Recruiting, rankings, and RR
This posting is a refutation of numerous poster's assertions that RR has taken UM's recruiting efforts down the drain. By the Rival's site(others rank UM differently), UM currently holds commitments from 3 four-stars and 10 three-stars.
Looking at the rankings of some teams in the fifteen or so, and comparing what UM still has on the board, as well as those of the other teams, UM has a decent to good shot at moving into that top fifteen and possibly into the top ten.
Part of the reason UM is ranked out of the top 25 right now is the numbers. We currently have 13 commits, the same as Auburn(at #24 with 4 four-stars and 9 three-stars). The next lowest commit totals ahead of us is Oregon(15 commits), Georgia and USC(16 commits), a handful of others at 17, and the rest who are close to or above 20 commits. Out of the teams in front of us up to the #10 ranking, only one has a five-star commit(USC).
The idea that RR is only recruiting three-stars is out there, and one of the major reasons that people believe we aren't getting the recruits we used to. Out of the teams ahead of us up to the tOSU(#7), only 6 teams have less three-stars committed(and one of those has 21 three-stars, ranked at #17 with only 4 four-stars).
Going by the player prospects, and those we have a good shot at getting, I count 7-9 four-star prospects and a handful of three-star prospects. Assuming that we gain commitments from the low end of the four-star prospect pool, and that we fill out the rest of the class with three star prospects, that will leave us with 10-12 four-star commits and around 13-15 three-star commits for a total of around 24-25 commits.
Now, looking at the teams ahead of us in the recruiting rankings, and assuming the general trend for their classes continues, we should place firmly in the top 15 with a decent to good chance of cracking the top ten. That is far removed from being a weak recruiting class, like some want to intimate in their postings.
Some of you will, no doubt, talk about us not really having anyone until they sign. Others will claim we don't have anyone until they are enrolled and on campus. And, your right, but neither do those other teams actually have anyone until they are enrolled at the school they've chosen.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:56 AM ^
the recruits will come as we chalk up more victories. a victory in the bowl game will be huge.
a loss will likely, in my opinion, result in RR being canned (but only if Harbaugh makes the jump).
we win and the upward momentum and progress continues. we lose and we go through another transition period and stagnation.
just win that damn bowl game and sunny days ahead...
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:00 PM ^
Nice Fred Jackson impression. Huge may be overstating it, a bit.
We will not be playing in the Rose or Fiesta Bowl. Hell, we will not even be playing in the Capital One, Outback or Alamo Bowls.
We will be playing in either the Gator, Insight or Texas Bowl. Of course a win is a good thing, but I am not sure that I would characterize it as "huge."
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:08 PM ^
.......whether or not a bowl win is "huge" is how we get the win. If we win by a large margin, seemingly dominating the opponent, it will be huge. If we barely scrape by like the Indiana win or Illinois win, then it will just be considered good.
Also, at this point, just getting to a bowl is a big gain for UM. Sure, everyone would have liked a better season and a bigger bowl game, but after not going to one in two years, any bowl game is a good thing right now.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:33 PM ^
Getting to the bowl game is huger than the results of the bowl game.
Brandon isn't going to fire RR or he would have done so already. His entire impressive career has involved being an expert on managing the markets expectations, if there was anything he could do to stop this idiotic point of view, he would have done it.
And then by the time the recruits commit in ink, the lemming masses will be guided by the brain dead media to start comparing Beilein to Tomm Amaker or someone else equally negative.
and the sun will come up in the morning and go down at night
December 2nd, 2010 at 6:40 PM ^
Brandon isn't going to fire RR or he would have done so already.
Then why doesn't he say so publicly, to dispel all the rumors?
You can argue that Brandon may be undecided and that he's waiting to see what happens in the bowl, but it's hard to believe at this point that he's decided to keep RR. That's not something you keep secret.
December 3rd, 2010 at 8:38 AM ^
December 2nd, 2010 at 3:48 PM ^
I'd be very happy with a one point win in the Insight Bowl over Nebraska, Oklahoma or Oklahoma SU, all currently 10-2.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:15 PM ^
the size of the bowl doesn' t matter as much as how you use it
RR needs to showcase the O and have a solid outing on D
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:09 PM ^
You put too much emphasis on this bowl game.. Brandon more than likely has already made his decision, and I doubt the bowl game will do anything to sway this barring an immense blow out in either direction.
Secondly, recruits commit to UM. Not just RR.
