Shane Morris 37
Shane Morris 37
Thats pretty low for Morris
I think the bigger "WOW" should go to the fact that there is 11 Michigan players in the Top 150.
He wasn't great in Texas but looked outstanding at whatever they're calling the Ann Arbor Best of the Midwest thing now.
I think the battle between RS Jr. Russell Bellomy and RS Fr. Shane Morris will be a good one.
I doubt he drops too far. He has everything that can't be taught - height, mega arm strength, more mobility than Chad Henne. He'll improve his footwork and change of ball speeds by the time he's done with camps and maintain his spot, or maybe move up much like Mallet did.
Eh not surprising. ESPN is the only service that ranks purely off film and stats, and not camps. At least they used to be; don't think it's changes.
I don't see you complaining about Conley being rated way higher than other services.
Outliers are the only reason having more than 1 or 2 rankings is at all interesting.
He's obviously no Christian Hackenberg.
ESPN knocks him for his accuracy (referring to the Dallas camp and his HS completion %). They said it needs to be up around 64% this year. His JR year is comp % was 52%. While this may be true stats can vary wildly at the HS level for so many different reasons. If you look at the game by game stats he had some terrible game comp % wise:
Brother Rice 6 of 16 38%
Inkster 7 of 21 33%
St Mary Prep 5 of 14 36%
Cass Tech 4 of 17 24%
The stats dont necessarily tell the whole story. Can someone who has seen him play shed some light. Does he not get enough time and has to throw the ball away? Are his WR not athletic enough to get seperation and get open? Are they trying to throw a homerun ball everytime (which isn't a high completion pass)?
My point is that you can make stats say whatever you want. Is the problem his accuracy, or is ESPN conveniently using this to point out an isolated incident at the Dallas camp?
(Forgot source sorry), that indicates his receivers aren't Div.1 level. Dropped too many passes. Secondly Shane has a hell of a throw. Don't see many HS players catching his balls. His team will be throwing more this up coming season. When this takes place, you will see higher yards, attempts, completions, ect.. His rankings will move up as well. I see him as the #2 overall QB prospect behind Max Browne (Future Rose Bowl Nemsis)
I'm predicting Shane throwing over 3,500 yards 23 TD/6 INT w/ 250 yards rushing and 4TD'S. Look forward to seeing him backing up Bellomy until he is ready in the coming years
...that surrounds him. His high school team doesn't have top talent.
I hear his rating is far above his high school stats because of camps and also his 7 on 7 team where he has top talent to throw to.
Maybe Morris isn't as good as you think. I think some Michigan fans are overrating him because a) he was offered and committed early and b) he's a Michigan kid. He does have some flaws.
I am not saying Morris is over or under ranked. I am just commenting on the fact that ESPN has his major flaw as accuracy.
1. I have not heard of this being a concern until their Elite 11 camp in Dallas. Just questioning whether this is truly a concern or are they trying to find stats to support their camp evaluation. Which could have been jitters or just a bad day. Or he truly has accuracy issues.
2. The fact that they point to Morris's HS completion percentage (52%) as support to his lack of accuracy, is weird when the #1 QB on the list completed only 50% of his passes last year and is an "accurate" QB.
Accuracy has been a concern about Morris ever since he arrived on my radar. People don't question his intelligence or arm strength, but he apparently has a bit of a scattershot arm. Of course, he does have occasions where he looks like a very accurate passer, but that's not the norm.
I have not watched film on Hackenberg, but I do agree that Max Browne is a better QB than Morris. And I also think Tyrone Swoopes is going to have a great college career if he's used properly. Assuming Hackenberg is better than Morris, too, then I'm not sure how high one could expect the 4th-best quarterback to be ranked overall.
Priest Willis 62
Tashawn Bower 119
Joe Mathis 120
Hargraeves III 4
Wow. Conley. Nice!
He's like 240-ish on 247 and 80th to Scout.
Not worried about his ranking. His offer list is good enough for me.
We definitely have the bottom tier of the 150 locked up. Also I'm sure a bunch of us are disappointed in the rankings, but having 11 of the best 150 already is pretty impressive
I don't understand how anyone could be disappointed in these rankings from the Michigan perspective.
ranked higher, but he seemed to have a Mitch McGary like drop, and a few other prospects weren't ranked as high as I thought they would like Ty Isaac and Treadwell...
Bottom Tier of the TOP ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY RECRUITS IN THE NATION. Why would anyone be disappointed?
they only gave out 6 five stars ratings.
7. C'mon, they even counted them for you.
yeah, no excuse. i'm an idiot.
15 150 players by next Feburary would be great. That is USC-cheating territory.
But without the cheating.
Having a head football coach as likeable as Hoke, who also poops gold and has a magically finger point... that may not be cheating, but it just isn't fair!
Considering the top 3 teams in recruiting last year had 13, 10, and 12 top 150 commits, I'll take 11 in the initial 150 for UM. With the potential for more, this could just a ridiculous class when it is all said and done.
