An informational post about the Rivals 100 players Michigan has recruited since 2002 got me thinking, and in this relatively quiet period, I decided I wanted to dig a bit deeper.

The question I set out to answer: How do these guys turn out?  At what rate do top recruits become top players in our program?  And how does that compare to other programs?

Given limited time, I compared us to only one other program: Ohio.  I used Rivals 100 data for position, stars, and rank.  The "Impact" data point is my subjective interpretation of a player's career impact; 3 is a high impact player (Solid starter to All-B1G type), 2 is a role player (contributor to starter), and 1 is a low impact player (did not produce for whatever reason).  These ratings are NOT based on talent or careers at other schools--only the player's impact where they signed their LOI.  Players who have not yet had the opportunity to demonstrate a rating are designated "n/a".  Players with an asterix have not yet signed.   And yes, some of you will argue with me, but my overall ratings are close enough to make some good starting points for conversation.  Here is the data, followed by conclusions:

NAME	POSITION	STAR	NATL RANK	YEAR	STATE	IMPACT
Chad Henne	QB	5	13	2004	PA	3
LaMarr Woodley	LB	5	14	2003	MI	3
Brandon Graham	LB	5	15	2006	MI	3
Donovan Warren	DB	5	25	2007	CA	3
Stephen Schilling	OL	5	26	2006	WA	3
Gabe Watson	DT	5	33	2002	MI	3
Shawn Crable	DE	4	39	2003	OH	3
Jonas Mouton	DB	4	45	2006	CA	3
Mario Manningham	WR	4	45	2005	OH	3
Prescott Burgess	DB	5	6	2003	OH	2
Will Campbell	DT	5	26	2009	MI	2
Tim Jamison	DE	4	40	2004	IL	2
Darryl Stonum	WR	4	41	2008	TX	2
Greg Mathews	WR	4	93	2006	FL	2
Ryan Mundy	DB	4	96	2003	PA	2
Terrance Taylor	DT	4	96	2005	MI	2
Ryan Mallett	QB	5	4	2007	TX	1
Kevin Grady	RB	5	22	2005	MI	1
Justin Turner	DB	4	35	2009	OH	1
Marques Slocum	OL	4	37	2005	PA	1
Carlos Brown	RB	4	39	2006	GA	1
Boubacar Cissoko	DB	4	44	2008	MI	1
Antonio Bass	ATH	4	49	2005	MI	1
Dann O'Neill	OL	4	49	2008	MI	1
Justin Boren	OL	4	64	2006	OH	1
Clayton Richard	QB	4	71	2003	IN	1
Alex Mitchell	OL	4	80	2004	MI	1
Cory Zirbel	OL	4	83	2005	KY	1
Jim Presley	LB	4	89	2003	MI	1
Adam Patterson	DT	4	91	2006	SC	1
Toney Clemons	WR	4	91	2007	PA	1
Matt Gutierrez	QB	4	96	2002	CA	1
Brett Gallimore	OL	4	96	2004	MO	1
James McKinney	DT	4	98	2005	KY	1
Doug Dutch	WR	4	98	2004	DC	1
Cullen Christian	DB	4	99	2010	PA	1
Derrick Green (*)	RB	5	8	2013	VA	n/a
Ondre Pipkins	DT	5	14	2012	MO	n/a
Kyle Kalis	OL	5	22	2012	OH	n/a
Henry Poggi (*)	DT	4	70	2013	MD	n/a
Erik Magnuson	OL	4	78	2012	CA	n/a
Shane Morris (*)	QB	4	81	2013	MI	n/a
Patrick Kugler	OL	4	82	2013	PA	n/a
Justice Hayes	RB	4	85	2011	MI	n/a

Let's start by looking at Michigan's "gets".  There are some definite correlations.  A higher national rank does indeed give a player a higher likelihood of making an impact.  Of the 36 players who received a rating, nine were 3's (high impact), eight were 2's (role players), and 19 were...not so good.  That gives Rivals 100 players during this period a 25% chance of being great, a 22% chance of being okay to good, and about a 53% chance of not being helpful at all.  Basically, it's about 50/50 on whether or not these kids make a positive impact at Michigan.

That said, of the nine players who were 3's, 6 were five-star players.  Two more five-star players made a 2 rating (Burgess & Campbell), and many would argue Burgess was a 3 (erroneously, but they would argue).  That means roughly 80% of your five-star players end-up solidly contributing, and of the two that didn't--Mallet and Grady--only Grady was a complete bust, as Mallet went on to SEC stardom.

Of the 20 players who were 1's, 10 were ranked 80th or lower nationally, and only six were ranked higher than 40th.

I think it's important to consider that this time period includes two tumultuous coaching changes and a year of "lame-duck" coaching from Carr.  I do not believe it will be representative of our success going forward, but it's the data we have.

