Recruiting Mailbag: Roster Balance, On-Field Success, Five-Stars Comment Count

Ace


Under Harbaugh's watch, Michigan is taking more versatile prospects like QB-turned-TE Zach Gentry. [Fuller]

This question was posted in the comments of Kai-Leon Herbert's commitment post, and I've been meaning to get around to it ever since:

It seems to me that right from the start, the Harbaugh staff hasn't been primarily focused on "roster balance" but instead--at least in the short term--focused on making 100% sure that they have solid players in key position groups.  

What I mean is--they seem to be adopting a "surge" strategy wherein they almost over-recruit certain spots to guarantee good performances.  QB and perhaps RB came to mind last year, and now perhaps this year OL and TE.

The theory I guess being that a few of the recruits will turn into diamonds under the pressure. Meanwhile the rest will either transfer (thus opening up roster slots to "surge" the next position group) or (more preferably) if they are athletic & amenable to it, switch to a different position group to help balance out the roster that way.

Is this a known strategy that they're following?  Or or is this just a wrong-headed & faulty observation on my part?

I believe the "surge" recruiting at certain positions reflects two things: first and foremost roster imbalance that Harbaugh is trying to fix, and second a change in emphasis in how this staff recruits.

There's one position where Harbaugh's recruiting stands in stark contrast to Hoke's: quarterback. Hoke took one per year and infamously skipped taking one in 2012 because he had Shane Morris in the fold for 2013—instead of promoting competition, Hoke seemingly wanted to avoid it. Michigan got only Russell Bellomy in 2011 and put a non-elite prospect (Wilton Speight, a three-star) on top of their board for 2014. This approach required the coaches to have an exceptional hit rate with their QB recruits; that obviously didn't happen.

Harbaugh, on the other hand, doubled up on QBs in his first class, adding Zach Gentry—a prospect versatile enough to shift to tight end, which he's since done—to holdover Alex Malzone. Instead of easing back after landing a top-tier QB in 2016 (Brandon Peters), Harbaugh grabbed another for 2017 (Dylan McCaffrey), and M's top targets for 2018 (Dorian Thompson-Robinson, Artur Sitkowski, Cameron Rising) are also of the high-four-star variety.

Hoke seemed to fear that his quarterbacks would leave if they felt they weren't preordained as The Guy. Harbaugh has no such fear; he recruits with future attrition in mind and, as mentioned, takes more position-versatile players than Hoke did—just look at Gentry for evidence. At certain positions, especially quarterback, I think Michigan is utilizing the strategy outlined in the question, and that general mentality drives how they recruit.

Other surges are more the coaches patching up holes in the roster. With Freddy Canteen's status in doubt, Michigan was set to have only three scholarship receivers back in 2017 (Ways, Harris, and Perry), so taking five receiver-types in the 2016 class made a lot of sense, especially since a couple can potentially play in the defensive backfield. After fixing the imbalance, the coaches are being much more selective at receiver in 2017.

Tight end recruiting, which spawned this question, is a combination of Harbaugh patching a hole—Khalid Hill, who's now a fullback, and Ian Bunting will be the only two scholarship upperclassman TE/H-backs in 2017—and putting together his preferred personnel. Harbaugh wants blocky/catchy guys of all shapes and sizes in his offense, and he had to jump-start that in the last couple classes; things should even out over the next couple classes as Harbaugh shapes the roster to his liking.

[Hit THE JUMP for the rest of the mailbag.]

We learned the hard way with Hoke that on-field results matter, especially when it comes to closing on top prospects late in the cycle. While Michigan doesn't need to win a national title to close on their remaining top uncommitted targets, they need to show they're headed in that direction—there's no other option when trying to convince prospects to choose Michigan over the likes of Alabama and Ohio State. Recruits would probably understand a loss at Ohio State—single-game outcomes tend to matter less to recruits than people think—but there'd be some explaining to do if the game is as lopsided as it was last year.

As for part two, I think this has more of an effect on out-of-state prospects, who are obviously less inclined to commit to Michigan because of loyalty, personal connection to the program, and the like. For out-of-state prospects, Michigan has to prove they're a better option than the who's-who of power programs also pursuing the Baron Brownings and Isaiah Wilsons out there. Meanwhile, Michigan has already convinced several of the top-level in-state recruits that they're the program of choice locally—they're the current favorite to sweep the top five:

If the result of the Michigan-MSU game was paramount to these guys, I think we'd see a little more green on that board.

There's maybe been a slight uptick, though Hoke was no slouch in this department. Hoke only closed on two five-stars (Jabrill Peppers and Derrick Green), however, while Harbaugh has already landed the top overall prospect in his first full class and has Michigan as the favorite to land Donovan Peoples-Jones this year. Michigan also has realistic shots at Browning and Wilson, Nico Collins is a five-star to Rivals, and Dylan McCaffrey is still within striking distance of a fifth star after his recent drop.

With ample supporting evidence, Harbaugh can sell five-stars on his ability to turn them into future stars in a way Hoke couldn't, and his team's success should enable him to turn more of those visits into commitments.

