Objective assessment of inherited talent
There may be no more rational, heartless, cold-blooded organization in the world than the National Football League. So I'm going to trust them to do a little impartial experiment regarding the level of talent inherited by Rich Rodriguez at Michigan. Posters on this forum have regularly stated that this team must have more talent than Purdue, Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, etc. simply because "we're Michigan" or "I remember we had a good ranking on Rivals back in 2006."
So in year one, here are the number of players drafted off of the Michigan team when compared to their conference rivals (essentially a comparison of senior class talent level).
Ohio State 7
Penn State 5
Wisconsin 4
Iowa 4
Illinois 3
Purdue 2 (one first day pick)
MICHIGAN 2 (a 4th and a 6th round pick)
MSU 1 (Sparty still sucks)
So yeah, not so good. But you know what is even scarier? The numbers could be even worse this year. Aside from surefire first day pick Brandon Graham, none of the remaining seniors (a group that includes Minor, S. Brown, Moosman, and the Space Emperor) are locks to even get drafted.
And the year after that you ask? Even worse. Warren is the only guaranteed draft pick (assuming he doesn't leave this year) with Schilling and Woolfolk as the only "maybes" in the group (barring a massive renaissance from Ezeh/Mouton).
So we are essentially looking at three of the worst draft performances in the history of the Michigan program, all in a row, none of which are the product of the players Rich Rodriguez is/has recruited. This talent deficiency doesn't even take into account the corresponding lack of depth that Misopogon has thoroughly documented.
Now, feel free to continue telling me the cupboard wasn't/isn't bare or that the team should be magically performing better. You will still be wrong, but I will have traded the last few minutes of my life for two delicious mgopoints (which have about as much value as all the whining I've heard from the Michigan fanbase the last two years).
November 8th, 2009 at 10:09 PM ^
Listen up, people.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:17 PM ^
I agree to a point, but doesn't this also speak some about the lack of development over the past couple of years, especially on D. I don't know if we will have the numbers, but isn't it logical to assume that some of the work to get people into the first round of the draft was due to coaches and staffs raising people's game. I struggle to see where we are radically behind all of the schools in the raw materials for having good players, especially on D, despite the documented results.
Plus, wasn't one of the arguments that Rich Rod could get top level results without a team of five star talent.
Not looking to pick a fight - just want to get some objective feedback on how much of a future player's success is high-school rankings, how much is pure talent, and how much is development by the college coaches.
Curious to hear the feedback.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:56 PM ^
plays a much larger role on a team that isn't predominantly freshmen and sophomores. You can (sometimes) take a player with mediocre talent and get him to make a solid contribution after a few years of coaching, but when you have to count on freshmen and sophomores to contribute, there isn't enough time for development. Also, it's much easier to hide your weaknesses on the offensive side of the ball than the defensive side, because you get to control where the action is going to take place. When your defense has to count on young guys who have neither a high level of talent, nor a wealth of experience, there will often be ugly results.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:26 AM ^
Do we have the horses or not? Too few people are asking that question. Who cares if it was Lloyd's fault? There may be reasons to doubt the long-term RichRod & UM fit, but he should be given some slack based on his raw materials.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:14 PM ^
is it the talent or the coaches fault for not being able to develop said talent? if there's one thing i learned from economics class at umich it's the definition of the word empirical. while i don't disagree with your point, this certainly is not empirical evidence that the players are just plain not good.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:45 PM ^
Yes, it is evidence (NFL draft) that the players are not good. It just doesn't prove if they were never good to begin with or if they didn't get further developed while at UM.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:16 PM ^
But the people who are playing the talent level card will see this data and point at RR and blame him for not developing his players.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:19 PM ^
Carr's 3-4 years of development >>> RR's 1-2 years spent with these players. Come back in year 4.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:26 PM ^
I'm just playing devils advocate. Sorry
November 8th, 2009 at 11:18 PM ^
I am sure that if senior Terrance Taylor would have been coached better in his 1 year under RichRod, he would have surely been taken in the 1st round and not been cut by the Colts. I know you didn't make the claim, just wanted to point out how ridiculous it sounds that RichRod, after 1.5 years, should be responsible for a lack of talent from the last 3 Lloyd Carr recruiting classes.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:29 PM ^
I don't think people will blame RichRod for not developing more talent. Instead, I think people are starting to ask how come we lost to Toledo, got bitch-slapped twice by Illinois, and lost twice to Purdue.
I think there's a pretty valid argument that you don't need NFL talent to at least keep it close with Illinois and beat Toledo.
The issue as I see it is "has RichRod been able to add any value to the average talent that he's got."
