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 11:41 AM ^
The class talent level may be lower, but I do think that Michigan has players better suited for the culture and for the schemes Michigan is running. Our lower rated 2018 class is making an impact and lower rated players like Bell, Paye, Haskins, Sainristil, Gray are outplaying their rankings. Not to mention how that high rated 2017 class imploded with transfers and top tier players not panning out.
Sure OSU has great talent and good coaching but Michigan’s struggles is not just talent related. I’m hoping that Michigan gains momentum and continues to get higher rated program guys and obviously include some elite talent there too.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:19 PM ^
2017 class is a huge weight on our necks. 20 4* or better. Several transferred after little to no impact, never got enough out of DPJ, Black and Collins for various reasons, injuries ruined some. Thomas is talented but he was behind good CBs his freshman and sophomore years, got sick last year and missed games and then COVID had him decide to opt out this year.
30 commits and at most, we will get (or already got) something significant from 11 of them.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:22 PM ^
I agree about UM and coaching/scheme minus CB and to a lesser degree DT and in previous years obviously QB. Problem has been there's always one glaring weakness. Last year it was DT and QB. Previous years it was o-line. This year it will likely be CB. We just seem to have some missing key position group every recruiting cycle and the year we didn't (2017) there was a ton of attention.
October 10th, 2020 at 11:41 AM ^
It's a useful marker for identifying the difference in talent between teams, but it also seems a bit weird. For example, if you go by average ranking (and not their weighted composite), Michigan's average of 89.17 puts them FSU and USC on that list and basically in the same tier as every other team not named UGA, Alabama, OSU, and LSU. And not to point to make fun of a program on the rocks a bit, but Texas is ranked #5 in that composite and has virtually nothing to show for it and, frankly, hasn't looked all that talented on the field since Mack Brown.
Michigan isn't an elite program right now; I'd expect a listing like this to bear that out.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:25 PM ^
Agreed, good point on average vs total.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:00 PM ^
This metric is kinda flawed. Our 2017 class which should be seniors right now was a huge bust and everyone good from that class is gone and over half that class transferred. 2018, our worst class in a while, is mostly still on the team which is heavily weighing us down while the 2019 and 2020 classes are about normal. So while it may represent facts in terms of recruiting, the 2017 class being a bust compared to it's ranking really messes up this metric
October 10th, 2020 at 1:17 PM ^
I think looking at a single class is too small of a sample size to draw meaningful conclusions. The 2016 class was JH's second best behind 2017 and it featured Gary, Bredeson, Long, Onwenu, Hill, Kemp, Bush, Hudson, Uche, etc. who all had good careers. The 2019 class was tied of #2 of JH's best and featured true freshman in Dax Hill, Hinton, Charbonnet, & Giles Jackson who have already made contributions.
October 10th, 2020 at 5:37 PM ^
A single class makes up 25-30% of this ranking, so not exactly a small sample size.
You also make the mistake of accounting for contributions. That has nothing to do with these rankings, it’s based only on recruiting rankings of players currently on the team. So taking lower ranked guys like Khaleke Hudson or Kwity Paye actually hurts you in these rankings, even though these are/were very productive guys.
It just highlights the inherent issues with the recruiting rankings and expands it over multiple classes. It doesn’t gauge how talented your roster is, it gauges how talented your roster is when they were graduating high school without accounting for the ranking being wrong and players improving as they get older.
October 12th, 2020 at 2:02 PM ^
You also make the mistake of accounting for contributions. That has nothing to do with these rankings, it’s based only on recruiting rankings of players currently on the team. So taking lower ranked guys like Khaleke Hudson or Kwity Paye actually hurts you in these rankings, even though these are/were very productive guys.
It all depends on who you're comparing them to. Hudson was good, yes. Was he as good as Peppers, no? This system is about comparing rankings to others to predict wins and losses, not individuals to their production.
