Is this current recruiting class as good as we think?
This year's recruiting class to date has drawn near unanimous praise, and some M fans are damn near ecstatic over the results so far. In particular, the last month's or so results have been undeniably strong. The dominance of Michigan based talent, in-roads into Ohio, and the list of top ranked recruits still listing us highly are all seen (rightly so) as a terrific start for the coaching staff. But is the overall quality of the recruits as top notch as the consensus estimates of the fan base?
To examine that, I looked at Rivals data for every year since 2002, when they first started rating. I looked at the total number of 4 and 5 star recruits each year, and then calculated that as a percentage of the overall class. As we know, 4 and 5 star recruits are what fans think of as "elite" recruits, and if you look at elite recruits as a percentage of the overall class, you can get a rough idea of the "quality" of that year's class.
There are major caveats with this approach, starting with a huge one; this year's class isn't finished being rated, since none of have even played a game as a senior in H.S. Also, the class isn't, like, complete. Finally, the usual caveats of recruiting ratings apply as well. But since fans are typically using ratings to proclaim their happiness with recruiting, it seems fair to at least look at the early ones, just as we do around here in Tim's "Hello' posts. So here goes:
YEAR- #4/5* of # in class (%)
2002- 11 of 21 (52%)
2003- 13 of 17 (77%!)
2004- 13 of 22 (59%)
2005- 10 of 23 (44%)
2006- 11 of 19 (58%)
2007- 7 of 20 (35%)
2008- 17 of 24 (71%)
2009- 14 of 22 (64%)
2010- 6 of 27 (23%)
2011- 6 of 20 (30%)
2012 to date- 7 of 16 (45%)
So of the 11 years that Rivals has recruiting rated, there have been 4 of those years that, by looking at 4 and 5 star percentage of class, this year's class so far has beaten. And of course 6 that had a higher percentage of the class rated as elite by Rivals. Again, I don't draw any conclusions here because of the above caveats, but I do find it interesting. What do you think?
EDIT: some asked about how this would compare to Scout's ratings. Here goes:
2002- 8 of 21 (39%) 2003-11 of 17 (65%) 2004- 10 of 22 (44%) 2005- 14 of 23 (65%) 2006- 10 of 19 (53%) 2007- 14 of 20 (70%, major outlier vs. Rivals) 2008- 15 of 24 (62%) 2009- 9 of 22 (40%) 2010- 9 of 27 (33%) 2011- 5 of 20 (25%) 2012 (56%)
So M this year so far, has a quality rating that has beaten 6 of it's past year's ratings, and trails 4 years.
http://michigan.scout.com/a.z?s=162&p=9&c=4&pid=65&yr=2012
Lists the player and national position rank (though they obviously don't always get those positions right)
Mat, he was pointing out "buy" vs. "by"
I know you reference this years' recruiting class, but I think the larger topic you may be getting at in whether this Hoke-A-Mania is going too far. Personally, coming off the season's we are I think this class is very impressive, and as noted will likely only get better as the remainder of our targets will likely be 4/5 star types.
Furthermore, you have to think that this quick start should allow the staff to increasingly focus on the class of 2013, which we can all agree has a great start in Morris.
Speaking of, let's hurry up and offer Steve Elmer (2013). He has a Wisconsin offer now, and there's talk about him camping at MSU this summer. All good state of Michigan student-athletes are belong to us.
so far, but there is no doubt that posters are overrating this class quite a bit. I've seen some truly ridiculous posts like "best Michigan recruiting class in the history of the school" and "top 3 nationally at the VERY LEAST."
People are overrating it (i) to hype up the new staff (nothing wrong with that but try and keep it rational at least to avoid being ND), and (ii) because the commits are coming in fast people seem to place more value on the strength of the class. Number (ii) really confuses me. Regardless, I'll just hope the class remains solid and cracks the top 10-15 nationally by the time NSD rolls around.
Instead of a 4 or 5 star lineman to pair with Diamond we pull Olson and he ends up a 3 star, and instead of Brionte Dunn we pull Sione Houma or Fatu and he stays a 3 star, and instead of Gunner Kiel we pull Appleby and he stays a 3 star, and Williams stays at 3, and Braden stays at 3, and Gant stays at 3, and Pharoah Brown drops to 3, and Bolden drops to 3. We would have 8 total 3 star kids and the other 18 would be 4 or above. 2003 LSU had the #1 class per Rivals with only 1-5star, 17-4stars, 10- 3 stars. They took 28, granted, but #2 was Florida with 5-5 stars, but only 9-4 stars, and 10-3 stars. We have Andrus Peat visiting camp next week, and made the top "5" (more like 3) for Kiel and other borderline 5 star kids. Magnuson could fall in the 5 star count for Rivals this year but I doubt it. If we land 1-5 star, 17 4 stars, and 8-3 stars which is almost identical to many of the top 3, and 1 top overall class then how is that overrated? It seems reasonable.
