the problem in recent history is superior coaching doesn't even give you a leg up vs. Meyer. How good a coach Day remains to be seen though going forward. Hard to evaluate with all that talent and only getting tested in the playoffs.
October 10th, 2020 at 11:01 AM ^
This article confirms everything we thought about the Michigan football program. Their recruiting is not even close to what it takes to be a National title contender. For whatever reasons, Michigan whiffs at their absolute top targets year after year after year. You cannot build a team based on who-dats from New England that Don Brown has a “hunch” about.
October 10th, 2020 at 11:12 AM ^
Good news! Michigan isn't building a team based on "who-dats from New England." I understand your larger point that Michigan probably isn't recruiting at an elite enough level to really compete for national championships, but let's not exaggerate. Michigan signed the #14 class in 2020 and currently has the #11 class. Not exactly a group of who-dats, but also good way from the OSU Recruiting Death Star.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:01 PM ^
In all fairness UM has not been a NC contender much in my lifetime ie finished in the top 4 post season polls and I'm 41.
My hope is they are a B1G title contender. Problem with that is our division has a perennial NC contender in OSU. I'll settle for closer games against OSU while still losing and cementing ourselves as #2 in the B1G ahead of PSU and Wiscy ala 2016.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:20 PM ^
I agree with these expectations. As a first step, I'd just like to see us beat a good team on the road.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:42 PM ^
Lol. How did you decide we were the 2nd best team in the BIG in 2016?
October 10th, 2020 at 5:06 PM ^
Lol. How did you decide we were the 2nd best team in the BIG in 2016?
PSU and OSU were tired at 8-1 with the best record in the conference. UM & Wisconsin were tied at 7-2 for the second best record.
- PSU barely beat OSU and Wiscy at home and got crushed by UM on the road.
- OSU barely beat UM and Wiscy at home and got barely beat by PSU on the road.
- UM barely beat Wiscy at home, crushed PSU at home, and barely lost to OSU on the road.
- Wiscy lost close games to all three on the road.
Based on that data if all 4 teams played each other in neutral sites PSU, OSU, & UM would all be tied and Wiscy would be just behind all of them. But, it's so hard to see UM beating OSU even though I think they do in that game in a neutral site so I give OSU the nod as number one and UM definitively beat PSU so they are #2.
October 10th, 2020 at 11:11 AM ^
Sobering stuff. Everything you just laid out leads to another embarrassing loss to OSU. Michigan really needs to dig deep and pull off an upset eventually. They need to earn more national respect and the only way to do that is beating OSU.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:04 PM ^
IMO the key is QB play, so I'm hoping Milton and McCarthy after will get us there. Clemson has showed one good QB (Watson) can overcome a big talent discrepancy and get you future recruits to eventually close the gap.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:07 PM ^
To have multiple classes under Harbaugh with ZERO top 100 recruits @ a national brand like UM just means this staff is either lazy or just bad @ recruiting. Osu,Bama,UGA and oklahoma staffs probably plan recruiting strategies every day. One class harbaugh signed had zero top 100 commits and 19/22 commits had only a um offer and no other P5 offers. Sounds like they committed over the phone as soon as they were offered by um. Thats bad.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:57 PM ^
I’m gonna go ahead and be the first one to call out the blatant lie that 19/22 didn’t have a P5 offer outside of Michigan.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:16 PM ^
Shut up Maizen!
19 out of 22 recruits had no other P5 offers? Sounds like bullshit to me. Which class?
October 10th, 2020 at 11:24 AM ^
Our best talent was when we had the new coach bump when Harbaugh came in with high esteem from the NFL. I feel as if our coaching turnover has been the biggest detriment to both recruiting and on field performance in big games.
Look at Alabama, and I know they are still a juggernaut, but they were solely on top of the mountain up until his staff started getting poached for head coaching positions annually. That is, likewise, why i believe Dabo was able to finally break through and have success.
Let's say we had a staff of Jim Harbaugh, Jedd Fisch, Josh Gattis, Ed Warinner, Jay Harbaugh, Sherrone Moore, Chris Partridge, Al Washington, Mike Zordich, Don Brown and Greg Mattison consistently for 4 or 5 years without turnover, I guarantee the narrative would be different today. That is a staff full of elite coaches and recruiters.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:12 PM ^
I agree with a lot of that, but I'm not sure that's realistic at a blue blood program. Guys want to move up the coaching ranks. Either you promote your high flyer assistants or many will take opportunities elsewhere eventually. You can't expect to key a top recruiting position coach like Wheatley, Partridge, etc as a position coach.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:40 PM ^
I agree that coaches will move on, the problem under Harbaugh so far as that we have had annual turnover. If we would've gotten 4 years or so out of any of them before people started leaving first (the more proven ones) and the others moved into their roles. Lack of succession has been a key.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:58 PM ^
"Let's say we had a staff of Jim Harbaugh, Jedd Fisch, Josh Gattis, Ed Warinner, Jay Harbaugh, Sherrone Moore, Chris Partridge, Al Washington, Mike Zordich, Don Brown and Greg Mattison consistently for 4 or 5 years without turnover,"
Let's say my aunt had balls. So then she'd be my uncle.
October 10th, 2020 at 11:29 AM ^
Seems oddly low to me given past classes. 2018 was very poor I guess.
Do they weight it by year? I would value the senior class higher than incoming freshmen.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:02 PM ^
It's low because our highly rated 2017 class is basically absent from the team right now. Everyone either went to the NFL or transferred
October 10th, 2020 at 5:04 PM ^
That’s basically my take as well. The 2017 class was the one everyone said should be the model, several highly rated players, nailed down in-state recruiting and while there were some good impact players, it feels like a bit of a flameout and said flameout, drove the rating down. We’ll see what happens but I’m seeing a lot of classes with guys coming in who meet the profile of what the coaches want and I am wondering if that will lead to better retention, which right now, I think will help the program out the most.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:18 PM ^
Lost Ruiz, Thomas, Collins, Patterson, DPJ, Black, etc. All were highly rated recruits.