Michigan Offensive and Defensive players with NFL contracts the past 5 years.
I'll always be more impressed with Michigan getting Poole drafted in the First round and Duncan Robinson's success...over Duke being attributed with getting Zion to the league or other schools turning 5*s into draft picks.
Some things were pretty much inevitable, No matter what. And some things show how much a program can help you reach your goals if you put in the work.
For Michigan Football...
You now have the former walk-on, DRAFTED Glasgow Trio.
Zach Gentry being in the top 300 of his draft class at a different than initial position was great to see.
3* Uche being a 2nd round pick despite not even being on the field a majority of the time.
For any great story you hear about Michigan, there's always a "Yeah, but...". I just like for it to be people that Don't like Michigan as the ones adding it. They're funny jokes until another school uses it to recruit against you.
~~As far as the NFL Draft (where the Top 300 players are drafted) is concerned, in any given year there are some schools that have better recruiting classes than Michigan does, especially when looking at the top end recruits, BUT Michigan, despite not getting as many Top 100 recruits somehow cranks out more players in that Top 300 of the Draft than they do.
That should be the most significant and telling thing when talking about development and connections for the Professional next level. The talent gap is a completely separate discussion.
**To close the gap in Talent, Michigan has to erase the notion that there's a gap in Development.**
That offensive stat is pretty surprising. I suppose it probably includes people who signed as UDFAs.
We do a great job at developing NFL talent. What matters more is getting elite HS talent to perform right when they get on campus, without regard to their future NFL endeavors. This is college football. Our coach was elite in the NFL. We need elite freshmen.
I’d give your quote a ‘sort of’ distinction. For the most part, Harbaugh has done a good job developing players for the NFL and getting them drafted.
There’s just one small problem: It doesn’t matter what level of football we’re talking these days, it’s all about scoring points. Everything these days is offense, and Michigan’s development and use of offense skill players has been putrid for going on over a decade. Obviously, not all of that is on Harbaugh, but for the life of me I cannot figure out what happened to our QB’s after the plane landed in Iowa City in 2016.
Fresno State has put a Pro Bowl QB, RB and WR in the NFL since the last time we had an offensive skill position player drafted that made a Pro Bowl (Braylon Edwards). We’ve probably only had one or two players since him that were ever considered ‘above average’ in the NFL (Avant and Breaston). In terms of on-field performance, it’s what has killed Michigan in the Harbaugh era.
It’s not all about 5 starzzz.
You keep trotting out that tired Fresno State stat -- what the hell does that have to do with Harbaugh and the overall strength of UM recruiting or even team performance? As an example, Tom Brady is the greatest QB to ever play IMO, but if I look at his UM career objectively I would struggle to put him in the top 5 at UM.
Also, when was the last time an OSU QB went to a Pro-Bowl? Go ahead....I'll wait.
If I recall Haskins was the first OSU QB taken in the first round in about 40 years. And yet given these facts, I would still take OSU's QB performance for the last 15+ years over Michigan's -- lack of pro bowls be damned.
The Fresno State part is simply an example to a singular point in my discussion that you don’t need 5 starzzz and the greatest college coach(es) on earth to develop high end NFL players. There seems to be some that feel you can only pump out elite NFL talent with 5 starzzz or national championship team talent and I feel strongly against that.
For the record, Pro Bowls are not everything when you’re measuring what makes a ‘good’ NFL players. Honestly though, I don’t really get what your point is about Haskins, OSU qb’s and what I was talking about.
-1 for excessive z’s
Perhaps I misunderstood your point, but that is because it is unclear and frankly a red herring. You say that only scoring points matters, but then you bring up the fact that Fresno State has produced pro-bowl skill players recently while UM hasn't. My original questions stands -- what the hell does this have to do with anything?
The logical conclusion from you saying that scoring points is what matters and then talking about our lack of pro-bowl level NFL skill players is that one has to do with the other --- based on what? This is why I bring up the OSU QB example --- OSU has clearly failed to produce a pro-bowl level QB in... ever? (seriously don't know, but none come to mind) but yet they have an elite college offense and score a metric shit ton of points (particularly against us). So again, what is your point with the Fresno State stat?
