Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
Rivals updated their 100.
Changes in Michigan recruits:
Shane Morris drops from 16 to 22.
Mike McCray drops from 44 to 55.
Chris Fox Drops from 46 to 57.
Patrick Kugler drops from 54 to 73.
Kyle Bosch drops from 60 to 77.
Dymonte Thomas drops from 77 to 95.
Jake Butt falls outside the top 100 from 96.
New Rivals 100 http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/rankings/rank-3053
Old Rivals 100 with interest in Michigan http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/2013-rivals-100-out
They hate us!
I think that fans of most teams will feel that their players have dropped. The initial Rivals 100 came out so early this year that there is no way that they had time to evaluate film on everyone. As more film rolls in you are going to see more new names in the top 100, which will bump everyone back.
Higher ranked prospects (top 50) appeared to fall 5-10 spots while the guys in the bottom half of the initial top 100 fell between 10-20. This appears to be simply due to new names entering the list. I still love the class Hoke is puting together.
* Also, relatively few OL ranked near the top. I only counted 4 in the top 60 (including one of ours - Chris Fox). Is it a down year for linemen or is it easier to rank skill positions higher this early on?
Lots of new names showing up in the Top 100 or just a lot of moving around? Just interesting that all of Michigan's recruits dropped a little bit.
Derrick Green all the way up to #12 and a 5*.
Its been a little while now was Green the one who we told we were kind of full at RB at the time when we were still holding out for Ty? I thought there was a RB who wanted to commit but we didn't want to take or something along those lines.
Yep, he's the one. I think he's overrated by Rivals. They're impressed with how he looks, but he doesn't play like the beast that he looks like in person. I really don't think he's the #12 recruit in the country. If you watch his film, he doesn't have great balance and he doesn't show the great speed (4.37) that has been reported.
Did us turning him away when we did effect our chances with him? I mean I am sure it didn't help but are we still in the running to land him?
Where does Scout, ESPN, and 24/7 have him Mag?
I don't think it particularly helped, but I don't know if it hurt, either. The Rivals mods think Michigan has a good chance at Green, but most other sites think he'll go somewhere down south. I usually agree with the Rivals guys, but here not so much. I think Green will end up elsewhere, and I don't think that necessary would have changed even if the coaches weren't waiting on Ty Isaac to decide before going after him hard.
I'm not sure where Green is ranked by the other sites off the top of my head, but I know Rivals is higher on him than anyone else by a pretty significant margin.
Dropping 20 spots each. Plus I thought Shane won best qb and an invite to Elite 11?
Oh well, Hoke and Mattison know what they are doing and I'm gonna rely on their judgement of talent.
Shane was the top QB at the Midwest Regional competition and earned an invite to the National Elite 11 this summer. He is ranked ahead of everyone that he beat out at the Ohio camp, but by no means does it mean that he is the best QB in the country. He will get his chance to prove himself this summer in Cali.
* Also, if you're bent on Morris, he is currently ranked higher than Andrew Luck was coming out of HS. Kid has a lot of potential.
I think that is the primary reason they have dropped as they have not done anything to "improve" their status while some other prospects may have impressed Rivals at their camps that allowed them to jump in the rankings.
I guess I can understand some of them dropping because of inactivity in regards to the camp circuit. They're usually the site that's the highest on our commits.
It's evil Herc. He has a goatee.
But it had an awesomely bad "if you like this..." link...
they gotta find some way to make an give an SEC team the top ranking. really not nice
Now our class sucks.
Lol
merp
Rivals rated a total of 505 players thus far and these guys above (not counting Butt) fell an average of 10.5 spots. That's a 2% in rankings. You have to allow a tolerance of +/- 2% when dealing with such an inexact science...
I think it's bullshit.. Every single commit falls... For what reason? Haha
Committed prospects dont make them money
There were some uncommitted guys at the top of the list that fell, too (Cravens, Tunsil, etc.). It's entirely possible that Rivals has simply re-evaluated their rankings since February and decided that people weren't rated correctly. Rivals does the best job of ranking prospects according to NFL Draft order, so maybe they know what they're doing...
