SI's Andy Staples Re-ranks 2009 Recruiting Classes
6. Michigan
Original Rivals rank: 8
Record since 2009: 22-15
BCS bowl appearances: 1
Conference titles: 0
2011 starters: K Brendan Gibbons, WR Jeremy Gallon, S Thomas Gordon, OT Taylor Lewan, QB Denard Robinson, DE Craig Roh, RB Fitzgerald Toussaint
Rich Rodriguez didn't do everything wrong in Ann Arbor. After all, he signed this group, which provided much of the leadership for a team that went 11-2 and won the Sugar Bowl. Obviously, Robinson is the crown jewel of the class, and it appears coach Brady Hoke has figured out how to take advantage of Robinson's speed and playmaking without relying on Robinson so much that the quarterback gets maimed.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:24 PM ^
February 6th, 2012 at 3:26 PM ^
I'm somewhat surprised that we went up. From the 2009 class we have lost:
Justin Turner
Tate Forcier
Je'Ron Stokes
Vlad Emilien
Anthony Lalota
Teric Jones
I guess Denard and the rest make up for all those losses.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:30 PM ^
Also Adrian Witty.
It's an interesting class to evaluate. Very feast-or-famine.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:34 PM ^
Does he count? I thought he never fully qualified.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:37 PM ^
He is starting at Cinci right?
February 6th, 2012 at 3:38 PM ^
Well, he was part of the initial class that signed in February 2009.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:41 PM ^
Good point. I forgot that he actually signed his LOI.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:27 PM ^
Yeah, it seems we've lost half the guys from 08-09.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:27 PM ^
Seems a little high to me, outside of D-Rob and Fitz (and off and on with Lewan), what we've seen of the '09 recruiting class hasn't been all that spectacular. Roh, Gallon, and Gordon were serviceable but certainly not game changers.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:52 PM ^
Touche. Gallon is a game changer the same way David Tyree was a game changer. He changed a game, once.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:56 PM ^
Twice actually. That catch above and when he engaged his cloaking device.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:01 PM ^
He changed the same game twice. Still only changed one game.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:05 PM ^
Your standard seems to be that to qualify as a game changer you need to be a Braylon Edwards, Mike Hart or Brandon Graham type. If that's the case, then you'd be hard pressed to find many recruiting classes that feature more than 1 or 2 of those types. Solid contributors who have the ability to make or break a game or two a season shouldn't be dismissed so easily. If we lose that Notre Dame game, who knows how the rest of the season plays out.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:12 PM ^
I love Gallon, but he was an interchangable piece at wideout this season. Very serviceable player but not someone that anyone ever worried about game planning for. There is a level of player between Braylon (superstar) and Gallon (serviceable and unspectacular) that I would like to see more than a handful of recruits achieve. Call it the Avant level.....
February 6th, 2012 at 4:22 PM ^
If you're honestly expecting a recruiting class to have more than one Braylon in it (probably the 3rd/4th best WR in program history), then you're going to be awfully disappointed with a lot of classes.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:32 PM ^
Are you trying not to understand what he's saying?
It's not that you need a Braylon in every class to be satisfied- it's that Gallon isn't a reason to up the grade of the class seeing as he had one great game and some solid ones- but more or less he was an interchangeable piece with Odoms and by no means a game changer in the way Denard or Lewan are.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:53 PM ^
I understand perfectly what he's saying. I would of course agreee that Gallon is not on the same level as Braylon and am perplexed how you can't see that from my post. My disagreement was with his larger point that you need multiple Braylons(who we both agree are really, really good) in order to have a successful class.
February 6th, 2012 at 5:11 PM ^
Did someone really call for multiple Braylons in one recruiting class? I don't see that above.
February 6th, 2012 at 5:54 PM ^
With all due respect, you clearly don't understand what I was saying. I never once came close to saying that you need multiple Braylon's in a single recruiting class. I'd be happy with one Braylon every three or four recruiting classes, quite frankly. The point is that there is room to upgrade the roster without filling it with superstars. I specifically said that there exists a level of player (I called it the Avant level) between a Braylon and a Gallon that I'd like to see filling up the starting positions on the roster. No slight or disrespect to Jeremy, he clearly gets the most out of his size and physical ability, but he would have been no better than a 3rd or 4th WR on any Michigan team between 1995-2007.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:34 PM ^
But he just said a level of player between a Braylon and a Gallon.
(Though I don't know that Avant was a great example...Avant was and is a pretty damn good player).
