247 releases final Top 247

Submitted by ish on January 15th, 2013 at 1:27 PM

247's final Top 247 is not the most kind ranking system applied to M's class.  David Dawson is our highest rated commit on their site, coming in at 65 overall.  The rest of our class breaks down as follows:

  • 80 - Dymonte Thomas
  • 81 - Shane Morris
  • 97 - Patrick Kugler
  • 103 - Kyle Bosch
  • 108 - Taco Charlton
  • 120 - Henry Poggi
  • 129 - LTT
  • 137 - Chris Fox
  • 190 - Maurice Hurst
  • 194 - Mike McCray
  • 199 - Ben Gedeon
  • 218 - DeVeon Smith

Derrick Green checks in at 84 overall.

247 lists Michigan's class 6 overall.  The question for the recruitniks/talent evaluators: is M's class lacking top end talent/supreme playmakers or are 247's rankings unduly harsh to our commits?  Obviously this isn't bad - 6 overall is an incredible class.  I'm just surprised by some of the rankings here.

Comments

LSAClassOf2000

January 15th, 2013 at 6:39 PM ^

If you narrow it down to conference, we get about a third of the currently committed recruits going to schools in our conference. Granted, this involved a lot of manual counting, so there might be spot errors, but among those 208 who list a commitment, here is the approximate Big Ten breakdown.

TEAM # OF COMMITTED 2013 RECRUITS % OF CONF. TOTAL % OF OVERALL TOTAL
Michigan 13 32.50% 6.25%
Ohio St. 12 30.00% 5.77%
Penn St. 4 10.00% 1.92%
Nebraska 3 7.50% 1.44%
Wisconsin 2 5.00% 0.96%
Northwestern 2 5.00% 0.96%
Michigan St. 2 5.00% 0.96%
Illinois 1 2.50% 0.48%
Indiana 1 2.50% 0.48%

 

TheDirtyD

January 15th, 2013 at 1:32 PM ^

Shane's bad UA game doesn't help him which hurts us. It's a great class but there are other great classes this year too. We don't have all these flashy skill players in this years class. Which I think hurts

ChuckWood

January 15th, 2013 at 1:38 PM ^

Solution is simple.  We are loading the trenches and building something that will become very appealing to recruits.  Who wouldn't want to run behind an all-star o-line?  And who wouldn't want to have all day to get open so Shane Morris can throw to them?

If you build, they will come.

And if that doesn't work, hire Tom Brady and Charles Woodson as position coaches in a few years.  That'll do it.

ChuckWood

January 15th, 2013 at 2:01 PM ^

Hey, we talked about a mascot...

And I'm serious.  People want to talk about "Michigan men" being involved, hire big names.  Tom Brady ever contributes to the team and welcome back quarterback U.

Also, go back to Nike.  And build a wall around the state.  A real one, not immaginary.  Problem solved.

crazyjoedavola

January 15th, 2013 at 3:32 PM ^

I don't see recruiting as a problem for Michigan under this staff.  The lines were very thin and that has been addressed through the last 2 classes.  Once the offense starts gaining yards through RBs and putting up solid passing numbers, an upgrade in skill position players will naturally occur.  So it will come down to whether our coaching staff can develop players and coach with all the top programs.

Johnny Blood

January 15th, 2013 at 5:40 PM ^

I don't know if he's ever addressed it, but Michigan fans weren't exactly overflowing with love for Tom back in the day when he was a student there.  I recall many of game where a large portion of the stadium was cheering for Henson anytime Brady would make a mistake.

While I would love to have him back in AA, the elite of the elite guys (which I think he has clearly proven he is among) usually don't going into coaching or broadcasting when they're done. 

I Like Burgers

January 15th, 2013 at 2:11 PM ^

Said this before, but it wasn't just the UA game for Shane that lead to his drop.  He performed below expectations at nearly every major camp he went to this summer -- Elite 11, The Opening, and then the UA Game.  All of those scouting sites have people around for the practices too, and Shane looked the same during the UA practices as he did during the game.