But I think that ranking services take more into account than just the stars... not all 4 stars are created equal. Although we seem to have a good number of 4 stars we do not seem to be in as many "Top 100" ranked players (not complaining, just pointing this out). I bet Rivals/Scout significantly gives more value to the #35 player in the country than one in the 200's.
I think this class is awesome, especially considering all the issues the program had over the past few years, but having been following recruiting since '97, this is still not one of the top classes, at least in terms of star power. Who knows, might end up even better on the field by having very good players who work hard...
The class is not YET as great as most are saying, but there is plenty of time left and most of the remaining scholarships seem to be reasonably likely to be filled by high end 4 stars.
The optimist will look at the '10 and '11 classes, which are down from the historical norm, and see major improvement and rave.
The pessimist will look at the '09 class and most classes before and not see any real improvement. Michigan has had top 5 classes before, but even now they're only ranked 6th (on ESPN) despite an enormous and temporary quantity advantage.
I tend to think the pessimist is right, but we won't know until February. So far, Hoke has done pretty well to bring Michigan recruiting BACK to what it was. Improvement over the recent past is good, but the bar hasn't been raised...yet.
The only tangible change that Hoke has brought so far is the timeline for commitments. How that manifests in terms of results is not yet clear, but it appears that it can have some benefits by allowing Michigan to focus on higher-end recruits for the remaining spots.
The pessimist will look at the '09 class and most classes before and not see any real improvement.But that's like accusing an A student of "not improving" after he gets a 95 on a test. If we can get our talent level to where it was a few years ago, when we were among the top five programs in sending players to the NFL, we'll be in good shape.
Michigan has done and can do better than 2009. The 10-15 range nationally is roughly a historical norm.
Getting back to that (after '10 and '11 down years) is a good step, but its not 'best class ever' or 'uber-class' or whatever other superlatives are getting thrown out there with regularity.
To me, comparing to 2010 and 2011 in recruiting is equivalent to comparing to 2008 and 2009 on the field. Michigan didn't consider 7 wins a raging sucess and I wouldn't consider a top 15 recruiting class a raging success either.
I don't disagree with that. I'm just saying that it's going to be hard to do much better than how we did before the past two seasons. The difference between say, the #12 class and the #5 class might be one or two fickle kids.
This class is coming together amazingly. I think a lot of our recruits will be moved up a decent amount throughout the year. Our class is being built up with great balance and talent. The class isn't over and as of now its a "great" class with the potential to be "amazing"
funny but i predicted there would be better than a punter's chance that we'd contend with the #1 recruiting class, citing mattison, hoke, playing time, etc, and got somewhat scoffed at, for it.
we're not. ok to be optimisitc, but not crazy.
link or gtfoh
I find it funny that Ondre Pipkins just released his top 7 and MSU didnt make the list
Tenn , Bama,UF ,Mizz,Oregon,Oklahoma and Michigan
You can't compare June rankings of a partially completed class against the final rankings of completed classes. A better comparison would be, "how does this class stack up against other classes at the same point in the recruiting cycle?"
I think by that yardstick... yes. This is a damn fine class.
No one is arguing that the timeline has changed dramatically, but a '11 May commitment is no more valuable than a '12 January commitment in the end.
I'm not arguing that it matters whether Kid X commits in January '12 or May ''11. But early commitments do matter here, because (a) it's the only data we have to go on, and (b) early commitments mean that the coaches are getting commits from their highest recruiting priorities.
Is it perfect? No. But it's a hell of a lot more "apples to apples" than attempting a side-by-side comparison between a bunch of finished products (which were graded on the end-of-season, more-stars scale) and something that has eight months to go. Entire classes have been grown in less time. Hell, human beings have been grown in less time.
If the question is, "Are we (MGoBloggers) overrating the current class?" I'd say yes, becuase people around these here parts of the world wide web seem to be talking about this class like it is the best in Michigan history, and the Hoke boys are the best recruiters in Michigan history.
I think the services are not neccessarily overrating our class. It is what it is. A very strong start. A reasonable guess (which is only a guess at this point) would have our class about as strong as OSU's when all is said and done, with an edge to ours based purely on numbers of available scholarships. That is what I predict, and I'll live with that prediction until the end of the year.