February 6th, 2012 at 5:59 PM ^
Avant is your prototypical #2 receiver that a great offense can't function without. He didn't have the field stretching abilities or freakish leaping ability but you could pretty much count on him always making the catch in traffic or in critical situations. He wasn't a high round NFL pick but he was drafted. He was a damn good player like you said, but a notch or two below Braylon (at the collegiate level). Again, no disrespect to Jeremy, but there is room to upgrade at that position.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:33 PM ^
I agree. Gallon had a solid season but if we define "game-changer" as an All-Big Ten player (which seems fair), he's not quite there, at least not yet.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:05 PM ^
nicely played
February 6th, 2012 at 4:09 PM ^
Don't hate on Lewan. He's probably going to wind up being the highest draft pick out of that entire class.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:29 PM ^
Thanks for sharing. I appreciate Mr. Staples putting us 6th overall, but I see no reason why Georgia would be ranked ahead of our class.
Records are basically identical, they haven't made it to a BCS game, they just choked away a bowl game to Sparty, and they didn't have to go through a regime change in the last 4 years.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:31 PM ^
Hoke figured out that having a healthy Toussaint would diminish the need to rely on Denard. Why didn't RR figure that out?
February 6th, 2012 at 3:41 PM ^
February 6th, 2012 at 3:45 PM ^
Are you really too blind to see that he was actually defending RR with the "healthy Touissant" comment?
February 6th, 2012 at 3:33 PM ^
I think the class rank should go up by at least one spot based on Gibbons' instant classic "Brunette Girls" remark.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:34 PM ^
I am all for any media outlet putting out positive stuff on Michigan. But, I am not so sure that I can agree with putting us at 6. I think that Stepleton is failing to look at the entire class, and that his rating is based largely upon one individual, Denard Robinson.
The 2009 class lost quite a few players to attrition, and aside from Denard, Lewan and Fitz, none of the others are real top-level stars. Also, the class failed to address many areas of need or to provide good depth.
This is NOT an anti-RR thing - I am equally critical of Lloyd's last class at M.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:05 PM ^
Look at any class at Michigan or any other school and you will see a bunch of names that were never heard from again after signing day, whether they left the program or not. Also, none of the guys who left would be playing if they were still here (save maybe Witty, who just got screwed over by admissions). Half the guys in the class we just signed are never going to make a significant contribution on the field. A class pans out if it produces good players, not because everybody sticks around. There are just so many playing spots and scholarships available. Alabama is forcing underperforming guys to leave the program (in short, begging for more attrition) and I think their talent base is pretty solid.
A class that produces all-conference honorees at QB, RB, LT, and DE (and SS if you count Kovacs as part of this incoming class) in basically their RS sophomore season is a great class. There is a reason we just won the Sugar Bowl and it isn't because our recent recruiting classes haven't been any good.
February 6th, 2012 at 3:36 PM ^
He started almost all of last year. It will also be interesting to see this year from the guys we lost who if anyone does well at the schools they transfered to. Also don't forget V Smith, BWC (hoping for a bigtime year from him this year), Cameron Gordon, and Washington. This class still has some upside and all of those guys i mentioned have a shot or starting or major contributions next year.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:06 PM ^
Those guys are respectable players but not highlights of the class. They're basically your standard borderline-starters that every class generally has a few of. Schofield started largely because of Barnum's injury. The others were situational backups this year.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:00 PM ^
And note that the recruiting services missed on classes with:
Stanford 20th originally, now 3rd
WVU 27th originally, now 8th
Clemson, 37th originally, now 9th
Wisconsin 43rd originally, now 10th
So, I would love to see this done for a number of years to see how good rankings of classes really are.....
February 6th, 2012 at 4:05 PM ^
February 6th, 2012 at 4:09 PM ^
These guys (from RR's first full recruiting class) were true sophomores when he got fired. They made a huge positive impact on last year's team as well (Denard didn't suddenly become awesome).
Compare this group with the senior classes that were here under RR and that should explain why we've gotten better every year since the crater in 2008.
February 6th, 2012 at 4:56 PM ^
Your persistence on being measured, logical, and reasonable is really going to hurt the level of discourse on these RR threads. Can't you just stick with spittle-flecked hyperbole?
February 6th, 2012 at 6:21 PM ^
I'm almost certain that a defensive unit doesn't improve 100 spots in the rankings by becoming a few months older. The offense improved marginally with Hoke's first year, and that can probably be chalked up to the maturing of its components. The defense, however... Well, let's just remind everyone that Greg Mattison said that the guys had to be shown what to do from the very beginning as if they had never been shown before.
EDIT: Yeah, this looks like trolling. Here, at least let me give you reason to tag my comment as such: No alternative opinions allowed! All hail Rich Rodriguez, coach of the Arizona Whatevertheyares!
February 6th, 2012 at 6:42 PM ^
Will Heininger, Troy Woolfolk and JT Floyd returned from season ending injuries. Mike Martin healed from a brutal cheap shot that hobbled him the second half of 2010. Jake Ryan, Morgan/Hawthorne, and Blake Countess jumped into the starting lineup. That is more than half the spots on the field having different guys. We also got contributions from newcomers like Beyer, Clark, Ash, and to some extent BWC (since he had been on offense a year earlier). In exchange we lost Jonas Mouton to the pros and Cam Gordon missed the first half of the season due to injury.