All that being said though, he's still top 5/top 10 at his position, which is pretty goddamn good.

turtleboy

January 15th, 2013 at 2:24 PM ^

We'll be fine for qb depth. DG will get a redshirt, plus we'll take 1 or 2 qbs next year, so we could have 5. We'd have rs senior Devin, rs junior Bellomy, rs freshman Shane, and a true freshman or two.  We could likely land 2015 Cass Tech qb sensation Jayru Campbell who won back to back state championships as a freshman and sophomore as well. Alabama and ND are already after him, lol.

HarBooYa

January 15th, 2013 at 7:05 PM ^

Lets not presume Jayru is committed here. We need depth at qb and we need it ASAP. We locked ourselves out of another one by over relying on Morris in this class. Seems like a lot of pressure to put on the kid. In Mykonos we must get two qbs next year. We don't want to rely on walk ons. Being back the qb factory years.

vnperk

January 15th, 2013 at 2:10 PM ^

OSU is ranked the #2 class, a full four spots above us, despite having 4 fewer commitments and 1 less 4-star. I'm not sure how they end up composing these rankings, but that doesn't make much sense.

All things considered, I think Rivals team rankings make the most sense. The methodology is transparent and simple (unlike 247), and they only count the top 20 commits in each class, taking out an oversigning bonus you'd get at Scout.

goblue1213

January 15th, 2013 at 1:44 PM ^

They have Green 84th? Scout has him at 6, rivals and espn both have him in the 30s. Any clue what they see that no-one else does? Or is just them hating?

ken725

January 15th, 2013 at 1:52 PM ^

Sometimes there is some bias involved.

Take EJ Levenberry for example.  He only speaks to Mike Farrell and you can tell in the way he is rated.  Rivals has him #38 in the nation and all other services have him in the 250+ range.

 

elaydin

January 15th, 2013 at 1:55 PM ^

I assume they're not just "hating".  I don't see the problem with one recruiting site having a different opinion than the others.  What's the point of having a site if you're just going to copy ratings from Scout and Rivals?

247's internal ratings even differ.  For example, the Bill Kurelic Ohio ratings are often very different than the 247 national ratings.

Dutch Ferbert

January 15th, 2013 at 2:01 PM ^

I hate the layout of this site. It's funny how a blog such as mgoblog can look so much more professional and user friendly than a national recruiting service's website.

It's funny how MIchigan has 17 four stars to Ohio's 16 and 8 three stars to Ohio's 5 and yet Ohio is ranked 4 spots higher (and neither have a 5 star). I haven't read their methodology, but I'm okay being 4 spots below Ohio based on these numbers.

Don't tell the national media, but it looks like Hoke might be able to compete with Urban on the recruiting trail.

woodfeld

January 15th, 2013 at 2:54 PM ^

OSU is also ranked #5 overall by 247 (#2 using the composite rankings)

OSU recruits point ratings - 1 96, 6 95's, 4 94's, 1 92, 1 91, 5 90's (18 4-stars under 247 rankings, 16 4-stars using the composite rankings) 

UM recruits point ratings (in order) - 3 95's, 6 94's, 3 92's, 1 91, 4 90's (17 4-stars under 247 rankings, 17 4-stars using the composite rankings)

Dutch Ferbert

January 15th, 2013 at 3:19 PM ^

Thanks for the info. I figured they probably had more detailed ratings than just 4 or 5 stars.

But what's the difference between a 96 and a 95? Or a 91 and a 90? How is that calculated? Who is doing the calculating?

Recruiting is subjective. Again, there is some merit to the recruiting services because they are often right about their projections, and I would rather have all 4 and 5 stars than 3 and 4 stars. However, in the end, the differences in quality between Michigan and Ohio's classes are miniscule, especially when taking into account the subjective nature of recruiting.

I think the best way to look at recruiting (besides looking at the class 4 or 5 years later) is to look at whether or not the team is filling positions of need and how each recruit is ranked by all the recruiting services.