Two Deep Class Breakdown: Michigan by Phil Steele
Looks like Michigan fields the least experienced 2 Deep team in all of college football next year, according to Phil Steele. He has Wolverines ranked 130th (last) in the land.
This probably explains why Penn State, Iowa, Wisconsin and Ohio State are getting most of love for 2017.
I do think Phil Steele's method has its flaws because if you look at his predicted depth charts for teams in his magazines, they are frequently way off from actual starters for that season, ignore the reality of injuries, upperclassmen burnouts (never hitting the starting lineup) and the effect of his so called "VHTs" (very high talent) incoming freshman who do start and many of whom play comparatively-to-remarkably well to alternatives on the roster. I bet Phil Steele has Solomon Vault listed as a starter for Northwestern, for example. He's injured and will miss 2017.
Whatever.
FWIW, I sorted the data for Big Ten teams and Notre Dame here. Note not a single Big Ten team cracks the Top 20 in Steele's 2 deep experience.
Will put my faith in Harbaugh and Downtown Brown and cheer the team on like a mad man no matter what.
Rank | Team | Conference | PTS | SR ST | SR 2D | JR ST | JR 2D | SO ST | SO 2D | FR ST | FR 2D |
22 | Northwestern | Big 10 | 73 | 10 | 5 | 10 | 4 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 4 |
28 | Purdue | Big 10 | 72 | 6 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 7 | 7 | 1 | 1 |
48 | Iowa | Big 10 | 68 | 11 | 2 | 6 | 7 | 5 | 9 | 0 | 4 |
61 | Indiana | Big 10 | 66 | 9 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 5 |
70 | Minnesota | Big 10 | 65 | 9 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 4 |
76 | Penn St | Big 10 | 64 | 12 | 1 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 12 | 0 | 5 |
83 | Rutgers | Big 10 | 63 | 8 | 1 | 10 | 8 | 4 | 7 | 0 | 6 |
87 | Ohio St | Big 10 | 62 | 9 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 10 | 0 | 5 |
87 | Wisconsin | Big 10 | 62 | 11 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 4 | 8 | 1 | 7 |
87 | Maryland | Big 10 | 62 | 9 | 3 | 10 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 9 |
106 | Nebraska | Big 10 | 58 | 7 | 2 | 10 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 1 | 7 |
112 | Notre Dame | Big 10 | 57 | 5 | 2 | 10 | 6 | 6 | 10 | 1 | 4 |
127 | Illinois | Big 10 | 46 | 6 | 1 | 6 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 3 | 7 |
127 | Michigan St | Big 10 | 46 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 10 | 5 | 4 | 5 |
130 | Michigan | Big 10 | 40 | 4 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 11 | 4 | 2 | 11 |
They did lose a bunch of experience due to, how shall I put it, "attrition".
Yeah red-locks don't work very well when the whole team has a pair of bolt cutters.
While I don't think they'll be very good, I think this could easily be a case of addition by subtraction for Staee. Not only will D'antoni get to sell the whole "us against the world" thing, I wonder if they won't better off losing a certain "Top 3" defensive lineman. When your star player is the also the hardest worker on your team, you have a good situation. When he's a known loafer -- not so much.
Sparty: 127th place in returning experience. Will be lucky to win 3 games.
Michigan: 130th place in returning experience. Sure bet for the final four and probably going to the whole damn thing this year.
Do I have that right?
Your point is certainly valid; however, the starting points before losing all that experience (how last season went) between the two teams is not the same.
As well as the talent level behind last year's starters and oh yeah, coaching!
Personally, I put more weight into Phil Steele's returning starters, and returning % of yards and tackles charts. The class rank of the players on the depth chart seem to have little effect in comparison.
How does he classify a guy like Hurst who didn't start but was really a starter?
But from previous conversations about his lists, I feel the consensus was that he doesn't dive too deep. So if he has a 2016 Michigan starting line up in front of him, and Mo Hurst isn't on it, he's not a returning starter.
I thought the OP said it was for the two deep.
There are rankings out there for "returning productivity" too so guys like that don't get unaccounted for. It doesn't change things much. I think Michigan was 3rd to last in returning productivity in the country.
Per Bill Connelly, yep, third from last.
over the next 73 days. As we already know, this season is going to come down to how are talented young players perform - and in particular, how the youngsters on the OL and Secondary perform.
If everything clicks early and a bunch of guys blow up, we could be looking at a 12-0 or 11-1 season and a playoff appearance.
If the guys start slow and don't move up the curve as we would like, we are probably looking at an 8-4 season.