And, having said all of that, I think that fairness requires giving Brady Hoke and Mattison and Chris Singletary and Kurt Mallory and everybody else involved in recruiting credit for having done a really good job so far. The really telling thing is to see the OSU boards light up when they see players like James Ross, Chris Wormley, Tom Strobel and a few other guys who held legit offers and recruitment efforts from Columbus, all saying yes to Michigan.
You got "it is what it is" AND "Having said that" in the same post. TERRIBLE.
Now as for your "prediction" that Michigan will have a highly rated class based in large part on sheer numbers--when did you make that prediction? When this recruiting cycle began, UM had 18 scholarships to offer. That's not a lot. Even assuming some attrition (although there were reports of the kids bein g"ALL IN!"), you would assume the class would get to 20-21--still not a large class at all.
Oh my god--I just noticed you also used the word "telling" in your post.
Man, you belong in the Norm Crosby Message Board Guy Posting Hall of Shame.
Completely agree... and it is nice to finally see us winning some battles for recruits against some of the other big programs around the country.
I was going to just say "Yes." but I was bored so I went to look at some fun stuff.
2004 Class: 3 star Mike Hart
2005 Class: 3 star Zoltan Mesko
2007 Class: 3 star Mark Huyge
2007 Class: 3 star David Molk
2008 Class: 3 star Roy Roundtree
Just a quick sampling per Rivals rankings of some of the players that wouldn't qualify as "elite" recruits and there are many more that have become impact players who weren't in the four or five star category.
Also, unless I'm looking at something you aren't Rivals hasn't rated Gant, Ojemudia, Ringer, or Standifer.
That really means 7/12 (58.33%) so far are in the four/five star rankings and 4 are unranked.
Someone correct if I'm wrong, but punters and kickers rarely get rated above 3 stars.
This is a very good recruting class. Not great as of yet, but very good. Most of the 3 stars are borderline 3/4 stars and will probably get a 4th star soon, so that number will go up. As someone else said, Scout has 9/16 4 stars, which is a much better number.
Also, considering we just hired a new coach who hasn't had much time to make relations with some of these prospects and the schools and coaches, the fact that he's getting so many people to consider Michigan is very impressive.
You have to remember how many 4/5 stars who we've been in the top group for that we didn't get, and considerig that Hoke and Co have only had a couple months to work there way up with these guys and they've been sucessful doing so is very impressive. I would expect a significant jump from this year to next year's class because Hoke will have had longer to recuit the 2013 guys and he'll be able to make friends with coaches, parents, "mentors." etc.
Also, we still have a large amount of 4/5 star prospects who we are in on and might commit soon. Wormley, Pittman, Pipkins, Diamond, Thurston, Garmon, Dunn, Kalis, Wilon, Washington, Stanford, Burbridge and more are all4/5 star guys we could realisticaly get. Plus we already got a top QB prospect for next year who wil most likely be a 5 star in Morris.
Is this recruiting class good? Yes.
Is it the best ever? No.
Is it overrated by Michigan fans? Of course.
Is it pretty damn good considering we're coming off a 3-year debacle in which we had a 15-22 record and the worst defense in Michigan history, then hired a no-name head coach that nobody ever heard of outside of Ball State, San Diego State, and Michigan circles? Yes.
Context is important.
Exactly. I wish I new how to give points because this comment nailed it. How about some kudos, a gold star, smiley face, whatever it's yours.
How about a TTB link on the sidebar?
*knew
I'm not good at the grammar.
you can moderate when you get enough points. i think the threshold is 100. you'll get an email and the buttons will appear.
Does Michigan always get good recruiting classes?
Yes, unless they win 3-5 games, Michigan will recruit itself to a large extent. If you're going to do a 'great job' as a recruiter at Michigan you have to raise the bar a little bit and that means beating OSU/ND more often, landing some 5-stars, and winning some national battles. They're done some of that, but need to finish strong to stay in the top 10 nationally.
that Hoke is doing incredibly well. Pulling in a load of highly-rated players, of his KIND of players, pulling them in so quickly--all these are strong signs that he will succeed. Getting so far out in front of recruiting when there were so many institutional and other issues that he had to play catch up about, will stand us in good stead down the road.
Having all of this early support will help smooth things as the team loses its share of games this year, too. Hesitating players will know there is a nucleus for the future. I take it for granted that Mattison is going to field strong defenses; for me the whole question is Borges. There is quite a bit of pressure on him to show that he can both use Denard cleverly and transition. I don't envy him the task. Denard is under a hool heap o' pressure, too.