Maybe I was unclear or confusing so I’ll try again. Point one was football is a game now centered around scoring lots of points quickly. All I meant by that was there’s a larger emphasis on offensive skill position players now than there was 25, 15 maybe even 10 years ago at all levels of football. In my eyes, Michigan is lagging behind almost all of their contemporaries in the development and deployment of their offensive skill players and it’s shown by their draft spots and overall lack of success in recent years.
The second point is not exactly related to the above, but what I was getting at is there seems to be some fans that feel only Bama and Clemson have the ‘croots and developmental skills NFL teams are looking for and I disagree with that wholeheartedly.
Apologizes if I was confusing but I hope that helps.
100% agreed
Could I get a list of Michigan offensive and defensive players who have won an outright Big Ten Championship in the last 15 years ?
Have you ever won one in the past 150 years? Have you played a snap?
WTF does that have to do with anything? The old "You never did X, so you can't possibly judge if someone else is doing it badly!" argument is really kinda dumb.
He called a shit comment a shit comment by blasting the poster. You will note the shit comment is getting negbanged appropriately. So he decided to go one step further, that's all it has to do with.
If the "you never did X" comment were replied against say the OP - well sure, then you have a point. When it's used against an asshole? You can roll your eyes and say UPMichigan's post is unnecessary, and yeah, probably true, but then, what's your reply but a blast? So if his blast has no value, yours doesn't either... His is at least targeted against a shit comment.
The exact "Yeah, but" comment I knew was coming.
Ultimately, it's the gap in team performance that matters, not the gap in talent. Individual NFL contracts have nothing to do with getting it done as a team in college. Chalk it up to whatever combination of sub-par talent, sub-par player development and sub-par scheme and in-game coaching you want, Harbaugh is a 9-3ish coach, and there is no sign of him raising his ceiling.
This is one of those deals I'll chalk up to talent available, talent developed into NFL ready players not just physically but mindset, interview, work ethics. Which leaves the elephant in the room. Can't win big games due to game planning. We hang with big teams. They adjust, and shut the door. I'll even add OSU officiating bias. The new four team formula demands perfect. Is it in the best interest for the B1G to have 11-0 OSU or 9-2 UM win the east?
The formatting and caps and bold and everything in this post gives me real #forwardsfromgrandpa vibes
Harbaugh needs time, which is not something fans want to hear. He had almost no college coaching experience he could draw upon when he took over this job since Stanford was a completely different animal than coaching Michigan. The recruiting was very different. The expectations were very different (Stanford was as bad of a football program as any when he took it over). It didn't help that the media had it out for him the second he fell short of their unrealistic expectations.
There's a difference between Harbaugh not doing a perfect job up until this point and Harbaugh being an inadequate coach or the wrong person to lead Michigan football moving forward. The best thing about him is his willingness to adapt. The program is improving. Have a little patience.
Fantastic post! True Michigan fans will appreciate it.
How is the program "improving"? Harbaugh was a 9-3 coach when he started, and six years in, he still is. We've been "patient" for 5 years, but he shows no sign of being able to take this team to the next level any time in the foreseeable future. All you have is wishful thinking and finger crossing.
Dabo Swinney had no head coaching experience at all when he took over at Clemson. Harbaugh had 7 years in college and 3 in the pros before he got here. But according to you, he was starting completely from scratch.
I'll take 9-3 over RRod or Hoke. It's easy to say "chuck Harbaugh" and roll the dice, but guess what, we can lose that roll too, and damned if I want to go back to watching abysmal offense or abysmal defense and nothing in between. Gattis is giving me some hope, and if we start scoring it takes pressure off Brown's defense, which allows him to be more aggressive.
Assuming no shenanigans, do you really think Clemson knew ahead of time they had a NC coach in Dabo or were they just hoping? If you answer the former you're wrong.
Sure there's a portion of the population that says NC or fail - they're all wrong, always wrong, and never even close to anything but wrong. Don't be wrong.
I'll take 9-3 over RRod or Hoke.
No shit. 9-3 is better than the two worst coaches in Michigan's history. If that's the metric Harbaugh gets graded with he's a lucky dude.
We had a good coach in Carr and folks trashed him for not giving us another NC. In the process of replacing him we ended up with our two most recent coaches (their ranks among the M coaches all time notwithstanding) - I grant you, another roll of the dice likely won't end up as bad as either of them, but the odds that we can just keep firing and replacing and somehow we'll magically end up making the impatient fans happy are about nil.