Your previous post about Green on this thread indicates you do not agree with their evaluation. Seems like they not know what they are doing....
I disagree with this one post of yours, so by your logic, you don't know what you're doing every time you post.
My post? Please explain?
I was pointing out that Magnus' (whom I have the utmost respect for on this blog) posts were contradictory. This usually isn't the case.
Thanks
I was pointing out, in my own way, that it's perfectly possible to think someone generally knows what they're doing and yet disagree with them on one particular point. I don't see any contradiction; saying someone knows what they're doing doesn't mean you have to robotically think they're right 100% of the time.
This really doesn't merit much more discussion. If we get Green great!
All that means is maybe I don't know what I'm doing. But regardless, just because Green is overrated at #12 (in my opinion) doesn't mean that the rest of the rankings are suspect. If the other 99 guys on the list are accurately ranked, then that's a success, regardless of whether Green ends up being a bust or not.
(For the record, I don't think Green will be a bust, but I just don't think he's the 12th-best player in the country.)
Or targets that you feel Rivals may be inaccurate? When I looked at Aces commit chart they seem to have the greatest variation on our overall average when compared to other sites. Your insight is appreciated.
Thank you.
I think E.J. Levenberry is too high at #21, Jonathan Allen is too high at #35, Dorian O'Daniel is too high at #40, and Mike McCray is too high at #55. It's hard to say that a lot of guys deserve to be higher than they are among the top 100 players, but I do think Joe Mathis is a little low at #71.
This was quite helpful. For the record, I read your posts quite often. Ive actually been reading the blog since I joined but have decided to take a more active / vocal role.
Cheers,
OP
...and do I think they are above it? Hardly. Rivals and the others have created an industry out of thin air and it works due to drama. They won't go over the top and harm their credibility but some tinkering by adjusting the rankings to slightly downgrade committed and upgrade uncommitted prospects sure rings my conspiracy theory chimes.
Couldn't it also be that the best athletes really like all the attention and have the freedom to choose later (since teams will hold spots for them), so perhaps the fact that they move up in the rankings is actually a function of their talent and resulting desire for drama?
Rival these NUTS!!!
Those kids we recruited had their football skills diminished because someone changed the number at which they were arbitrarily ranked! Jerks!
Really not worth the gnashing of teeth, rending of garments that will ensue. But this is a fun topic to discuss during the 'dead season'.
The ranking after all the summer camps, 7-7 tourneys, All-star camps like Elite11 and the Opening, where our verbals go head-head against other elite prospects, will be a more representative ranking.
Also, don't forget how play/film during the senior season plus play at the all-star practices can positively impact rankings (see Pipkins, Ondre).
I'm most interested to see how Dawson's ranking changes this time around.
I'm already naked.
Well there goes my dream of our recruits being ranked 1 through 18. Such a disappointment.
Just a reminder, we had a total of 3 guys in the Rivals 100 in 2012: Kalis, Pipkins (5*) and Magnuson (4*). This year we have 6 this early and we still have a good shot at adding 1-2 more (Poggi, Treadwell).
Commits usually tend to drop a bit, but I am a little surprised Dawson didn't break top 100 yet; isn't he one of the guys participating in the rivals 100 challenge?
This means nothing. Only fodder for summer, all is well lads.
For anyone interested, this is what happened to OSU recruits:
I haven't gone through the numbers, but I'm going to make the relatively safe assumption that uncommitted players got a significant higher bump than committed players. It might be shady practice, but Rivals is a business and creating more top prospect drama over the next few months drives subscribers.
Also, I made a Google spreadsheet comparing OSU and Michigan classes if anyone wants to compare the rankings across the 4 main services: Spreadsheet - updated as of today.
I support this theory - most of the 'risers' are likely uncommitted. Rivals has to keep everyone interested until January after all.
The Rivals guys addressed this: During this period it's the guys who show themselves in camps as as deserving bumps got them, comitted or not. Dawson and Lewis will move, but they were far enough down that a bump into the 100 right now would be a stretch. They say that McCray and Morris performed well, but only solidified that they were previously placed where they should've been. Other players move up past them, because they're the hot performers who outplayed their rankings.