Percentage of 4- and 5-star recruits for the top ranked classes in 2011:
1. Alabama - 77%
2. FSU - 52%
3. Texas - 72%
4. USC - 50%
5. Georgia - 54%
6. LSU - 55%
7. Auburn - 58%
8. Clemson - 34%
9. Oregon - 48%
10. Notre Dame - 43%
11. Ohio State - 43%
12. Florida - 58%
13. Tennessee - 44%
14. Oklahoma - 53%
15. Nebraska - 58%
16. North Carolina - 36%
17. California - 45%
After that it drops off significantly. So if the class fills out consistently with the same level of recruits, we could probably expect a class ranked between 8-17.
Personally, I think the class will end up around 10-12 by the time all is said and done, unless the team COMPLETELY tanks this year and ends up 3-9 or something. If we go 8-4 or 9-3, something like that, then most of these kids will probably stick around and/or commit.
Nobody's saying it so I will: A good part of our enthusiasm for this recruiting class has to do with the quality of the two classes that preceded it. I was one of the people who occasionally questioned the quality of recruiting in the last two Rodriguez years. For every poster who did the same, there were many more who whined "omg 3 star mafia!!". I'm not here to say I was right, but it's certainly a relief not having a constant flame war. And to everyone who's so excited about this class: welcome aboard, you're implicitly a member of the 3 star mafia
Unless Michigan Robot actually qualifies this year, I will be disappointed. Also, need MOAR linebackers.
This class obviously isn't elite (and I don't think many people think that it is) but it's already a lot better than we could have expected not too long ago. Here's a quick list meant reflect the (apparently) uphill climb that the coaching staff has faced:
Funchess and Ojemudia: Thought to be uphill battles at one point b/c their school traditionally sends kids to MSU.
Bolden & Ringer: Two of Ohio's top linebackers, would have picked OSU if offered?
RJS, Ross, Richardson: Sam Webb thought for a time that they wouldn't all go to school together. RJS looked like the only Michigan lean at one point.
Stroebel: Considered an OSU lock by OSU fans not too long ago.
Magnuson: A California kid with no ties to Michigan at all (as far as I know) but for the coaching staff.
There's good reason to be excited about this class. We're cleaning up in the MIdwest, which rivals is biased against (there have been a few posts over the years showing that the Midwest produces NFL players in greater proportion than their rankings in rivals). If this doesn't end up being an outstanding class, it will only be because of the general talent level in Michigan and Ohio.
And when I look at the offer list of our commits, it looks better than commits of the same ranking from the past two years. A lot of our three-star guys have gotten quality offers. In the RichRod era, we were winning lots of battles for 3-star recruits against the likes of Boston College and South Florida. This last class has a couple of 4-star guys like Raymon Taylor and Kris Bryant who didn't get much love from major programs. The 2012 class, on the other hand, has guys like Ross, RJS, Richarson, Magnusson, and Strobel. Guys that OSU, Notre Dame, Nebraska, and OSU wanted. RichRod was losing middling 3-star recruits to programs like MSU and Iowa.
On top of that, most of the guys left on the board are 4-star guys. Dunn, Washington, Stanford, Pittman, Diamond, Burbridge, Dodson, Wilson, Pipkins, Shittu, to name just some of them. Not many 3-star guys left besides Mauk and Wormley, both of whom are more likely to move up than down.
Honest question, but why are people still using Rivals' rankiings all the time? Is it because they are more conservative with their stars? They don't even have a midwest evaluator this year (where our entire class is from, save Magnuson) and their rankings get more and more political every year. Rivals practically gives out an extra star to anyone that commits to a SEC school or performs well in the AAA Game.
Mostly good points, but what's wrong with recognizing success in a big game that's organized (entirely?) so that players can be brought together and evaluated carefully?
"Rivals practically gives out an extra star to anyone that commits to a SEC school or performs well in the [Under Armour] game."
ESPN gets the same criticism.
Is that regardless of how good the rankings look, from all appearances Michigan is getting the kids it wants. Whether the coaches are going after the right kids is a different question (I think they are, but I don't know shit), but the fact remains that Michigan is selling itself so well right now that the Se'Von Pittmans and Wayne Morgans of the world are (reportedly) left on the outside looking in.
Toss in a few OSU targets who strayed north and a shit-ton of Sparty priorities who have already committed, and these are some damn fine indicators.