My prediction is 9-3 with a big win in a bowl game followed immediately by the 2018 hype train leaving the station. I think 2018 will be the year we have been waiting for...
But I cannot do the whole looking forward thing anymore.
2016 was supposed to be the best opportunity for this team in forever, and they fell short.
What happens in 2018 if everything does not line up as fans hope? Is 2019 the year?
Every team is young. If you have a team with 80 seniors, you are doing something wrong. Freshman and sophomores everywhere make massive impacts. After the non-conference and the team knows what to do and where they are, the youth stuff goes out the window. If Harbaugh is the lord that he is often praised to be, then his year 3 team should be the one that wins a title. Year 3 in any system is when everything supposedly comes together.
2016 was absolutely the best opportunity for the team since the Carr years and there is a dropoff because so much talent is leaving. That was known, there was a window.
Michigan couldn't get it, limited largely by a mediocre offensive line. So it was disappointing.
Someone who expects a team built around sophomores to do better has a slight chance of being right and a big chance of being really disappointed.
It's not unreasonable to look at rosters going forward and project what the team will look like in the future. 2018 looks like a monster team. Except for Mo Hurst and Mason Cole, all of the critical talent that will be playing this fall will be back and more experienced (and, often, better). Rashan Gary will be preparing his top-5 pick resume. Either ridiculously experienced Wilton Speight, brilliantly talented and developed Brandon Peters, or Surprisingly Precocious Other Young QB will be under center. The OL, after years of wilderness, will finally be coming together.
And if things aren't perfect then, well... yeah, 2019 might be the year then, too.
But the whole "monster team" concept just never seems to play out.
I think we are always constantly looking forward as fans instead of the current situation. Nothing will EVER line up perfectly.
When you are hoping to establish a dynasty like Alabama or insert football power here, you can continue to have incredible seasons despite losing talent.
The current situation is that Michigan has, literally, the youngest team in college football. That is not "normal" and you are way oversimplifying. You're looking at Nick Saban and Urban Meyer having a lot of success early with rosters well-stocked by their predecessors while ignoring Jimbo Fisher and Dabo Swinney who took slightly and a lot more time, respectively, to build their teams into winners.
This is not a "normal" cycle of talent. Hoke's final years were a death spiral that left older guys with some talent on the team and a pipeline that had Jabrill Peppers and basically nothing else. Peppers was great, and he's gone; who is left?
Alabama replaces talent with experienced talent, guys that have been in the system for a couple of years. Michigan is replacing talent with guys that aren't even 20 yet.
And I'm not sure what you mean by a "monster team" concept never playing out. For Michigan? You can blame the Carr staff for that. That's not the staff that we have now.
Nobody expected much from the 1997 team when it hit the field. We didn't know who the QB would be, the offensive talent was pretty limited (in the Carr era it was, in my opinion, his second or third least talented offense) with a young OL, and we had just lost DC Greg Mattison to Notre Dame.
Teams predicted to be great in preseason in the Carr era that didn't pan out: 2000, 03, 05, 07.
There is no excuse for how much a team as loaded as 2003 underachieved. Yeah, they beat OSU and won the B1G; they also choked away games at Oregon and Iowa and were soundly outplayed by a younger USC team.
The entire crux of your argument?
No one expected anything from the 97 team that had an unknown QB, average offensive potential, and other doubts.
Why can't I expect this team to do something great instead of just layering on these pre-made excuses and say "Well, just wait until 2019 when the team is filled with seniors"?
College football is completely different than it was 20 years ago, same with college basketball. Freshman and sophomores are the ones that do a ton of heavy lifting, the whole concept of the grade hierarchy is done.
After the first few games, everyone knows what they are doing. Talent wins out.
You can expect it if you want, but you're the one setting yourself up for disappointment.
And where it gets sticky is when the team underperforms your unrealistic expectations. A lot of shallow fans have "my team is the best!" standards and then get mad when things go poorly. So they irrationally blame a coach, or coaches. Or a player. Or the refs. Anything but actually understanding that football is a difficult and complex game and a lot of stuff happens.
1997 doesn't undercut my argument at all, because 1997 didn't go undefeated on the backs of freshmen and sophomores. This team is way, way younger than 1997.
To disagree on the concept of youth. The depth may be new, but a lot of it (especially on defense) got enough snaps last year to understand what they are doing.
And would you rather have elite, young WRs or average, older ones? Guys like DPJ and Black can learn that position really quickly. Routes are all about repetition and timing. Once they work the kinks out in the first half of the season, everyone should be on the same page.