My point wasn't to suggest that we'll get another Rodriguez, it was to say that shooting for national championships tends to backfire more often than succeed even if one's program is prepared to sell their souls. I'll take a consistent top-15 in whom I have faith over bringing in a whole new system.
We definitely do seem like a consistent top 15, though not top 10, program under Harbaugh. And, as you say, there are worse places to be.
I'm not in favor of firing Harbaugh. He's doing a decent job, though not the job I would have expected him to do. I think whoever takes over after him (I can't see him staying here getting his ass kicked by OSU 10times in a row) will find Michigan a really nice landing spot.
The very vocal minority hasn't been "patient" since the Wisconsin game of '17.
Well, there's a boatload of context behind each and every season. I'm not going to take the time to delve into all of the nuances but I do want to point out two things. First, losing to Michigan State in 2015 due to the flukiest ending of all-time changed Harbaugh's first season from 11-2 to 10-3. Big difference in perception between those two. And then that was followed up by losing to Ohio State in overtime on the road by a bad spot on 4th & 2. Perception matters so much in recruiting and just the general morale of the program. Harbaugh isn't any different as a coach if those two bounces go our way but Michigan football would be in a much better spot.
Second, Michigan was much further from being a contender than the fan base realized when Harbaugh took over. Hoke had some talented juniors and seniors he left Harbaugh but there was almost nothing from the 2014 and 2015 recruiting classes, particularly with Peppers leaving after three seasons. Again, this doesn't mean Harbaugh hasn't made mistakes because he's definitely made plenty. But they are understandable mistakes for the most part and he's fixing what needs to be fixed.
There's essentially no such thing as luck in football. There is making plays and not making plays. That's it.
Agreed. Every team has similar context yet some of them still manage to win the games. Alabama's all everything superstar QB went down with a destroyed hip late in the year, yet they still spanked Michigan. Shit happens to all the teams. Some of them overcome and others don't.
What simplistic hogwash. While your trite nonsense can be used to explain things "trouble with the snap" (wrong though you'd be) it doesn't explain a punt stopping dead at the 1" line with no assistance from anyone - lest you pretend that any kicker ever has that much control over wind and angle and you know, the whole point of the football is that its shape allows and even exaggerates its bouncing and erratic rolls. It can't explain a fumble that happens to roll right into Denard's hands instead of towards someone else. It can't explain a Wisconsin kid trying to run down to cover a punt and the ball bouncing off him letting us recover.
Football is a game of making the most of the situations in front of oneself - but there's randomness all over the place, and that randomness is "luck".
Also, it's not as simple as "making plays or not making plays". When M beat NW on the Dileo Slide, we didn't make the play, but the refs let the play stand, so we win! When Sparty didn't have time left and yet the ref in the booth gave them another go, we lost... There are plenty of factors completely outside of the players and coaches control. That can't go in any column except luck.
If you're going to be a condescending jerk, you might want to try to be right first. A fumble rolling right into Denard's hands? Some players have better hands and hand-eye coordination, and could make that play without missing a beat. Some players would just have to fall on it. Some players would bobble it around and let the other team recover it. Not luck, skill.
Want me to make a fool of you on the others too? Be happy to. Say the word.
I'm condescending the idea of no luck in football, which is a stupid thought.
The fumble is a reference to ND (2011 first play of 4th quarter), ball on their 4, running back fumbles and --- the ball rolls right to Denard standing 3 yards behind the pile. Not on the ground, not into ND's hands, just rolls right back to Denard who yes, then with skill grabs the ball and scores. Oh yeah, 3rd down, so even if we fall on it, who knows what's next. We were down 24-7, think we win without that score? Yes, obviously Denard knew what to do and made the most of the situation - as I noted in my reply - BUT there's no way he could've controlled where the fumble went. THAT is the luck part. It could just as easily have rolled into the end zone for a ND touchback. You're implying that the ND player that caused the fumble failed to execute his fumble correctly as though he could control where that ball went. Bullshit.
Look, if you want to make the argument that the team that wins is most often the team that does the most with the opportunities that come their way - YES, I will fully agree with you. If you want to make the argument that that better prepared teams have more "luck", yes, that's true too. But when you suggest that there is no luck in football as though there's never anything about the game that isn't 100% entirely under the control of the players on the field, and thus 100% entirely about execution, I call bullshit.