I think that's what seems so exciting. Our batting average on 4* guys seems to be way higher than it has been. Like way way higher. (Obvious caveat that we have a jillion offers out)
I can think of a couple reasons why Michigan's very early class ranking shouldn't be compared with final rankings of year's past:
1. Some of the early commits will be 2-3 star types who are just thankful to get Michigan offers and want to get in early before their spots are filled. 4-5 star players are willing to survey the scene and consider their multitude of offers.
2. Rivals tends to shuffle uncommitted recruits upward and committed recruits downward to build more interest and hype as signing day approaches with headlines like "UNCOMMITTED 5 STAR VISITS WEST COAST!! JOIN AND PAY TO LEARN WHICH PAC10 POWER IMPRESSED HIM!!!" They always claim changes are based on senior year performance though.
I didn't have a chance to read all the replies so apologies if I'm repeating points already made upthread
To be fair, I think senior year performances HAVE had an effect on some of Michigan's recruits in recent years. For example, Ricardo Miller and Marvin Robinson are two guys who didn't exactly do great things as seniors. They were both 4-stars to begin with and dropped down to 3-stars, although eventually Robinson moved back up.
Here is the Scout.com avg from 2002- current. Along with our record that year. 4 and 5* recruits
2002
9/20 - 45%
10-3 (6-2)
2003
11/17- 64.7%
10-3 (7-1)
2004
10/22- 45.45%
9-3 (7-1)
2005
14/23- 60.87%
7-5 (5-3)
2006
10/20- 50%
11-2 (7-1)
2007
14/20- 70%
9-4 (6-2)
2008
15/25- 60%
3-9(2-6)
2009
9/22- 40.91%
5-7 (1-7)
2010
9/27- 33.33%
7-6 (3-5)
2011
5/20- 20%
Notice that some of our best seasons have been with lower % teams 2002 we were 10-3 with 45% of our team being 4* or higher. 2006 11-2 50% 4* or higher. With the exception of 2005 some of our best season have came with lower ranked recruits. I hope they do keep all of our prospects under rated. I know its already been said but Mike Hart was rated as a 3 star. So I wouldn't go putting too much trust in the * ratings
this is not a trend, correlation, or relationship - players from incoming recruiting classes rarely see PT and not enough to make much of an impact, so you can't make the conclusion you are trying to.
guys who never even made it at UM like Dorsey and Austin White in 2010. Players should be excluded if they never made it past fall ball their freshman year.
Although the statistics above are interesting and helpful, this class stands out for the following reasons:
1. We Were Nowhere. As of the 2011 U.S. Army All-Star Game, essentially NONE of the participating Juniors (Class of 2012) had Michigan in their Top 5 (something that had never happened before); mostly due to (a) Michigan's lack of success on the field in 2008-2010; (b) uncertainty regarding the coaching staff and future system; and (c) a preference for Pro Style offense and defense amongst most of the highest rated players with next level aspirations;
2. We Got a Very Late Start. Hoke was named Michigan's HD in mid January and did a VERY admirable job of retaining many of the previous coach's verbals while landing a surprising number of new commits from nowhere late in the process (but had no time to even start recruiting the Class of 2012 until after NSD in February);
3. We Reclaimed Our Home Turf. After losing the "pole position" in recruiting the highest ranked/best players in Michigan from 2008-2010; Hoke immediately landed most of the most coveted players in the Top 10 including a clean sweep of the Big 3 (RJS; JRoss; TRich) plus 2 of the Big 3 from Farmington Harrison (MSU turf); and essentially everyone else who we have offered and truly want (I'm still hoping we get O'Brien but would be thrilled with Pipkins);
4. We Surged to The Top. The number of recruits who have verbally committed this early in the process (compare Michigan to the rest of the Big 10 at this point);
5. We seem to be recruiting kids who really want to play for Michigan and Hoke/Mattison and the entire staff (more likely to qualify and less likely to de-commit and hopefully less likely to transfer);
6. The kids we are recruiting have SERIOUS BCS caliber offers (rather than considering MAC or Conference USA schools like many of our recruits the past three years);
7. As many posters have pointed out, we are still in the mix for many highly rated kids and many of the existing 3* (5.7) have the potential to move up to 4*;
8. There is a recruiting BUZZ around Michigan that we haven't seen in the past 3 years (and exceeds any that I recall in the ~25 years that I have been reading/devouring The Wolverine - and now Rivals and Scout and MGoBlog)...
Maybe this years class won't be in the top ten(most likely 11-15) but overall I would be satisfied given the hard work and determination our staff has put in.Next year though is a different story.If we get at least a 9-3 season I think 2013 class will be in the top five.Right now I wouldn't sweat these rankings as of now
Sorry for the repeated post..fail on my part
Comments