And I would argue that people who continue to kick the can down the road and say next year is our year set themselves up for more disappointment than someone like myself who gets tired of excuse making.
If he's the coach we all expect him to be, year 3 with the majority of his guys in the system should be pretty damn good.
I love our 2016-2017 WR classes and the Michigan Man in me expects Julio Jones and Anthony Carter type freshman years; however, the stats say that these guys will make some great plays while struggling with consistency.
I hope the team clicks and a few of the guys blow up into monsters and we dominate this season. Certainly possible, but not the most likely scenario.
that the passing game isn't going to be entirely dependent on 4 freshman WRs, two of which weren't here for spring ball. I'm pretty confident Perry will be back, then we have Bunting, Wheatley, McKeon, and then throw in Eubanks, Gentry, Johnson, McDoom, Schoenle ... maybe Ways ... split Evans or Isaac out into slot from time to time (we keep hearing about it, would love to see it) ... and I think the passing game will be pretty decent, perhaps good by end of year.
I agree with you and you forgot the guy who could end up being the leading receiver, which is Crawford.
but it doesn't preclude a 10-2 or 9-3 season. I will be psyched if we finish 10-2, might even be enough to make the playoffs this year.
1 loss, especially non-conference (Florida) & it's party time.
10-2 isn't likely a record that gives Michigan a playoff berth with the particular games at home being what they are. Must be 11-1 in my opinion and that loss probably can't be OSU.
But there will be a 2 loss playoff team at some point.
Well lets see: Speight,Mone,Cole,Marshall,Winovich,Harris.Watson,Bunting,JBB,Ways,Furbush Starting QB,Nose,LT,DE,TE and full time LB and maybe CB. I sure would not call that nothing else. At least five starters on a very talented team and at least that many getting drafted and Cole will be drafted higher than peppers possibly. It is not as good as it will be from next year on, but there is huge turnover at osu and I agree there should be no excuses this year as I feel we are the second most talented team in the Big Ten.
and still had some weaknesses due to poor recruiting in the late Hoke years.
One good bounce in either of the Iowa or OSU games last year and we were in the playoffs. Didn't work out so we move on.
As SRJK points out, the roster will be loaded in 2018 and 2019 (and probably every year thereafter with this coaching ./ recruiting staff). That is not a guarantee of a Natty or even playoff appearance but the talent will be there. I said that I "think" 2018 will be the year, doesn't mean it won't be 2017, 2019 or 2020 but it is my best guess.
With the great coaching and development plus the talent / depth we will have in future years, we will catch our breaks and make a few runs.
"One good bounce." All we really needed was one good drive where the OL opened enough space to gain a couple of first downs on the ground. We couldn't get them either in Kinnick or the Shoe.
The OL, by the way, is the main obstacle this year as well. The D will be talented but young and thus less consistent; the offensive skill position talent young but more athletic and gifted.
But the OL is just plain young. Scarily young.
But even with a mediocre OL, just one break in either game and we were in the playoff.
Cole-senior Bredeson-sophomore Kugler-fifth year senior Onwenu -sophomore Runyan-red shirt sophomore Really don't see the scarily young and all have experience.
by getting almost nothing from 2 entire recruiting classes - 2014 and 2015
it meant a lot of our depth came from freshman
we have gone 20-6 in 2 years with this massive gap - I think it ended up being like 8th best out of the power 5 schools - imagine when we get contributions from every class
I believe our floor this season is 8-4 - not horrible - and the ceiling is dependant on how the right side of the OL comes together in my opinion (and cornerbacks)
We have OSU at home and Peters will take over at QB. OL should be filled with seasoned veterans. Looks like a NC team to me.
Why are we talking about 2019?? Nothing will line up the way anyone predicts. One of those veterans could get hurt. Peters could regress/not live up to billing. Team could be upset.
I know, I am pulling back to the Carr era for this comparison. Same crap happened in 07. That team was supposed to be a runaway finalist for the championship game. Things happen.
Looking ahead 1, even 2 years is something that happens a lot with this fan base. Almost pre-made excuses in case Michigan isn't good in 17.
No reasonable person expected a championship run from the '07 team. The '06 team wasn't quite championship-level and lots of future pros (Jake Long, Leon Hall, David Harris, etc.) were drafted the next spring.
You must be getting more senile in your old age, that beard is getting even whiter lol.
There was a MASSIVE amount of hype around that 2007 team. From the fans to the media, people expected very, very big things from that team.