NAME	POSITION	STAR	NATL RANK	YEAR	STATE	IMPACT
Terrelle Pryor	QB	5	1	2008	OH	3
Theodore Ginn, Jr	DB	5	2	2004	OH	3
Chris Wells	RB	5	3	2006	OH	3
Mike Adams	OL	5	3	2008	OH	3
Michael Brewster	OL	5	12	2008	FL	3
Alex Boone	OL	5	20	2005	OH	3
DeVier Posey	WR	5	21	2008	OH	3
Donte Whitner	DB	4	27	2003	OH	3
Marcus Freeman	LB	4	31	2004	OH	3
Corey Brown	DB	5	31	2009	PA	3
Braxton Miller	QB	4	34	2011	OH	3
Maurice Clarett	RB	5	37	2002	OH	3
Brandon Saine	RB	4	50	2007	OH	3
Andrew Norwell	OL	4	59	2010	OH	3
Doug Datish	OT	4	68	2002	OH	3
Quinn Pitcock	DT	4	72	2002	OH	3
Doug Worthington	DE	4	80	2005	NY	3
Robert Rose	DE	5	17	2006	OH	2
Etienne Sabino	LB	4	46	2008	FL	2
Garrett Goebel	DT	4	64	2008	IL	2
J.B. Shugarts	OL	4	87	2008	TX	2
Mike D'Andrea	LB	5	29	2002	OH	1
Lamaar Thomas	ATH	4	33	2008	MD	1
Louis Irizarry	TE	4	38	2003	OH	1
Justin Zwick	QB	4	40	2002	OH	1
Connor Smith	OL	4	55	2006	OH	1
Kyle Mitchum	OL	4	56	2004	PA	1
Jaamal Berry	RB	4	56	2009	FL	1
Eugene Clifford	DB	4	60	2007	OH	1
Kenny Hayes	DE	4	68	2011	OH	1
Raymond Small	WR	4	88	2006	OH	1
Duron Carter	WR	4	90	2009	FL	1
Dorian Bell	LB	5	33	2009	PA	1
Jamie Wood	DB	4	74	2009	OH	1
Curtis Grant	LB	5	2	2011	VA	n/a
Noah Spence	DE	5	9	2012	PA	n/a
Adolphus Washington	DE	5	25	2012	OH	n/a
Mike Mitchell*	LB	5	26	2013	TX	n/a
Jalin Marshall*	ATH	4	35	2013	OH	n/a
Cameron Burrows	DB	4	39	2013	OH	n/a
Michael Bennett	DT	4	41	2011	OH	n/a
Joey Bosa*	DE	4	47	2013	FL	n/a
Marcus Hall	OL	4	52	2009	OH	n/a
Tommy Schutt	DT	4	64	2012	IL	n/a
Roderick Smith	RB	4	65	2010	IN	n/a
Ezekiel Elliott*	RB	4	84	2013	MO	n/a
Eli Apple	DB	4	89	2013	NJ	n/a
Evan Lisle*	OL	4	90	2013	OH	n/a
Se'von Pittman	DE	4	95	2012	OH	n/a

Ohio's data gives us 35 rateable recruits to our 36.  They show a similar correlation, with higher rankings and five-star players much more likely to be 3's.  Of their 35 rated players, 17 were 3's, 4 were 2's, and 13 were 1's.  That means roughly half (49%) of their rated players were 3's, and about 37% were 1's.  Interestingly, many of their 1's were players who had trouble with the law--an issue that was much less prevalent with Wolverines.

The comparisons are pretty obvious: Ohio has gotten much more production out of their top recruits.  This is, no doubt, partially attributable to mostly consistent coaching through the period by one of the best in the game (even if was a lying cheater).  Ohio also had higher-ranked recruits--their average national ranking is 45.9 to Michigan's 55.2--and were much more geographically concentrated in Ohio and the midwest than Michigan's players.

Another interesting bit of data is that position does not seem to make much of a difference.  LBs are probably the most successful recruits, but it matters very little.  National ranking seems to correlate with impact regardless of position.

Going forward, my expectation is that roughly two-thirds (60-66% would be good) of Rivals 100 recruits end-up as solid contributors or better for Michigan, with about half becoming impact players.  Unfortunately, the lower rankings of this year's four Top 100 recruits (Morris is 81 and Kugler 82) would suggest they have a smaller chance of being successful, while Poggi is most likely to be at least a contributor and Green has a 50/50 chance of being great.  If Green finishes his career as a 3, and we get two 2's out of the other three, it will have been a very good year.  If there are two 3's, it's a great year, and if there are two or three 1's, things didn't go so well.

I do believe our success with top talent will say a lot about or staff and look forward to revisiting this in 2016, when Hoke has had a full five-year cycle to demonstrate how well he can maximize talent.

GO BLUE.

EDIT: After some honest thought and good criticism, I bumped Will Campbell up to a "2".  It's a "meh" difference statistically, but he probably earned it this year.