Michigan recruiting by the numbers
2016
Composite Top 100 commits: 6
Composite Top 247 commits: 9
Total # of 4/5 star commits: 13
Total # of 3 star commits: 14
Class Rank: #8 overall
2017
Composite Top 100 commits: 6
Composite Top 247 commits: 14
Total # of 4/5 star commits: 21
Total # of 3 star commits: 9
Class Rank: #5 overall
2018
Composite Top 100 commits: 0
Composite Top 247 commits: 5
Total # of 4/5 star commits: 7
Total # of 3 star commits: 12
Class Rank: #21 overall
2019
Composite Top 100 commits: 2
Composite Top 247 commits: 3
Total # of 4/5 star commits: 5
Total # of 3 star commits: 5
Class Rank: TBD
For comparison, last year OSU signed 13 top 100 players and 20 in the composite top 247. In 2017 they signed 11 in the composite top 100 (five 5 stars) and 17 in the composite top 247.
There's absolutely no doubt that OSU is out recruiting us. Why insist on highlighting it? I think that most here are aware of their recruiting dominance.
Based on the replies I'd say most aren't.
Everyone is aware of it, Bluey -- and not just because your efforts to inform us. But again, for like the third or forth time, what is that you propose WE do about? What is your motivation behind these posts? Are you just "keeping it real?" If, to a man, every MGoBlog member posted something to the effect of, "Yes, Bluey, you're 100% correct, Michigan is underachieving on the field and in recruiting!" Would that make you satisfied?
Again, what is it that you're trying to accomplish? Further, and more importantly, forget about us fans, what is it that you think Harbaugh & Co. can do about this? You make this out to be some sort of mass delusion on the part of the fans (as if our opinion means anything) and gross negligence on the part of the Coaching Staff. It's neither, Bluey. It is (if it is in fact a reality to the extent that you state) simply Michigan coming out more than a decade of ineptitude.
So, for the last time, what are you trying to accomplish and what do you think Michigan should and can do to change things? I said in another post, should Harbaugh start Shanghaiing 5* players? He cannot MAKE players come to Michigan.
Please, enlighten us or STFU!
*Wild applause*
If you look back over the last five years of recruiting and take the average player ranking from 24/7, Michigan is recruiting very closely with Clemson. The average for Michigan is 0.8960 and the average for Clemson is 0.9076. I seem to remember Clemson held Ohio State scoreless a couple years ago in the playoffs.
I think by looking at the average player rating gives a better picture that an arbitrary cutoff of stars. We hear people say low four star, average three star, etc. With that said, I'd like to see us at an average of 0.9200 or so. That is the level Alabama and Ohio State are at.
I'd love to see that level of recruiting too -- I think everyone would. However, with apologies for sounding pessimistic, I don't think Michigan will ever recruit that well. Personally, I think it's an academic issue more than a football issue -- Michigan is looking for a certain type of student-athlete both on the field and off. Every program is looking for, basically, the same guys on the field but Michigan is looking for those guys who can compete in the classroom too.
I am not saying that Alabama, OSU, and Clemson don't have players who excel on and off the field. But, at least from what I understand, those programs pay lip-service to the "student" portion of the student-athlete, while Michigan does not. Now, Michigan isn't at the level of Stanford, Northwestern, or the Service Academies, but we're a lot closer to that than we are to the near complete lack of academic requirements of OSU, Alabama, et. al.
My $.02
If that were remotely true, Michigan wouldn't offer all the same kids OSU, Clemson and Alabama offer. Basically every kid in OSU's 2018 recruiting class held a Michigan offer too.
The point is many choose the path of least academic resistance, which leads them to other schools.
Especially schools that offer a "shallow, easy, in and out" experience on their way to NFL millions.
^^^ This!!!
Michigan expects/demands their athletes “play school” while OSU, Alabama, Clemson, etc. do not — if you don’t believe me, Jon Ross, just ask the esteemed T. Pryor.
In the spirit of 100% transparency, I don’t know that I really blame those that choose the path of the least academic resistance. When I was a 17-18 year old, if I were an elite football recruit with the aspiration and a legitimate shot at the NFL, I probably would have chosen the path of least resistance as well.