Yes Alabama got 13, and Texas got 12 but they also had recruiting class sizes of 26 and 28. Makes 11 out of 17 very impressive. That is a 65% rate. Tops last year was 53% by FSU. In 2011 it was Bama with 44%. Florida has the highest with 61% in 2010. USC and Florida also had a 50% rate in 2009 but with small classes.
The top three teams (2009-2012) averaged 44% of their class being on the 150 list (or about 11 players).
Not to be all debbie downer, but I have the feeling that the class won't end up with more than 11 in the 150. With so many towards the bottom of the list, some will probably be bumped out by players who rise over the summer/during their senior seasons. And there's a very slim chance, the coaches get Isaac, Treadwell and 2 more players in the 150.
It's not like there are 3-4 guys in the 140-150 range. The lowest rated is Kugler at 121. That would be a pretty significant fall for any of these guys. I think most of these guys will be safe.
uh? We dont have slim chance at Isaac and Levenberry last time i checked we were in good condition for both of them. Same for Treadwell, we might not be as strong still but we still have shot.
isn't in the top 150
He isnt. Wow thats odd. Still for it to be said we will stick at 11 150's is ridiculous, FWIW
I know nothing about evaluating players, but 247 dropped him 200 spots when they released their rankings, he's #80 overall to Scout, and not in the ESPN 150. I think everyone saw his initial Rivals ranking and got excited when he might not turn out to be that kind of super elite guy.
Are the coaches overrating him too? The reason most M fans think highly of Levenberry is that the coaches pulled the offers for all of our LB prospects except him. He was the one LB our staff decided to wait for. That means more to me than what some recruiting site thinks.
I'm just a huge believer in the wisdom of crowds on this sort of thing. The views of coaching staffs (including ours) are important, but I don't think the fact that Michigan really wants him drowns out everything else. Coaches screw up. Even good ones (I'm not saying they're screwing up by rating Levenberry so highly, because I'm not a talent evaluator. Just saying the fact that the coaches love any particular prospect doesn't end the conversation for me).
OK, but when you have rankings of 15 (elite), 80 (pretty damn good), outside 150 (?), and 200-something (still possibly a good player)...basically all over the place....what IS the wisdom of the crowd? Other than "I don't know"...
Not saying which one is right, or that you're even coming down on anybody for recruiting him. I just don't see any pattern there. If Scout wasn't fairly high on him too, then maybe Rivals is an outlier...but assessments seem all over the place.
In any regard, we all agree he's good and won't look bad in a Michigan uniform.
what happens when Rivals updates their rankings (247 dropped him quite a bit in their last update). If he stays at like 15 I'll have to revise my opinion somewhat, but I've been assuming he was in for a bit of a drop.
And probably an accurate project. But there's a difference between what "the majority are saying", and what they might/probably/could say.
And I guess I don't think he's going to fall to anywhere that we still wouldn't be happy to recruit him (as fans, not staff...we already know that), so it doesn't matter that much to me. Groupings do rather than spot. More highly rated recruits means more chance for them to succeed and less chance of medium contribution, but if it means we won't be able to beat our chests because he's not the best LB in the nation or something, it won't be as fun, but I'm not losing sleep over it. (And I don't think you are either).
Sure, it's one data point, but a very important one. He's not just a guy the staff offered at LB, he's on the top of their list. That's a very strong data point, and should hold more weight than any one recruiting site. Add in the fact that he has offers from every top SEC school (Bama, Florida, Georgia, LSU) plus FSU, Ohio St, Oklahoma, Penn State, and ND.
Sure, our coaches can be wrong. But unless every other major coach in college football is also wrong, it's a safe bet that our excitement for Levenberry is warranted.
more than in this particular instance. I think Levenberry is likely a very good prospect that Michigan fans should be excited about (unless he goes to FSU). It's just not enough for me that he's at the top of the board, and I think there are enough other things going on (Florida fans insist he's been told they don't have room for him, his drop in some of the rankings), to think he's like half-shirtless instead of completely shirtless.
Speaking more broadly, my view is: if you could create some sort of theoretical ranking based on offer lists, intensity of interest from top schools, and rankings from the big 4 recruiting sites, I'd take that over the Michigan coaches' opinion.
I'm not saying the Michigan offer should trump everything, but in the case of Levenberry, he has a lot more than that in his favor. He has offers from everyone worth getting an offer from and is in the top 100 on two of four sites. He might not be a four time All-American, but the preponderance of the evidence says he's well worth getting excited over.
All those coaches CAN be wrong. ESPN was very down on Will Campbell and they proved to be the correct voice.
What people SHOULD do is make their own decisions about what evidence they choose to weigh.
Will Campbell is a nice cherry pick example, but I bet you can find just as many 3* guys that were recruited that are big time contributors. Just because they got one right doesn't mean anything more than a broken clock being right twice in a day.
Now if you want to show some data that on the majority of recruit rankings they're not only right, but more correct than most major coaching staffs, that might prove something. One player doesn't.
Every site is going to have their share of hits and misses, and so are coaches. My point was to counter the idea that 'the coaches like him so you should do' assertion.
As I don't have evidence for sites over coaches, you don't have any for coaches over sites. I happen to side with the coaches argument, in general, but that is beside the point.