RichRod is 3-11 in Big Ten play. If you think our talent is so low that we should have won less than 3 of our last 14 games, then it follows that you think RichRod is doing good work.
On the flip side, if you think any monkey could won 3 out of 14 games, then it makes sense that you think he's underachieving.
It all depends on your subjective view of how much talent we have.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:28 AM ^
Please tell me how you beat *anyone* in D-1 consistently with Threet (as a RS freshman) / Sheridan (at any age) driving. Did RR throw that interception?
November 9th, 2009 at 7:00 PM ^
Brandon Minor went crazy on PSU the very next week, yet he had no carries against Toledo (I read that recently on the blog). So, off the top of my head, RR could have run Minor more often.
I'm not trying to engage in hypothetical discussion about the Toledo game, I'm just saying that I wasn't impressed by that game.
November 9th, 2009 at 11:27 AM ^
He overlooked the fact that equating NFL draft position to success in college is a spurious conclusion. Troy Smith was drafted at the end of the fifth round and was an absolute monster in college. You can't argue that Graham Harrell didn't have a successful college career and he wasn't drafted at all. Any comparison like this should be based on recruiting rankings because it would take into account the coaches' abilities to develop players.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:17 PM ^
Zoltan will go. I don't know if punters go in the first day, but he will be one of the first to go.
Now of course...this is probably the one position where we don't really want to brag about talent...
November 8th, 2009 at 11:29 PM ^
Yeah I was about to say the same thing. I can't see Zoltan going undrafted.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:13 AM ^
The NFL team lucky enough to be selected by Zoltan will serve at his will.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:21 PM ^
Who's fault is that - the player's, or RichRod's?
Look, I think the point boils down to this: what value has RichRod added since coming here? The mark of a good coach is being able to squeeze a little extra out of his players; winning with 5-star talent isn't particularly impressive (aside from that fact that I guess it makes you a good recruiter)
Has RichRod done anything to distinguish himself from all the other candidates that were discussed prior to his hiring?
I don't think he's added much value to date. I'm pretty certain that Brady Hoke or Kirk Ferentz of Greg Schiano or Gary Pinkel etc etc could have all done what RichRod has done so far.
And, since it's pretty mandatory to pick a side, I'm staying in RichRod's corner. It does me no good to root against him, but I must admit that I'm a little disappointed so far.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:22 PM ^
his guys in here.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:29 PM ^
Considering this team has a true freshman quarterback (recruited by Rodriguez) that has twice as many TD's as INT's and is leading an offense putting up 30 points a game (despite a thin o-line and tons of inexperience/injuries at the skill positions), I would say this coaching staff is definitely getting the most out of the players on offense. On defense, the depth chart is such an unmitigated disaster that no coach in the universe would be able to mold them into a competent unit at this point (though things will improve as the freshmen gain experience and the depth chart is filled out with recruiting).
November 9th, 2009 at 3:23 AM ^
but it also goes against his reputation, which was to have had significant long term success against other coaches in a talent neutral environment. Not to mention he's very well thought of in coaching circles outside of Joe Tiller.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:22 PM ^
Against the two teams with equal or less talent, Purdue and Michigan State according to the above analysis, Michigan is 0-4 the past two years.
I don't think reasonable people are arguing that Michigan should have been competing with OSU and PSU for Big Ten championships. I do think reasonable people are pointing out that there is more talent on these squads to win more than 4 games against BCS competition over the past 2 seasons. The cupboard IS bare compared to historical Michigan norms. It isn't in comparison to some of the bottom dwellers in the Big Ten.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:26 PM ^
This team is only equal (and then only equal with crappy teams) in terms of top-end talent. At the same time, they have much less depth/experience than MSU or Purdue (e.g. those teams have enough scholarship players to field a team on defense).
Little talent + no depth = losing to BCS teams whose depth chart isn't a complete disaster
November 8th, 2009 at 10:29 PM ^
...but I don't think the original post was addressing what reasonable people are arguing.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:40 PM ^
Purdue and MSU also didn't start freshmen at QB, like we did, both years. We not only are less talented than usual, we're also extremely young.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:27 PM ^
Mich Recruits,
select the 2007 class, and tell me if your reaction is anything other than "Yikes".
Five stars Ryan Mallett and Donovan Warren were the only reasons that 2007 class didn't look awful (for Michigan standards). Half of that is now gone.
You can't ignore the "2007 Vacuum"
November 8th, 2009 at 10:26 PM ^
He had how many draft choices in 2007 alone, not including his career. It isn't like the underclassman were sitting in the corner jerking off during practice under Lloyd. I assume they were learning too. I think his strength and conditioning sucked balls, but he took 3 stars and made them starters in the NFL over his career.