Michigan is trying to be more than a football factory for those that choose to come to Michigan. That is enticing to some elite prospects, and somewhat of a deterant for others. Further, Michigan does not employ bagmen, nor use a myriad of dirty recruiting tricks like other schools do. All one has to do read about how this has effected Michigan Basketball recruiting — ie, Coach B runs the cleanest program in the nation according to other coaches — to see a similar effect on the football program.
“You mean I gotta play school and you ain’t gonna pay me shit, or give my mama a house?! Welp, Roll Tide!”
Now, all that being said, I’m not naive enough to think that competeing for and winning NC’s isn’t a huge factor in recruiting the elite. But there is, in fact, a Michigan difference.
I think you make an important point here though. We're THIS CLOSE to recruiting at the same average as Clemson, and they MANHANDLED Ohio St.
This should tell us that we have more than enough talent on the roster to win these games...we're just not doing it. Call it poor coaching and player development, poor execution, unlucky bounces, bad calls, call it whatever you want. But we have the resources, on paper, necessary to win. It's just up to the coaching staff to figure out how to win and how to develop the players to be capable of winning.
I've said this multiple times over the past several years with all our coaching turmoil...it's all in the coach. A great coach can take an underachieving team and make them great. A poor coach can take a great team and underachieve. We've seen this principle transcend programs, hot-bed recruiting states, and geographic regions time and time again.
USC has been trash since Pete Carol left. Oregon fell off their pedestal shortly after Chip Kelly left. Texas has been awful since Mack Brown retired. Florida's been awful since Urban Meyer left. Bama wasn't great UNTIL Saban got there. Clemson was floundering until Dabo took over. OSU couldn't beat us or win a bowl game to save their lives until Tressel got there.
At the end of the day it's the coaching staff who will make or break a program. Elite coaches get players to execute at an elite level. Good coaches get players to execute at a good level. Average coaches coaches get players to execute at an average level. Poor coaches get players to execute at a poor level.
Soon enough we'll know what caliber of coaching staff we have with Harbaugh. Either we'll start winning big or we'll continue the trend of the last decade.
"A great coach can take an underachieving team and make them great"
As Harbaugh showed he could do in '15 and '16.
At the end of the day, it's the players that make or break a program, they take good coaching and produce great results and they take great coaching and become champions; but whether it's champions of the WAC or champions of the CFP depends squarely on the quality of the athletes.
We were good, not great in '15 and '16.
And the fact that mostly the same players went 5-7 in 2014 and 10-3 in 2015 should illustrate my point that it's more the coaches than it is the players. Look at OSU in 2011. Luke Fickell takes a loaded OSU squad and goes 6-6. Meyer comes in the next season and goes undefeated. Coaches make the difference in how players perform.
And considering that we're recruiting just about on par with Clemson, I'd say we have 99% of the quality of athletes we need to win big.
"And the fact that mostly the same players went 5-7 in 2014 and 10-3 in 2015 should illustrate my point that it's more the coaches than it is the players. Look at OSU in 2011. Luke Fickell takes a loaded OSU squad and goes 6-6. Meyer comes in the next season and goes undefeated. Coaches make the difference in how players perform."
Exactly MY point! A great coach takes a 6-6 Luke Fickell team filled with recruits from the #10, #5, #18 & #6 classes and goes 38-3 over the next three years and wins a CFP.
A coach would also be considered great if he took recruits from the #30, #6, #4, #20 classes that had gone 12-13 the two years before he arrived and goes 28-11 the next three years; not to mention, they were only an inch from a trip to the B1G Championship and maybe a CFP.
The difference between us going 12-0 in '16 was the players NOT the coach.
Last year, well that might have been some coaching issues....but I'm sure they're ALL worked out.
I agree with you on this: we have the players.....but, I'll add we also have the coach.
I'm not entirely sold yet on if we have the coach. We might, but I haven't seen enough "quality" wins/performances on the field here at Michigan to be fully persuaded. I think most of my mind will be made up by the end of this season, though I'll be okay with waiting until year 5 at the very latest.
But if it's year 5 and we still can't beat OSU, I'll be done I think.