October 10th, 2020 at 12:28 PM ^
There's a lot that will still happen between now and 12/12. Perhaps by then the tables will be turned: Milton might have grown into a really good player by then, and who knows if OSU has to play with a backup QB.
Those two factors right there would certainly level the disparity.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:27 PM ^
There's a lot that will still happen between now and 12/12. Perhaps by then the tables will be turned: Milton might have grown into a really good player by then, and who knows if OSU has to play with a backup QB.
As Cassandra said in Wayne's World 2, "and if a frog had wings it wouldn't bump its ass when it hopped".
Those two factors right there would certainly level the disparity.
I applaud your efforts to assimilate :)
October 10th, 2020 at 12:29 PM ^
Numbers don't lie. This will be little consolation to the MGoBloggers that believe Michigan "just hasn't wanted it enough since the Hoke years" when playing OSU. As if desire is all that's needed ...
October 10th, 2020 at 12:41 PM ^
Obviously rankings matter, but just look at Texas sitting there at 5 and that should tell you all you need to know about this particular ranking system
October 10th, 2020 at 1:40 PM ^
Obviously rankings matter, but just look at Texas sitting there at 5 and that should tell you all you need to know about this particular ranking system
Really? You think one sample is a good way to draw meaningful conclusions? If that was the case, the counter would be look at Bama and that's all you need to know about this ranking system.
Here are a list of the NC game and winners and where they fell on this ranking:
- 2019: LSU #5 vs Clemson #9
- 2018: Clemson #6 vs Bama #2
- 2017: Bama #1 vs UGA #4
- 2016: Clemson #9 vs Bama #1
- 2015: Bama #1 vs Clemson #13
Average Ranking in NC Game: #5.1
Average NC Winner: #4.4
It looks like a pretty good metric to me.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:32 PM ^
Not a promising start beginning. Hoping the season plays out better than this implicit forecast.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:35 PM ^
This is a useful snapshot for big picture evaluations and projections, but it's based on rankings from when the current players were 18 so it shouldn't be seen as an absolute metric of potential ceilings.
For example, Kwity is a projected top 2 round pick. He would have been the 2nd lowest non-specialist in OSU's 2017 class. Guys above him in Michigan's class included Hall, Jeter, JKP, Martin, Anthony, and Singleton. None of those guys are getting drafted. None of those guys are probably going to make an All-Big ten team, which Kwity already has.
Also worth considering, your freshman 4.5 star isn't worth the same as Clemson's 4th year senior 4.5 star in most cases.
Also also, that 2016 team had guys like Long and Hill, which inflated this metric. Neither of them played against OSU over Stribling who was a 3 star. Didn't hurt the secondary any.
That all being said, they need to do a better job recruiting the DT, CB, and Pass rushing DE positions to make a dent in OSU's chances of winning the division. Point being, recruit better at those positions and continue/improve talent development to get guys like Watson, Paye, and Glasgow to overplay their rankings.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:43 PM ^
This is a useful snapshot for big picture evaluations and projections, but it's based on rankings from when the current players were 18 so it shouldn't be seen as an absolute metric of potential ceilings.
Of course, just a metric...a relationship not necessarily a causation.
Also worth considering, your freshman 4.5 star isn't worth the same as Clemson's 4th year senior 4.5 star in most cases.
Agreed, projected starters and maybe #2 on the depth charts as well would probably be even more beneficial as a projection for a given year.
October 10th, 2020 at 1:49 PM ^
So for the people who want to deny that the gap has gotten wider since Harbaugh has gotten here this pretty much confirms that.
October 10th, 2020 at 5:43 PM ^
I don’t think anyone has denied that, theres just nothing that Harbaugh, or any coach for that matter, can do or could have done to prevent it (within the rules anyway).
The fact of the matter is, OSU has the on-field results and is willing to bend the rules to get to where they are and get the recruits they get. Michigan isn’t willing to bend the rules, at least not to the level these elite teams are. And it doesn’t matter who you roll out there to coach, unless Michigan is willing to bend those rules, nothing is changing.
