2019 Recruiting Outlook: Post Daxton Hill Decommitment Edition

Submitted by Gentleman Squirrels on December 9th, 2018 at 1:44 PM

Current Commits: 23

Expected Commits: 28-30, so 5-7 spots left

  • QB (1) : Cade McNamara
    • Projection: Done for the class
  • RB (1): Zach Charbonnet
    • DJ Williams; unlikely to come to Michigan
    • Projection: Done for the class
  • WR (4): Giles Jackson, George Johnson III, Quintel Kent, Mike Sainristil
    • Cornelius Johnson; Recent report from Steve Wiltfong suggests that Michigan is a real player, but Stanford is most likely the leader
    • Kyle Ford; USC has been leader and Kliff Kingsbury addition probably helps them out; longshot to Michigan
    • Jaylen Ellis; Michigan is in contention 
    • Projection: Cornelius Johnson is the most likely bet
  • TE (1): Erick All
    • Sam Snyder; Coach Moore recently visited him in home and he has set a visit for Michigan. He's a kid that's been blowing up with offers but Michigan hasn't offered yet, most likely due to seeing how many spots there are in the class
    • Projection: Sam Snyder if offered
  • OT (2): Trente Jones, Karsen Barnhart
    • Trevor Keegan; Recent run of crystal balls suggest that Keegan is coming to Michigan
    • Danielson Ike; Ed Warriner has made it a point to keep in touch with him and get him back on campus; He will make a return visit to Michigan soon
    • Dawand Jones; New kid that has been blowing up with offers. Michigan has crystal balls but not sure how hard Michigan is pushing for him
    • Projection: Trevor Keegan and Ike or Jones (most likely Ike)
  • OG (3): Nolan Rumler, Zach Carpenter, Jack Stewart
    • Chris Akporoghene; visited Michigan this past weekend. Listed as a tackle but doesn't have the prototypical size
    • Projection: Done for the class

From the push made to recruit multiple OL, it seems that the staff wants at least two more OL

  • DE (3): Gabe Newburg, Mike Morris, David Ojabo
    • Zach Harrison; You all know about him. Michigan leading in crystal balls but who really knows
    • Projection: Zach Harrison
  • DT (2): Mazi Smith, Chris Hinton
    • D'Von Ellies; New offer after Karlaftis reaffirmed to Purdue. Seems to be favoring PSU but visit to Michigan in the works
    • Jared Harrison-Hunte; Same story as Ellies with visit plans in the works; Miami(YTM) may be in mix
    • *My expectation is Mike Morris will move inside similar to Carlo Kemp
    • Projection: Done for the class
  • LB (2): Charles Thomas, Amauri Pesek-Hickson
    • Quavaris Crouch; Clemson has all the crystal balls. Michigan is always in contention but who knows
    • Projection: Done for the class
  • Viper (1): Joey Velazquez
    • *Quinten Johnson said he may play at the position as well but with Hill de-committing, it's unlikely
    • Projection: Done for the class
  • CB (2): DJ Turner, Jalen Perry
    • *Perry may be a better fit for safety
    • Projection: Done for the class
  • S (1): Quinten Johnson
    • Josh Sanguinetti; Had interest in Michigan for a while but it may have faded when Hill committed
    • Jamal Hill; Michigan is listed as warm on 247. Tall, fast safety that may be a under radar option
    • Projection: Jamal Hill



December 9th, 2018 at 4:11 PM ^

So you're unhappy unless we're top 5?  Well Bama, UGA, OSU, and Clemson don't play fair.

I'm not naive, all schools pay players, but these 4 schools decide to have a unfair advantage.

That means we have to be the best cleaner program every year.  Just not possible, ND, USC, PSU, Oklahoma, Texas.

And all the other schools who decide to get dirtier for a year or two.  Ole Miss, FSU, TAMU etc.

Just not realistic.


December 9th, 2018 at 2:32 PM ^

If you add Harrison and Keegan you're looking at 3 T100 guys and 8 T200. That's good but far from excellent. The team ranking may well be top 10 because it is a large class but the average rating will be around 88 and outside of the top 10. Eight guys outside the top 500. There are probably some gems, but there are also some reaches because we aren't getting top guys. 


Maybe that worked for Clemson but there are 10 other schools that didn't become Clemson as they don't get to compete against pervasive mediocrity in the ACC and because no DeShaun Watson ever walked through the door. To compete at a CFP level, the recruiting will have to be better, or we'll have to find a true star at QB. None of the current QB recruits or players are close to that level. 