Maybe this isn’t a realistic question at this point but what the heck;

What do you think a realistic ceiling is for this class for the Wolverines?

As always, thanks for considering the q and for the great work, love the coverage.

Dana

If the team is a playoff contender, I could see this ending up as a top-three class, though it'll be tough to catch Ohio State and Alabama. They'll have the volume—it's not hard to project this class up to around 30(!) commits with normal attrition. They're the favorites to pick up Peoples-Jones, Ambry Thomas, and Jaylen Kelly-Powell, and they're running at or near the top for the likes of Collins, Wilson, Drew Singleton, Cesar Ruiz, TJ Slaton, and so on. Plus, as we saw last year with Devin Asiasi, this coaching staff can pull high-level prospects seemingly out of the blue; you never know who's going to emerge late in the cycle.

Comments

schreibee

July 23rd, 2016 at 1:40 PM ^

The Drake went to Pioneer.

As for Simmons, I don't think this staff ever made a strong push for him, and there's plenty of time if he blows up in his senior year to flip him, if Harbaugh & Co change their minds.

AS an AA native and Pioneer grad, I don't believe that anybody feels the way we do about Michi-gan...

(Co-writing credit to Oasis)

LKLIII

July 22nd, 2016 at 11:53 PM ^

My follow up question on roster balance relates to balance in experience between the classes. I'm wondering--do all teams strive to achieve similar sized classes from year to year to have a moderate level of experienced players each year? Or do some teams try to "surge" a few big recruiting classes numbers wise? The theory for this option would be that you stack the deck with kids and then endure a cycle of some "down" years where the big classes are underclassmen to but in recharge you in theory should have 1-2 peak years where your top talent are all juniors and seniors to maximize the chance at a NC. Do teams think about this stuff or is it as simple as "stay under the scholarship numbers and try to recruit the best players"'and let the "roster experience" issue just play itself out naturally?



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

AZBlue

July 23rd, 2016 at 3:04 PM ^

I would guess the "ideal" is to have classes of 20-22 every year - so 100-110 every 5 years less attrition, injury, and early NFL departures.

I think it would be difficult to do/manage/maintain the "2-high, 2-low" as consistent winners are going to draw more attention and if you have years like OSU has last year you will have spikes of early departures that will level out the numbers. -- Side note: They say OSU is going to have a "small" class this year (20-ish?). How small would it have been if not for all the kids leaving early? How many 4-5 stars would they have had to turn away due to space? There was serious discussion that they might have to turn away Riep - 4-star, top 150 OH CB - that chose them over Sparty today. #problemsIhopewehavesoon

I would guess Harbaugh is ecstatic that they had the numbers to do 2 large classes these first two full years so he can build his team, but also suppose that they have serious talks about redshirt vs. playing number "goals" for each position. I.e. Probably want to play 1-2 of Mitchell, Crawford, McDoom and Nate Johnson to even out the receiver numbers going forward. (Of course this is not the primary driver of these decisions.). The opposite would be they would probably LOVE to RS at least one of Long and Hill given our current depth at CB but cannot due to needs in 2017.

Rasmus

July 23rd, 2016 at 5:13 PM ^

I don't know the answer to your question, but there was speculation when Harbaugh arrived that he might try to address the severe imbalance in class numbers. It seems pretty clear now that he's not interested in that, and he will take as much talent as he can get in these huge classes and let the future take care of itself.

That's the voice of experience -- you play the hand you're dealt. I mean, you can't really predict what will happen with attrition -- it's folly to think that you can. Maybe later on, when you're winning and have a steady flow of top recruits, then yes, you can mess around, but right now, given the shitstorm on the horizon in terms of recruiting numbers, you need to plug as many holes as you can and hope for the best.

In short, I think he's trying to outrun it -- godspeed.

I think most coaches would be stupid to purposely run an imbalanced recruiting program. Harbaugh is doing it because that's where Michigan is at -- but it took a decade of exceptional circumstances to get here. Again, you just can't predict attrition (and not just players, but your staff -- think Jerry Montgomery), and most coaches can't really expect to have a job if it all goes to shit and one or two of those off years are really bad.

Alumnus93

July 23rd, 2016 at 5:40 PM ^

I always figured Poggi would end up at OG... that's where saban was recruiting him primarily for. and I think Paea might end up at C

Goggles Paisano

July 23rd, 2016 at 7:08 AM ^

Marcus Ray was from Columbus.  There may have been a couple more Columbus natives to commit to Michigan.  Trey Burke obviously but he didn't get an osu offer.  

Edit: this was supposed to be in response to DualThreat's post.  

ook96682

July 26th, 2016 at 2:27 PM ^

 Evelyn . if you think Daniel `s st0rry is inconceivable... on monday I bought themselves a Infiniti from earning $6932 this past 5 weeks and-in excess of, ten k last-month . without a question it is my favourite job I have ever done . I started this 10-months ago and almost immediately started bringin home more than $84

------------------------ http://www.factoryofincome.com