247 composite: #5 Overall, #4 in sight (for 2016)

Submitted by GoBlue on December 11th, 2017 at 1:37 PM

The addition of Shea Patterson would bump Michigan's total points on the 247 composite for the 2016 class to 290.95, good for 4th place (just above OSU).

If/when Deontay Anderson is in the fold, the resulting score of 296.62 would have been good for the 2nd overall spot in the rankings, behind only Alabama.

2016 Football Recruiting Composite Team Rankings

2016 Michigan Football Class Calculator (link to commit list which doesn't include Patterson & Anderson)

(For those who are interested, removing those two players from Ole Miss' class drops them from #5 to #12)

Edit: Thanks to StayingPositive/reddogrjw who pointed out that in this exercise, Asiasi & others (Davis, D. Johnson, N, Johnson, Davis) should be removed too. (Left Hawkins as he's still on the team & as many of you have been quick to point out, this means nothing in the real world anyway))

The resulting totals are 284.78 & 291.29, which would be good for 5th and 4th place, respectively.

I'm not trying to "prove" anything here, just looking at a general gauge of blue-chip talent, as FatGuyTouchdown observed.


Perkis-Size Me

December 11th, 2017 at 2:00 PM ^

I predict that I'm just going to shut my mouth about this game until Michigan actually finds a way to beat these fuckers. 

I'm sadly in a place now where until I physically see Michigan win, I'm always going to think they're going to just find a way to lose. Neg away but I know I'm not alone in that thought. 


December 12th, 2017 at 1:49 AM ^

I went to the 99 and 2003 games and saw 2 Michigan victories. I have been to every home game since then and they're 1-6. I've also seen two losses in the toilet bowl (2012 and 2016). I always somehow convince myself they have a shot, and then they manage to lose in excruciating fashion.


December 11th, 2017 at 1:42 PM ^

I appreciate the effort and this doesn't mean anything now. Patterson and Anderson both need to come in ready to compete and win. Going back to 2016 and saying "hey, look at us", isn't going to win us games. 


December 11th, 2017 at 1:50 PM ^

is that really any different than regular recruits? If regular recruits don't come in ready to compete their stars don't matter. I think it's a decent exercise to see the amount of blue chip talent that we're going to see with good experience under their belts, instead of just talking about the recruiting ranking.


EDIT: That being said, Michigan also lost 4 recruits since then, so I understand why this is kind of a pointless exercise by looking at recruiting rank, but there should be 27 guys with at least 2 years of experience from the 2016 recruiting class by next year without any more attrition. That's all I'm taking from it.


December 11th, 2017 at 2:15 PM ^

so essentially we both agree to the point I was making which was "viewing this from a recruiting rankings from 2016 standpoint" doesn't really mean anything. I'm happy about the transfers, and I hope they can both contribute in a meaningful way. I mean, we are literally one or two spots ahead when all the kids that left were taken out. So in actuality, when everything is considered, the OP makes it look like a spectacular ascension, when really Michigan has moved from 6th to 5th, possibly 4th.


December 11th, 2017 at 3:04 PM ^

Since you busted my chops on accuracy, I'll point out that a move from 8th to 4th (which happens with the addition of Patterson & Anderson & the removal of everyone else) is "literally" 4 places, not one or two as you asserted.  As I mentioned in a reply to one of your other numerous posts here, I thought that amount of movement was relevant.  If you and others do not, it doesn't hurt anyone.  

Again, I don't disagree with anyone who says they aren't interest in this concept. Adding volumes of comments saying basically the same thing just makes the board a less friendly (and user friendly) place to be.


December 11th, 2017 at 1:47 PM ^

I totally agree.  Just like looking at this year's ranking isn't going to win us any games. People still do it, for whatever reason(s) they find it interesting.

I have noticed previous discussions on the average recruiting ranking for playoff teams, etc. which is what got me thinking about it.  I in no way meant to imply this would somehow mean anything specific on the field, just playing around with what the class as a whole "looks like" with this updated iteration.


December 11th, 2017 at 2:22 PM ^

due to your edits that Michigan has maybe moved up one or two spots, from 6th. Your OP started in an ok spot, but without doing your homework ahead of time and removing players who no longer exist. You have actually made your post less relevant. Moving from 6th to 2nd, seems more noteworthy than moving 6th to 5th (maybe 4th).


December 11th, 2017 at 2:52 PM ^

Personally, I was curious to know how things changed in the rankings, whether it was a little or a lot.

I would also suggest that (theoretical) a move of four places from 8th to ~4th would represent a a much bigger deal than a move of four places from something like 25th to 21st.  Again, if that concept isn't of interest, no worries.

It seems that many feel strongly enought about the topic (at least in concept, if not content) to comment (in some cases multiple times.)  I in no way disagree with folks who say "so what?" as it relates to next season.  It's a quick little exercise which was of interst to some.


December 11th, 2017 at 6:36 PM ^

Patterson is a huge bump. We were defensively stout so now with a good offensive play we should do some serious damage. We could never align our offense and defense in the same year. 2000 offense. 2016 defense. Hopefully this will be close in 2018.


December 11th, 2017 at 2:10 PM ^

If you remove our attrition, you need to remove everyone else’s attrition, which I doubt you want to take the time to do. Like other posters said it means nothing but still kinda fun to think about.


December 11th, 2017 at 2:20 PM ^

Thanks to the OP for starting this; it crossed my mind today.


I see your efforts were rejected by some as this devolved into another bickering session about recruiting rankings. This board does a fantastic job of proving the point that you can't please everyone.


But know that at least one person here is appreciative of your efforts!




December 11th, 2017 at 2:28 PM ^

passive aggressive blogging, my favorite. I made the point that I thought the post was kind of useless, which isn't a personal shot at the OP, but rather my opinion of his post. Which is more productive, politely disagreeing with the OP's topic and generating respectful discourse or agreeing with it and then calling people out for not liking it? 


December 11th, 2017 at 2:57 PM ^

Not trying to pick a fight, but I'd say there is a difference between politely disagreeing, and posting 4 (now 5) different times with some variation of the same idea.

I think we all get it.  This is not heavy insight that is of any direct relevance to on-field production.  It is still a topic of interest to some.  If the thread weren't cluttered with a bunch of folks trying to tell others what is or is not relevant/interesting, perhaps it wouldn't be so annoying & tedious to review.


December 11th, 2017 at 3:32 PM ^

I'm simply responding to those that have responded to me. This blog is a collection of people's opinions, the notion that someone should just "not say anything" or tell others "what is or isn't relevant" goes against the idea of people freely posting opinions. People have commented on my OP's before with the same things, I had two choices 1) comment back to them that I thought MY topic was important or 2) realize that everyone has an opinion and just move on. 


December 11th, 2017 at 3:01 PM ^



What the actual fuck are you whining about?


I responded to an overall trend, that I was thankful for the point the OP brought up and commented globally on what happened afterwards.


But I guess a wannabe snowflake figured it was time again to be the focus of someone's attention, and since created victimhood is the new norm, he decided it was about time to whine about some perceived personal slight then sing his favorite song, "Do you want to build a Strawman?"