Third, I already have a boner about next season
Lets hope RR sticks around to let Denard win his 1st Heisman.
December 2nd, 2010 at 3:57 PM ^
and Amen
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:56 AM ^
You should also look at the RR score that rivals gives, which will show you that a lot of our 3-stars are low 3 stars. Not that such discrepancies make a huge difference.
December 2nd, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^
I think that much of the RR criticism re: recruiting is naive. Given our record, the media jihad, the negativity surrounding the program, it was not realistic to expect a 5* kid who can have his pick of places to play to sign up to come to Michigan. Losing does that. I genuinely do not believe that RR targets 3* kids, or that he is unable to close the deal on higher ranked kids, given an equal playing field.
Unfortunately, the playing field has not been equal because of the aforementioned factors. Also unfortunately, those factors are unlikely to go away, and this will hinder us from getting some (not all) of the truly elite talent.
December 2nd, 2010 at 5:42 PM ^
Yeah. Our losses were caused by the media.
<br>
<br>What a joke.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:02 PM ^
I also want to add that we can't help it when RR lands some good prospects that are kept out of school. Or when we land some commits that leave early. I do not think our main problem here recruiting.
GERG.
December 2nd, 2010 at 6:43 PM ^
I also want to add that we can't help it when RR lands some good prospects that are kept out of school.
Actually, we can. We do not have to target players who are in danger of not qualifying academically. That's a gamble.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:03 PM ^
Let's be fair. Dave Brandon (whom I love) has put RRod in an impossible situation. I'd be shocked if we received any more commitments prior to Brandon's year end evaluation. It is obvious this team has improved each year RRod has been here. By that measure we should not be having any discussions whatsoever about the Michigan football head coaching job. The man signed a 5 year contract! If you want to get all old school about it there is no way Bo would have fired a head coach after 3 years (Note: Illinois fired Gary Moeller after 3 years and Bo never forgave them for this).
By delaying the announcement DB is not helping the cause. Ultimately this cloud of uncertainty hovering our program hurts our recruiting efforts and makes RRod's job nearly impossible. We need to concerntrate on recruiting which imho is the ONLY way to solve the problems we are seeing on the field.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:05 PM ^
Can I get a chart?
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:10 PM ^
I haven't posted new topics on here quite enough to be up to the task of creating a chart.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:15 PM ^
Um......you have over a million points. You have literally been upvoted to the heavens.
Sorry if someone already pointed this out to you.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:58 PM ^
Profit, seems to be a lot of CC talk around here. Why aren't you regulating?
December 2nd, 2010 at 9:20 PM ^
.......meant to be pro-RR or anti-RR. I did this as a refutation of certain ideas floating around that RR cannot recruit well. If someone is going to argue on behalf of, or against RR, they should at least present factual arguments based on reality and not on assumed perceptions that are simply not true.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:10 PM ^
I should add that I strongly suspect RRod will be let go after the bowl game. I say this because DBrandon has to be aware of the damage this state of limbo must be doing in terms of our recruiting efforts. If you assume for one second that Coach Rod will be here next season this so called post bowl evaluation does tremendous harm. Brandon is no dummy and surely he must recognize the situation lends itself to all kinds of negative recruiting. In my mind the only possible explanation for the delay is that a decision has already been made and that Rod will not be here next season...
December 2nd, 2010 at 4:16 PM ^
I went back to the Crain's Detroit Business article, which was written before the WoJo, "beat OSU or we're hiring Harbaugh" article broke, and in the Crain article Brandon states his process in a generic and long term manner. If he wanted to fire someone, he would have done it so he can get to work hiring someone, same reason they announced Lloyd's retirement before the bowl game.
Now that the media have created a story they ask Brandon to make a statment, and Brandon's statement is, "I am going to follow the process I follow for every coach in every sport, wait until their season is over then evaluate them".
No, "wait until the season is over to fire them". He's talking about an annual review process. Who ever gets fired at their annual review? There are two ways to be fired, you are laid off because the company can't afford to pay you, or you job is not going to be filled by a replacement (as far as I know, Michigan is not bankrupt and considering cancelling football) or you are fired for cause. In each case the decision to fire is not delayed to the annual review, it is done exactly at the moment it's apparent the person no longer has a future.
Thus by this logic Brandon is NOT going to fire Rich Rodriguez. You could follow this logic, like some and twist it into "but his contract fee is lower" or "if they win the bowl game suddenly the entire season turns into the most fan beloved event of the decade, you have to keep him then." Both of these are weak. There is plenty of "for cause" conditions in Rich Rodriguez's contract, and the bowl game is NOT more important than OSU or MSU.