It seems like all these guys got a bad deal, but once you look at the deviation of talent in a widespread ranking system like this, 10-20 spots really doesn't mean anything.
So you're saying OSU's recruits only dropped an average of 9 spots while Michigan's dropped an average of 10??? Conspiracy!!! I tell you!!! Conspiracy!!! Damn You Urban Meyer!!!
may be #22 on Rivals, but he's #1 in my heart. Followed, obviously, by Jehu Chesson and then Jake Butt at #2 and #3 respectively.
Not creepy at all.
Rivals formula: USC/SEC comittment = +10; Michigan comittment = -10.
When you are initially ranked in the top 100, a majority of those prospects are going to move down to make room for new prospects who were not initially ranked because of lack of film, performance at camps, etc.
When you are ranked high, there is little room to move up but a lot of room to move down. As long as our top 100 prospects stay in the same range as before, that is good enough for me. The prospects I am interested to see get reranked are David Dawson, Jourdan Lewis, Taco Charlton, Csont'e York and Logan Tuley-Tillman. I am guessing we will see Dawson, Lewis, and Charlton get bumps in their rankings while LTT make take a dive due to his injury/weight gain. York was completely off the radar and will be interesting to see if he debuts as a 3 star or a 4 star.
I agree with basically everything you stated, but based on all the bumps everyone is getting, your service is not credible if Dawson, based on how dominant he has been at multiple camps, is not top 100. Its just my opinion, but Rivals 'used' to be the top recruiting service for a long time, and it just is not at this point. Probably 3rd IMO.
Someone with more time than me should make a chart showing the movement of everyone in the top 100. If this theory is true (and I believe it), a small number of the players will be making huge jumps, while the vast majority of players (not just Michigan recruits) will make small drops.
So just give me Fuller and Treadwell and color me ecstatic.
If Jourdan Lewis might be ranked higher if Rivals viewed him as an athlete. He looks to be a situational two way player. I can see him fitting well in 3+ WR looks. He can really go up and get the ball and he seems to always make space in 7on7.
Committed prospects make them less money than uncommitted prospects. I'll be surprised if any of our guys rise the rest of the year.
Another contributing factor may be that committed guys may not camp as much as their uncommitted brethren, thus giving other guys more chances to impress the recruiting websites
The changes reflect performances in the camp circuit since February and if I'm correct of those six guys only Shane Morris has been going to the camps. I just wish Dymonte would make it to a few 7-on-7's since the evaluators seem to be holding out until they can see a little more of him in coverage.
He's a multi-sport athlete. At least we know he's active and not putting on bad weight just hanging out.
Mike Mccray should have stayed where he was,d2 Should move up along with Taco!
This smells of hatred from Mike at Rivals.. Fuck him and the horse he rode in on
This comment smells of sour grapes.
You think the recruiting services sit around and try to bump kids down the rankings because of where they are choose to play? Look over your shoulder, I think someone is out to get ya.
I'm not so sure Michigan will get another RB in the 2013 class.
I think the recruiting services like the sexiness of recruits still in play and rank them higher to draw fans into their sites to see the race to get these top ranked in play recruits.
So if we get Fuller or Green are you going to drop their rating too?
In the chat they said Dawson didn't move into the top 100 because he was down near 200 originally. That remark shows a flaw in the system. Ranking shouldn't determine ranking. If he performed as a top 100 he should be ranked top 100, he shouldn't be held back by a number they are admitting was inaccurate.
I'm surprised Dawson hasn't cracked the top ten after being MVP of that one rivals event? and getting amazing praise from analysts recently
I know this doesn't really fit in with the OP but I'm curious as to whether or not we're still targeting a LB considering Levenberry picked FSU. Was he just a superstar that we left a spot open for or are we still looking for new linebackers?
As of now, we're done with linebacker recruiting for 2013. That doesn't mean the coaches won't re-open the recruitment if there's more attrition somehow, but they're not actively pursuing linebackers.