December 9th, 2018 at 3:07 PM ^

There are hundreds of four stars every year, few are true difference makes on that level. The overall point is that to compete at a higher level we need either stronger talent across the board or a winning lottery ticket at QB (Watson, Young, Newton, Winston). That's pretty much how college football works.


That's great that MSU won the B1G in 2010 when they didn't have to play OSU. Or that they won it in 2012 during the Fickell year that OSU took off. I don't think we can count on those as strategies for winning the conference in the future. We yeah, in one season, anything can happen, as demonstrated by PSU and MSU (with the punt fumble). You're right that a lot can happen in one year, and maybe that's enough to lift up the program. 


The whining about people being too negative or positive or whatever on the board when someone has a different opinion is tedious and childish. My perspective is based on what I've seen while following M football for 3 decades so if you don't agree, ok, whatever. While recruiting isn't everything, it is also certainly true that our best on the field results have matched our recruiting and that historically when we were closer to parity on recruiting. Go back and read some of Seth's historical posts too or look at how we fared recruiting wise from the mid-80s to ~2004. Our classes are good, but not quite up to those historical standards. 


December 9th, 2018 at 3:16 PM ^

UM’s recruiting actually is up to those standards.  UM generally recruits at a top 10-12 level historically. 


It is tedious and childish to be hyper-negative about a program that is under Harbaugh equivalent to what it has been since 1968. The difference is UM isn’t getting shared conference titles like they did under Bo. S



December 9th, 2018 at 2:42 PM ^

Average rating is kind of silly. Take out our four lowest rated commits and that average would probably jump above 90. Does that mean the class is better? Not at all. Just means you have a smaller class. Obviously if we replaced some of our 3* with 4*, it would be ideal but I don’t really look at it that way. JH is going to take a TE and FB and Viper in almost every class. These players are almost always rated lower because most schools don’t value such players, which will drag our rating down slightly. 


I look at our top 15-20 players per class. Are they in the same ballpark as the top 15-20 in the other top 10-15 classes. If so, cool. 


December 9th, 2018 at 3:23 PM ^

Whether or not the class is better is debatable. Sometimes you do need to fill positions with warm bodies based on depth and how talent is spread across classes. But otherwise, yeah, you are worse off by tacking on a bunch of low 3 stars because you only get 85 either way so filling those slots with lesser talent comes with an opportunity cost for as long as those recruits are on the roster. Replacing our 3* with 4* is exactly how you should look at it, it would help the overall talent level. I do agree that TEs and FBs and K/P aren't really rated in a way that is meaningful. Viper, I don't necessarily agree there, look at Jabrill, that spot can and should be an athlete even if they are a tweener position wise.


I mean, not every recruit is going to be a blue chip but count up the top 15-20 per class if that is how you are looking at it. In the 2018 and 2019 classes we have 2 T100 players and 10 total T200 players across 43 commits/enrollees. Contrast that with OSU having 17 T200 players and 23 T200 players out of 42 commits/enrollees. We need more top level talent to compete more effectively. 


December 9th, 2018 at 4:18 PM ^

Jabrill was considered a DB though. Our current viper commits are tweeners - too small for LB, too big for S. Without a true position, services aren’t going to rank them. If they can play the position, cool. I don’t care where they’re rated. 

And you fill your class. It doesn’t make sense to take fewer numbers just because some might not be rated highly. And we’ve continued to recruit pretty solid players. Everyone we are waiting on is a 4* or better expect for one or two guys. We get our current targets committed, I think we can safely assume a few of our lower rated guys will be encouraged to look elsewhere. But of course, bird in hand. 

Diagonal Blue

December 9th, 2018 at 1:51 PM ^

Some of this is simply incorrect. For example Michigan's name with Sanguinetti and Jamal Hill haven't been mentioned in months. Maybe that changes in the wake of Daxton Hill's decommitment but nothing to suggest that it will yet. Wiltfong's report on Cornelius Johnson was that it's likely to come down to PSU or UM for Johnson and that UM has the edge. He also said Jaylen Ellis is leaning toward UM based on his intel. At linebacker UM is still recruiting Kalen Deloach and Anthony Solomon and has a good chance at both. 

Gentleman Squirrels

December 9th, 2018 at 2:00 PM ^

I appreciate the input. I made guesses that the staff will pursue more safeties after Dax and Sanguinetti and Hill were my best guesses. 

Thanks for the info about Johnson and Ellis. I don’t have a 247 account so didn’t know much about Johnson’s interest in PSU but I did know it was good news overall for Michigan.

Definitely forgot about Deloach and Solomon. That’s my mistake.