Now I'll agree that Brandon has left the option open to do anything at that annual review. BUT what will he learn at the end of the season that he doesn't know now? Nothing. The review will be on building plans for how to fix what is still broken.
Next we can take the Lynn Henning approach and state, "but what about the children, is no one thinking about the children?!?" But what if Brandon said, "Rich Rodriguez is going to be the coach next year!" Do you expect that the media will just nod there heads and say, "thank you kind sir, that's all we wanted to know, we can finally stop bringing up inflammatory opinionated topics that generate enormous click through on our websites and give all our writers the entire month of december off"
No, the very next question is, "will Rich Rod fire GERG".
etc. etc.
So instead, David Brandon, being the Leader he is has chosen to state, "the buck stops here, and I am going to do what I said and have the annual review at the end of the season, please do not bug my coaches and players anymore while they complete their finals, take what holiday vacation they can, and practice for the bowl game they so richly deserve after these past two years of now reward. Afterall you are just going to continue writing irrelevant unimformed stories anyway, and with no upside to giving more, I respectfully refer you to my previous comments on all questions you have robotically asked without ever taking the time to listen."
December 2nd, 2010 at 6:48 PM ^
Now that the media have created a story they ask Brandon to make a statment, and Brandon's statement is, "I am going to follow the process I follow for every coach in every sport, wait until their season is over then evaluate them".
But he's not telling the truth. He doesn't follow that process for every sport. Ask him if John Beilein's job is secure, and he'll tell you unequivocally that it is. It's only when he's asked about RR that he gives the "review at the end of the season" line. That likely suggests that he's got doubts about RR. Whether he's simply undecided or has made up his mind to fire RR is unclear, but in any event, it doesn't seem likely that he's made up his mind to keep him.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:11 PM ^
Once we start winning more games! A bowl win or at least a close loss will help out a lot. Knowing who the coach will be will go a long way! Uncertainty is the problem, and something our competitors on the recruiting will use against us!
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:15 PM ^
I did not post this topic of discussion to be taken in any way as pro-RR or anti-RR. I posted this topic due to numerous other posters mistakenly citing the current recruiting rankings(we come in at #27 on Rivals and Scout) as evidence that RR is either, not a good recruiter, or concentrating too much on low-rated recruits, or both. The truth is far from it and I would hope that people would realize this and not use it in their rants against him, as it is an unfair disparaging of the man, regardless of how you feel about him on other UM football related issues.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:20 PM ^
If you sort the lists by average star rating, they are around 15th on most recruiting services. They will probably end up around 15 in the actual rankings when the coaching situation is sorted out, and the class is finished.
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:26 PM ^
When he was there and they DOMINATED there recruiting classes were usually ranked in the 30 to 40 range. That is the great thing about his system he doesnt need a top ten recruiting class to be competitive
December 2nd, 2010 at 12:57 PM ^
"Use to getting"?? I don't remember Carr having better recruiting classes than RR. His highest ranked class since 2002(furthest scout would let me go back) best producing players were Terrance Taylor, MM and Zoltan. After that it gets really light for productivity.
This class is smaller than usual due to lack of upperclassmen.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:04 PM ^
Is it true that the stars ranking looks at a players pro potential? If so, with the benefit of hindsight, given his pro performance, Vince Young should have been lower rated than a lot of other quaterbacks, but he performed better in college than a lot of the guys he is now behind in the pros.
If it is not true that the stars ranking looks at a player pro potential, then please disregard this.
Enjoy your day.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:08 PM ^
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:16 PM ^
This is all according to Scout.
2006 #37 23 total 0 - 5 stars 0 - 4 stars 8 - 3 stars 15 - 2 stars or lower
2007 #41 18 total 1 - 5 stars 2 - 4 stars 9 - 3 stars 6 - 2 stars or lower
2008 #41 24 total 0 - 5 stars 1 - 4 stars 18 - 3 stars 4 - 2 stars or lower
2009 #51 21 total 0 - 5 stars 2 - 4 stars 11 - 3 stars 8 - 2 stars or lower
(I'm assuming that a decent number of the 2006 class redshirted and played their final season in 2010.)