October 11th, 2020 at 1:03 AM ^
Be honest. Do you really think UM is so unattractive as a football program we can't manage more than a few top 100 recruits?
We signed the freaking #1 player in the nation a few years ago.
October 10th, 2020 at 9:40 PM ^
Yeah - a bit depressing. Harbaughs best team (2016) was stacked with Hoke recruits, and we’ve been declining talent wise ever since.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:15 PM ^
When I saw this, it made me think of Brian’s 2018 preview. We have basically become Iowa. A good, not great program.
https://mgoblog.com/content/story-2018-lie-back-and-think-iowa
October 10th, 2020 at 2:19 PM ^
I mean at this point Michigan is what it is. Our ceiling is limited by having unarguably the most consistent, dominant program of the last half century sharing a division with us. Which happens to also be our biggest rival. If we were in the Big Ten West, we would’ve been to Indy at least twice by now, and winning at least one of those times and a playoff appearance.
OSU has superior talent and coaching across the board and minus 2011/2016, that has been constant every single year for the last 20 years. Minus hitting a grand slam on the next coaching hire, or finding a Deshaun Watson caliber of QB who single handedly carries your entire team against the elites and wins, and who also single handedly changes the face of your entire program, Michigan is going to face similar results every single year.
And I’ve made peace with that. Michigan is just not a good enough program to hang with the OSUs, Clemsons, and Alabamas of the world. Much less beat them. Those teams are stocked full of so much talent that they’d probably give bottom feeder NFL teams a run for their money. I think Michigan’s ceiling is finding its way to Pasadena in years that OSU makes the playoff, taking care of business against PSU and Wisconsin, with a decent shot of beating a USC or Oregon but probably still falling short.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:20 PM ^
Thanks for this but I didnt need to be reminded there is no chance this year.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:32 PM ^
Fucking 2016. . .
Such horseshit
October 10th, 2020 at 2:34 PM ^
I think its a bit disingenuous to just write this off as an OSU problem.
Yes, OSU is a death star right now, but Michigan only plays OSU once a year...
Michigan's best years under Harbaugh are 10 win seasons...OSU is the elephant in the room, but people are ignoring the room.
October 10th, 2020 at 5:52 PM ^
Most of the best years in program history are 10 win seasons. Since 1975 (when Michigan started consistently playing 12+ games in a season, and 45 years of data) Michigan has finished with more than 10 wins a whopping 4 times, roughly once every 11 years. Now you want to sit here and say it’s a problem that Harbaugh is winning 10 games?
Harbaugh has returned Michigan to exactly what it’s always been. A consistent 9-10 win team. The difference is that you can’t go 9-3 and win the Big Ten like Carr did. The difference is OSU isn’t walking into the Big House with 2-3 losses already like they used to.
I get it, we want more. We want to win Big Ten titles and go to the CFP. We want to beat OSU. But let’s stop acting like what Harbaugh has done here is unacceptable. Let’s stop acting like we’re too high and mighty for 9 or 10 win seasons. There’s this mythical view of what “Michigan” is, but the reality of the situation is that this IS what Michigan is and always has been for decades.
October 11th, 2020 at 8:02 AM ^
You can keep hammering the "this is our historical norm" thing all you want, but it isnt based on previous coaches' record against the the top ten and bowl record. Harbaugh's are both significantly lower.
The fact of the matter is MSU for a while proved they could go toe to toe with Urban Meyer and we fell on our faces against him 4 times with 2 blowouts.
October 11th, 2020 at 2:01 PM ^
I think Michigan is right there as a mid-tier to 25 program..8-18 ranking
just find it funny how the "OSU death star" keeps coming up as a reason for Michigan's lack of success...last i checked, Michigan hasn't had less than 3 losses under Harbaugh...so they are losing other games to teams not called OSU.
i think if anyone suggested that 3 ten wins seasons, a 1-4 bowl record and 0-5 versus OSU was going to be Harbaugh's record after 5 years, they would have been run off the board as an OSU troll.