I guess I want some examples where Rich or his staff developed NFL caliber talent, especially on D.
I really want Michigan to be successful, you can ask anyone who lives with me, that I am no fun to be around when they lose. I struggle to see empirical evidence that Rich Rod can develop players, especially D, to have a top ten team consistently in a power conference. I think he is the best offensive coach in America period, but I am pretty old school and thinks defense wins at the end of the day
I am looking for some examples from Rich's past
November 8th, 2009 at 10:33 PM ^
But Rich's career consists of being an offensive coordinator and offense-oriented HC. He has not poured hours into teaching any overachieving linebackers their fundamentals.
But pretending he gets the credit for defensive player development when he does not coach defense...Ryan Mundy. UM had given up on him as starter-worthy player, one year at WVU put him in the NFL.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:42 PM ^
He is the head coach - isn't he responsible for everything in the program. I sure know Lloyd was crucified when something went wrong in his program.
Besides - Isn't this more a vote for Tony Gibson since he was the secondary coach or Jeff Casteel? Maybe we should keep Tony G and hope to get other teams (YAM) players for our secondary. Ryan went in the 4th round I believe. - I'll give you a point when I have the power to give points.
I'll give the board another since I am feeling better - Pac-Man Jones. You can think what you want as a person, but the fucker could cover.
That's two players for coach Gibson.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:53 PM ^
It's not that the backups during Carr's last year weren't learning. It's that most of them are gone at this point. Misopogon said it best. The defense is decimated. It's time we all stopped assuming that Michigan just has to have good players because we are Michigan. No, we don't. And it's no accident. Secondary and LB recruiting was terrible for awhile. Those are reasons we are bad, not excuses. No coach could have done better with this unit. And for those who say, "Brian Kelly could have," I say see last night vs. UConn -- not real impressive, and it is against the same so-called bad competition that the same know-nothing people who want RR gone complain about when they say he never did anything noteworthy.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:02 PM ^
The defense was just a bad last year, but we said it was all Scott S's fault. This year, the reason it is bad is we just don't have talent and we need freshman all-americans to come to the rescue over the next couple of years. I just want to know, based on the original post, where has Rich Rod or his staff has either recruited or developed NFL caliber defenders. I agree the talent is thin, but some of the kids also played last year and two years ago etc and no one is getting better week to week. My concern is that Rich Rod doesn't spend enough time with defense and defensive recruiting and we all think he is going to recruit and sign defensive all-american after all-american or stud after stud. I want to see some empirical evidence that this will be the case. Did he go to WVU and improve their recruiting that they were gettting NFL caliber defenders or not. I am asking as a serious question.
I am not trying to be a dick about this.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:18 PM ^
Signing talent is only part of the puzzle. People need to be in the system for awhile too. You are asking a question that has a false premise. You are saying that we have two years of RR defenses to evaluate and ask where is the proof that we will get or develop talent in the future. I would submit that Graham and Warren are the only people who have played at their respective positions for two years, and they have improved tremendously. They were 5 stars to start with though so they had a lot of upside. Their development happened probably in large part because of their own hard work, but you would have to concede that the coaches had something to do with it. Brown is much better in his current position than he ever was at safety, which is were the old regime had him. That is GERG's doing. The other people are just decent or flat out stink, hence my admonition that we need to give the staff time to develop them.
Whether RR developed NFL talent at WVU is besides the point. This isn't WVU. We will likely be able to recruit better. It's the same reason why people are optimistic about his offense paired with Michigan's recruiting base. He created an offensive monster at WVU with subpar talent. And while I don't know specifically about WVU's defense from that era, other than the fact that Pacman and Mundy did well there, I do remember that they were good enough to keep their offenses in the game.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:58 PM ^
and charlie weis teaches his safeties how to play cover 2. many coaches delegate one or both sides of the ball; like joe pa. some take the lead on a certain side of the ball; like RR or the sweatervest on offense or pete carroll on D.
i think GERG's D will be fine...in 2011.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:03 PM ^
Mike Martin, a true sophomore recruited by Rodriguez, may be one of the best young DT's in the country, despite being forced to play out of position by roster limitations.
Ryan Van Bergen, a redshirt sophomore, has been a competent starter in his second season under Rodriguez
Craig Roh, a true freshman, has been a competent starter on the d-line as a true fucking freshman!
Brandon Graham, a senior, has recorded 16.5 sacks and 37 TFL in two seasons playing under Rodriguez.