Apparently you can win a share of the Big Ten title, go to a BCS game, beat OSU handily, and kick our ass from one end of the field to the other, all with a team built largely on 3-stars and lower, with a bare sprinkling of 4 stars and just one solitary 5-star.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:25 PM ^
Not only that, but you can, over a ten-year period, produce as many NFLers as UMich. (Sorry -- I can't find the article, but it was somewhat eye-opening and left me with the conclusion that Wisconsin has done a great job of evaluating HS football players.)
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:00 PM ^
Which is in turn greatly aided by the fact that the Badgers have been running essentially the same sort of offense for the two decades since 1990, Alvarez's first season. In that same time, we've had Gary Moeller, Lloyd Carr, and Rich Rodriguez, and while the differences in scheme are most pronounced between RR and Carr, Moeller and Carr didn't run exactly the same kind of offense either.
December 2nd, 2010 at 1:43 PM ^
with the talent he gets. Now, talk about talent rich without results
Urban Meyer - 7-5
Kirk Ferentz - 7-5
Mack Brown - 5-7
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:12 PM ^
Ummm...I'm pretty sure we've been getting higher rated recruits than Iowa since we got RR...I don't think that's a very good assesment. And you can also look at the like 50 coaches who have a better record than us with less talent...just saying
December 2nd, 2010 at 4:00 PM ^
Rivals? I would imagine coaches are recruiting kids who fit their system. I would also imagine they extend an offer based on their own assessment, not Scout, ESPN or Rivals.
I gave 2 examples of coaches (Meyer, Brown) who "apparently" recruited a bunch of 4 or 5 stars. Did they look like 4 or 5 star players?
As for my Ferentz example. He is an example of a coach who has recruits that fit his system (talent wise, that he recruited, with experience), and then proceeded to go 7-5. Whether you believe it or not, they were talented (preseason top 10). Look how they did the past few years with proven players. Ask the Iowa coaches. If we were to use the same Rivals rating system, but on a collegiate level, before the season started, many of them may have been a 4 or 5. To me, if RR is on the hot seat about recruiting, then Ferentz really should be. Which is nonsense.
We really have no idea if a kid is a 4 or 5 until many years down the road. So, if you really think about it, shouldn't stars should be placed on the kids after 4 or 5 years and what they actually accomplished?
December 2nd, 2010 at 2:47 PM ^
Per Rivals
2005-07, MICH signed 29 4- or 5-star recruits. Four were 5-stars: Kevin Grady, Brandon Graham, D-War and Ryan Mallett
2008-10, MICH signed 36 4-star recruits. Zero 5 stars.
December 2nd, 2010 at 4:25 PM ^
This stat just blew my mind.
Whoa... /Keanu
December 2nd, 2010 at 3:50 PM ^
I'm assuming your "Zero 5 stars" statement means you think the 2005-07 recruiting was better than 08-10. I'd have to disagree.
Grady never panned out, D-War left a year early (to go undrafted) and Mallett is such a prick that despite his impressive numbers he isn't very high on draft boards. Graham, well yeah, that worked out pretty well.
So despite having two losing seasons, RR has done a pretty solid job of bringing in sufficient talent to compete at the B10 level. I can only imagine that our recruiting will get better with an improved record next year.
December 2nd, 2010 at 4:06 PM ^
No. Not at all. Its just a fact. Figured if I didnt include any 5-star breakdown, it would be incomplete.
I'm the leader of the RR has actually reinvigorated our recruiting in the most talent rich state in the Big 10 footprint. See my article in HTTV as an example.
December 2nd, 2010 at 4:12 PM ^
My apologies for jumping to conclusions. It will definitely be interesting to see what kind of talent RR can bring in if he can say secure and job in the same sentence--it must be difficult to sell when even he isn't sure if he'll be retained.
December 2nd, 2010 at 6:36 PM ^
Isn't the larger point that, although star-ratings are obviously flawed, they generally prove to be accurate? The best teams, over the past ten years, are the ones with the most 4/5 stars. Texas. Florida. Alabama. USC. OSU. It's not the scheme. It's the players and the coach.
Yes, certain variables apply. Oregon isn't flooded with 5-star. Neither are Wisky or Iowa. Neither was WVU. But I'm pretty sure they all would have preferred to get the highest-rated recruits. They just couldn't. They succeeded despite the ratings. But watch: now they'll start landing bluer chips. The bluer, the better. That's the way to remain consistently great.
RR might be able to get us back to the top by recruiting classes rated, say, 18th. Until that point, however, he's just been a guy who doesn't recruit the way Michigan once did.