Yet, here we are, and ppl now are trying to suggest that that record is somehow a success.
I was a huge supporter of Harbaugh; i was hoping for him during his stanford days and was pumped when he got the Michigan job.
I think that he has been a disappointment, relative to the expectations he arrived with, coming off a recent SB appearance and resuscitating a moribund Stanford program.
October 10th, 2020 at 2:44 PM ^
Eh. This is good data and I’m grateful for the share. It’s also true that Clemson built a juggernaut at the edge of top ten talent. We need to be closer to that to reach our goals, but we certainly don’t need to be in the top tier. Would that make it easier? Of course. But Michigan is unlikely to get back there without a culture shift and some moral concessions.
October 10th, 2020 at 5:26 PM ^
It’s also true that Clemson built a juggernaut at the edge of top ten talent.
While true, they are the only team outside the top 5 to make the NC game. No one else has been able to do that so they are probably more of the exception. Having a two time Heisman candidate at QB in Deshean Watson in '15 & '16 helped. I'm not sure most can count on that.
We need to be closer to that to reach our goals, but we certainly don’t need to be in the top tier.
Based on the data to date, it seems like you need to be in the top 5 unless you've got a Heisman QB, and even with one you still may need to be.
But Michigan is unlikely to get back there without a culture shift and some moral concessions.
It's so hard to judge that until UM gets a good QB. I think if they had a Burrow, Watson, Haskins, Murray, etc. 2016 & 2018 UM teams could make a run. It's possible that Milton or McCarthy could be that and UM could do some things. But, they still probably need to recruit at a higher level to get there.
October 10th, 2020 at 3:05 PM ^
Well this certainly explains a lot (unfortunately)
October 10th, 2020 at 3:06 PM ^
Well this certainly explains a lot (unfortunately)
October 10th, 2020 at 3:15 PM ^
With good coaching and a consistent system, teams can outplay their talent rankings. Wisconsin seems to do so regularly. Or they can underperform with bad coaching. Would not surprise me if ND was in that latter category.
October 10th, 2020 at 5:27 PM ^
With good coaching and a consistent system, teams can outplay their talent rankings. Wisconsin seems to do so regularly.
They can, but that probably won't be enough to beat OSU nor hence win a conference title or make the playoffs.
October 10th, 2020 at 4:27 PM ^
Meh. We are not beating OSU this year anyway so who cares.
October 10th, 2020 at 5:26 PM ^
2016 was close because of the QB and receiving crew IMO. 2018-19 were not for the same reason IMO.
October 10th, 2020 at 5:40 PM ^
Even with this talent composite comparison, you have to admit Michigan was two plays away from winning or sharing the Big East. 2016 and 2018 with the mixed xtra point by Maryland / OSU game. Michigan has bad fate in so many games along with the momentum landslide with OSU who lives rent free the heads of most of you guys.
October 10th, 2020 at 7:31 PM ^
Great news. Thanks for the kick in the dick.
October 10th, 2020 at 7:43 PM ^
The problem I have isn’t 17 which isn’t good enough but it seems we are not getting better
October 10th, 2020 at 9:47 PM ^
This is year 6 of the Harbaugh era. Do you really expect things to improve at this point?
October 11th, 2020 at 9:11 AM ^
This is year seven of the Swinney era. Do you expect things to improve at thus point?
-WichitanTiger 2015
October 11th, 2020 at 2:11 PM ^
Well, Swinney did win the ACC championship in year 3 (excluding his interim year)...along 11 win seasons in years 4 and 5.
Meanwhile, Harbaugh finished tied for 1st in the east division in year 4.... along with 3 third place finishes and one 4th place in the East division in the other 4 years
apples to turnips
October 11th, 2020 at 3:15 PM ^
And yet people get mad when you say Harbaugh does not have this program where EVERYONE thought it would be by now.