Hei2man

February 25th, 2019 at 4:10 PM ^

It's the OL from St. Francis. #800 player in the country. Would make 6 out of our 7 commits as guys outside the top 247. The one commit inside it currently is #246. Look out Ohio State!

mGrowOld

February 25th, 2019 at 4:44 PM ^

Dr......

Putting aside Shawn's inflammatory editorial comments for a minute are you not even a bit concerned that we're taking commits like this one (if in fact it is him) this early in the recruiting cycle?   I get having to fill-in if you miss on some targets late but if in fact it's him he would be the lowest ranked recruit that any of the teams in the top 15 have accepted to date.

https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/

Shawn's presence kills any chance for an open discussion on this topic but FWIW I too am a bit concerned over our recruiting.  In fact if you look at the relative quality of the class so far (average star rating) we are currently ranked 21st nationally - 12th if you add in quantity. 

Yes it's extremely early in the cycle but it's not like we're in on a slew of 5 stars right now which will dramatically change things.  What are you seeing that I'm missing? 

DrMantisToboggan

February 25th, 2019 at 5:07 PM ^

1. 247 hasn't reranked the 2020 since early last year

2. This staff's ability to scout on their own and the rankings eventually catching up

Last year's class is a great example of the staff identifying really good players (Charbonnet, Trente Jones, Giles Jackson, etc.) and the scouting services eventually realizing this as well. We've signed top ten classes 3 out of 4 cycles with Jim - I'm not worried about how this one will shape up.

Many reranks and commits will happen between now and signing day. What the class looks like in February is meaningless, especially when you know the staff's track record.

Mgoeffoff

February 25th, 2019 at 6:27 PM ^

That's one way to spin it.  And, I'll be the first to admit it's too early to succumb to a class outside the top 10.  However, another way of looking at it is that JH's classes following a highly ranked class are down the second time in a row.  If that continues to happen I don't believe UM will have the depth and talent to hang with OSU.  Unfortunately Day does not seem to be reverting back to the norm for OSU recruiting and is staying on part with Meyer-level recruiting.  

Mgoeffoff

February 26th, 2019 at 11:29 AM ^

Do you think there is cause and effect at work?

It appears to be so.  The first two classes were both strong.  It's possible that is because the new staff was eager to get their guys in there and the promise of early playing time may have been a lure.  However, after that 2017 (#5) to 2018 (#22) had a significant drop off.  It was again strong in the class of 2019 (#8) with a drop off again so far in 2020 (#12). 

 

Obviously there is less of a difference between #8 and #12 than #5 and #22.  And, I don't think the #12 class is any glaring sign of a problem.  But, if you average those two "down classes" at #17 and those two "high classes" at #6.5 that gives you an average of 4-year total of #11.25.  I don't think you can compete for a national title or expect to beat OSU with that.  To compare OSU has #6 for a 4-year average.  Bama has #2.25 as a 4-year average.  UGA has #6.5 as a 4-year average.  Clemson has #9.25 as a 4-year average.  A 4-year average top 10 class seems to be the Mendoza line to be in the NC conversation, which unfortunately OSU always is.

Mgoeffoff

February 26th, 2019 at 2:17 PM ^

I'm guessing that the 2018 class being below where we would like boils down to the results of the season.

That's valid and you could be right.  We're just guessing.  So, hypothetically how big of a difference does one game make?  We went 10-3 ever other year and 8-5 that year.  Let's say we go 9-4 in 2019.  Is that enough to land a top 10 class or do we need to win 10?  After 3 10-win seasons and not much to show for it maybe we need to get over the hump and win 11+ games and/or beat OSU.  

Don

February 25th, 2019 at 5:32 PM ^

One of the complaints that OSU fans had about Warriner was that he wasn't that great a recruiter. I haven't done an analysis of OSU OL recruiting under him to have a real opinion on that, but I'm sort of curious why we're taking anybody this early who isn't a high 4-star at least, regardless of what position they're at.

Don

February 25th, 2019 at 8:45 PM ^

"I haven't done an analysis of OSU OL recruiting under him to have a real opinion on that,"

"get back to me on your assessment of "Ed Warinner isn't a good recruiter"

Nowhere in the first sentence did I state my "assessment of Ed Warinner isn't a good recruiter." I was referring specifically to OL recruiting at OSU. And I didn't have an opinion on OSU OL recruiting because I hadn't taken even a cursory look at it. 

Until now: He was OL coach from 2012-2015, and in that span, 24/7 says OSU had nine 4-star OL recruits and eight 3-stars. I'd say that purely from a star-centric standpoint, that's very solid, but not spectacular. However, given the overall level of OSU success on offense during that time, it's sort of odd for any OSU fan to complain about Warinner specifically.

Regardless, Warinner recruited four 4-star OL in the 2019 class for UM, which is more than he ever did at OSU. So from that standpoint, he has no trouble recruiting high-level recruits. 

Which brings me back to my other question as to why we're offering Mazzccua at this stage of the process. Even if Warinner sees something in him that he can develop, I would think we could wait until later to offer. Am I losing any sleep over it, like one other goof on this board is? Not in the slightest. As the article in The Athletic posted downthread illustrates, stars in OL recruiting aren't everything.

 

Maize and Blue…

February 25th, 2019 at 7:13 PM ^

Well unless we have another mass exodus of players you should be worried because as numbers stand now we are almost full.  If the commit comes true that gives us 7 plus Kolesar is a grayshirt so that makes 8.  We had how many guys leave last year?  If the talent evaluation is so good why is the program developing a revolving door policy?  We have 8-10 (Glasgow and Evans?) players that will be out of eligibility.  Add Danna and that makes 9-11. Last I checked we were straddling the 85 limit for next fall maybe a little over. I know numbers always work out.

3 of those top 10 classes are boosted by the numbers we have taken as two of the three we would not be top 10 based on per player average. We have taken 103 recruits the last 4 years.

Kevin13

February 25th, 2019 at 7:12 PM ^

I will take what Harbaugh and the rest of the coaches think over some guy sitting in a basement on a computer thinks of a player. Harbaugh and staff are looking for traits and fits in their system not some systematic scoring system and camp attendance recruiting sites give 

MJ14

February 25th, 2019 at 10:47 PM ^

We know the story, when you recruited for Michigan you only got high quality 6 star players and so on and so on. I mean back when you were at Michigan, supposedly, you guys got every single one of the top 100 guys every year. Just reloaded the roster. And now Michigan intentionally just signs guys that they know they’ll lose to OSU with. I mean why not? That’s all you would believe if you read your and Maizen’s posts. Maybe Michigan should bring you back so they can sign the top 25 guys every year. I mean that’s definitely all they signed back in the 90s right?? 

BernardC

February 26th, 2019 at 1:28 AM ^

The fake kid getting ranked kills any credibility the recruiting services had left to me. I have zero confidence that their opinion is worth a hill of beans anymore.  I used to care about stars, now I care about offers and the top ranked players who've been heavily evaluated.