I'm sure guys like Demens, Roh, Avery, Black and Gordon all benefitted tremendously from an extra year of experience, growth and maturity (most players aren't at their best as underclassmen or the first time they see the field).
And Greg Mattison is a way better defensive coordinator than Greg Robinson. There is a reason he is making 4 times as much money.
Acting like the 2011 defense is just the 2010 defense with more age is dumb. That is why someone seems to think you are trolling.
February 7th, 2012 at 8:11 AM ^
I believe the undoing of RR was his hiring that surrounded him...he brought in some great kids when he was left with ZERO talent...ZERO. Fergodsakes when your backup qb came to UM with the hopes of a free ride and splinters from a clipboard...you know you are screwed...unfortunately shaffer and robinson didn't get it done at DC...a lot of other factors but RR wasn't a bad coach...he made some bad decisions in hiring...these kids under the leadership of Mattison made HUGE strides..they are a talented and prideful bunch of young men who just had an 11 win season....kudos to each and every part from recruting to implementaion that made it happen...which means Gallon, and Denard, and Lewan, and Mike Martin, Roh, and on and on and on...each man in class 132 had it's part in it.
February 6th, 2012 at 5:11 PM ^
The guys we signed in 2002 went on to play in 3 Rose Bowls if they stayed in Ann Arbor for 5 years (so obviously it was a solid class or at least good enough to keep the program at a high level). Here is how that panned out by position group.
QB: Matt Gutierrez was poised to start but got injured prior to the 2004 season and eventually transferred
RB: Pierre Rembert transferred to Illinois State. Darnell Hood moved to DB and played only sparingly as a backup. Obi Oluigbo started at fullback.
WR: Jason Avant and Steve Breaston were solid to awesome players throughout their careers
TE: Kevin Murphy never saw the field IIRC, and left the program
OL: Tom Berishaj left the program early. Mike Kolodziej started 4 games but left the program due to injury/illness before the 2006 season. Ruben Riley started as a 5th year senior. Mark Bihl was a Rimington Finalist.
DL: Rondell Biggs was a solid starter as a 5th year senior. Larry Harrison was kicked out of school for flashing his dong. Gabe Watson was a two time all conference honoree.
LB: Jeremy Van Alstyne stayed 5 years but never started. Brian Thompson was a 4th string tight end as a 5th year senior. David Harris started as a junior and crushed fools as a 5th year senior.
DB: Willis Barringer stayed 5 years and played as a backup safety. Quinton McCoy failed to qualify, signed again a year later and then promptly flunked out of UM
Plenty of attrition (35% of the class left with eligibility available) and even more guys who just wasted a scholarship for five years. And that is from a class of just 20 guys. If you had gone back and evaluated this class after just three seasons on campus, it would look like Watson, two wide receivers, and nothing else.
Try to keep reality in mind when evaluating recruiting classes and ask yourself if attrition is really a bad thing when you think about all the extra guys we could have signed in 2006 (we only inked 17 guys) if a bunch of career backups hadn't gotten a 5th year of eligibility.
February 6th, 2012 at 5:20 PM ^
"Try to keep reality in mind when evaluating recruiting classes and ask yourself if attrition is really a bad thing when you think about all the extra guys we could have signed in 2006 (we only inked 17 guys) if a bunch of career backups hadn't gotten a 5th year of eligibility."
That was the exact epiphany Saban had that got him where he is now.
February 6th, 2012 at 5:27 PM ^
I don't think the presence of the 5th-year senior backups explains our small 2006 recruiting class. It was more the other way around - because we didn't sign many players that year, we had roster spots left for those guys. Fifth-year seniors are a different animal from other scholarship players. It's considered acceptable to let them go if the team needs the scholarship.
February 6th, 2012 at 5:55 PM ^
Whatever the process, we left 5-6 future players on the table and instead got the 5th year contribution of guys who basically did nothing on the field. Looking at the late Carr era class sizes, it looks like it was pretty standard policy as well. Things might have gone a lot differently in 2006/2007 (and after) if we had brought in a handful of extra defensive players in 2006. That class featured only two defensive backs, and both ended up playing linebacker at Michigan. Have to think that adding 3-4 random mid-level recruits at corner and safety might have produced a guy who could have made a difference against OSU or USC and maybe kept the defense in better shape long term.
I get that not granting a 5th year isn't the same as a guy flunking out or transferring, but at the end of the day both can/do have the same positive effect if the guy leaving opens up a spot for somebody better down the road. Just want to keep pointing out that attrition is usually a positive unless you are in super serious APR danger.