Stevie Brown, has become a competent starter after Rodriguez and his staff realized he had been playing out of position under the prior regime and put him in a more natural/comfortable role as an outside linebacker.
Troy Woolfolk, a junior three-star recruit, has been a competent starter at cornerback in his first game action at the position after being forced to play out of position at safety much of the year due to roster limitations.
Donovan Warren, a junior in his second season under Rodriguez, has intercepted 4 passes already this year, as many as any Michigan DB since Todd Howard in 2000.
Jordan Kovacs, a redshirt freshman walk-on coming off knee surgery, recorded 17 tackles in a game against MSU.
Pretty long track record of talent development in just a year and a half. Enough to make up for playing walk-ons and the fact that three guys in the heart of the back seven (Ezeh, Mouton, and Williams) just aren't all that good? No. Enough to make up for having zero depth? No. But still some damn good coaching if you ask me.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:03 AM ^
the fucking HEAT lately. Nice research. Keep it up.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:22 AM ^
You are just bringing the hammer of knowledge on all who oppose you. I like it.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:28 AM ^
One more tidbit, I just noticed that RVB has five sacks and four pass breakups on the season (both good for second on the team), which for a guy playing inside most of the time is pretty damn impressive through ten games, so I guess move him from "competent" to "super competent with a chance of really damn good." And oh yeah, he still has two more years of eligibility left.
Now I have to go to bed though. Being right all the time is fucking exhausting.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:38 PM ^
Would rather see kids come in and help RR make UM a powerhouse college football team than see them go play in the NFL. 3% of NCAA football players make it in the NFL.
November 8th, 2009 at 10:57 PM ^
It's very simple. Michigan clearly does not have overall elite talent right now. But they also do not have last place Big Ten talent either. RR has not gotten the most out of his players yet. I think that will come but you would have to be crazy to be pleased with the coaching job so far. The part that is almost maddeningly frustrating is that if we had an upgrade in 2-3 positions we could very well be looking at 2-3 more wins.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:05 PM ^
I think that a big part of it is talent deficiency in crucial areas. We have a really good D-line and Donovan Warren--that's pretty much it on D. And the O-line, while improved, still can't pass protect. FML.
November 8th, 2009 at 11:51 PM ^
do you think opposing offensive coordinators are going to attack?
November 8th, 2009 at 11:22 PM ^
Thanks for letting me join the debate tonight. I appreciate all of the passion for Michigan, since the rest of my household (the Mrs. is not a michigan grad) could give a shit-less about, using her words, "Those stupid-ass mother-fuckers ruining my Saturday". It was interesting to hear listen to other opinions and Michigan is lucky to have so many fans that give a shit. I only wish I had discovered this sooner.
Got to get some rest, you know, got to make the donuts tomorrow.
Our country would be in a lot better shape if we could create a politicsgoblog.com to intelligently debate the issues in our country
November 9th, 2009 at 12:34 AM ^
the three teams were closest to one that list - Purdue, Illinois and MSU - have gone 6-0 against UM the past two years.
November 9th, 2009 at 3:44 AM ^
senior talent in the OP though. And the attrition has been undue in all classes.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:37 AM ^
Which team has a worse starting starting middle of the back seven than Obi, Jonas, Michael and Jordan? No offense to any of those kids, because it's clear they are playing their hearts out, but Kovaks is a stone frosh walk-on, Williams has now about a full season of starts between his two years of playing time, Jonas is about in the same boat as Williams, and Obi is just Obi -- he is what he has been for two prior years. These are all great kids and the coaches love them to death, but honest to Pete, it's doubtful that any one of them would start for any other team in the conference, and no way they start as a group anywhere else.
For a strong D, you gotta be strong up the center, and Michigan just is not this year.
The other seven positions are probably above Big 11 average, both individually and as a group.
The killer this year was Boubacar -- if he stays and plays, he's an adequate corner against non-first round draft picks, Woolfolk goes back to cutting off touchdowns from centerfield, and Jordan can play his run-stuffing role. It's a real shame Boubacar didn't cut it, for a bunch of reasons.
Take away the long TDs and Michigan's in a bowl game already.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:58 AM ^
What has happened to Obi? I mean, honestly? Still shocks me.
November 9th, 2009 at 4:00 AM ^
playing like 3 star fliers sometimes do. Obi hasn't had anyone to beat out for his job.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:39 AM ^
QB is still the most important position on the field. For those who think pre-and-post-injury stats for Forcier aren't important, look at Oklahoma. They now have four losses because of the injury to Sam Bradford.