So, yes, please do show me in every play in Michigan history where there is not a single moment of random chance. Pretty please. With sugar on top. If you can demonstrate a 0.00% randomness in ALL games, I will gladly call you correct. Good luck with that.
Tell you what. Show me any play where the outcome involved NOTHING that can be coached or prepared for and nothing that one player or team can be better at than another. The outcome of that play will be luck. Otherwise, it isn't.
No, sorry - you said there's NO luck in football. You said 0% luck. I don't need to demonstrate 100% luck to be right, I need to demonstrate any play where random chance factors in to make you wrong. Which I already did.
I've tried to be reasonable, I've acknowledged that the intent of your argument has merit - a better prepared team eschews random events over the course of a game and over the course of a season. Only a complete and utter idiot would suggest that uncontrollable random events don't happen.
When Randy Johnson hit a bird with a pitch - do you honestly want to suggest there was ANYTHING un-random about that? Granted, that's baseball where you're dealing with 1 person (and a bird) but sports are sports - random shit happens, that's part of what makes it interesting.
Yes, if you attempt a field goal and a bird gets in the way and deflects the ball, that's luck. That's not something you can prepare or coach for, and one kicker can't be better than another at avoiding birds. Which is why I said "essentially" no luck. But as far as anything else, no. The fact that something is unlikely and doesn't happen very often doesn't mean it's "luck" when it does happen.
In terms of final ranking, his best two years at Michigan were his first two. Are you smoking crack?
Brady Hoke left a nice crop of juniors and seniors for Harbaugh and almost nothing from the 2014 AND 2015 recruiting classes, particularly when we factor in Peppers bolting after Year 3. Combine that with the dearth of quarterback options and Brandon Peters not working out (which happens) and you have a recipe for disaster. Again, I'm not here to defend Harbaugh's mistakes, only his right to be less than perfect and to garner the type of results that should have been expected if context is actually taken into account.
It took Dabo Swinney 8 years before he reached his first national championship game and he accomplished that feat with some luck at quarterback (Deshaun Watson was a highly rated QB but look how many of those fail) and without the constant media bashing Harbaugh has to endure, which negatively affects recruiting. Clemson is also a warm weather university located in an extremely talent rich area.
It took Dabo 8 years of being a head coach to win a championship. Harbaugh had an extensive resume when he got here. That’s an apples and dental floss comparison.
Go ahead and list all the coaches who have won a championship at a school after year five, having never won one previously. I’ll start:
1) Dabo
That's a strange made up criteria. I guess you get points for creativity? Ed Orgeron was a horrendous coach at Ole Miss and even entered last season on the hot seat at LSU. He still ended up winning a national title last season with one of the greatest seasons of the 21st century. Are you telling me that's because Orgeron is suddenly a better coach than Harbaugh? Gene Chizik won a national title at Auburn in his second season. Is that because he was a better coach than Harbaugh. Of course not. He lucked into some JC transfer named Cam Newton. Was Larry Coker a better coach than Harbaugh since he has a national championship on his resume?
Since 2003 (i.e. the modern era of college football), every single national championship has been won by a school that is located in a geographical area swimming in talent, with the exception of Ohio State under Urban Meyer in 2014. Meyer proved you can win a title without being located near an abundance of talent but it's not easy. In fact, only 9 schools have won a national championship over the last 18 years. Breaking into that elite tier is extremely difficult.
Is Noah Furbush one of the nonsigners? Masters in Aerospace Engineering. Marine. Pilot?
2016 NFL Draft
Graham Glasgow – 3rd round
Willie Henry – 4th round
Jake Ruddock – 6th round
2017 NFL Draft
Jabrill Peppers – 1st round
Taco Charlton – 1st round
Chris Wormley – 3rd round
Jourdan Lewis – 3rd round
Delano Hill – 3rd round
Amara Darboh – 3rd round
Ben Gideon – 4th round
Ryan Glasgow – 4th round
Jehu Chesson – 4th round
Jake Butt – 5th round
Jeremy Clark – 6th round
2018 NFL Draft
Mason Cole – 3rd round
Maurice Hurst – 5th round
2019 NFL Draft
Devin Bush – 1st round
Rashan Gary – 1st round
Chase Winovich – 3rd round
David Long – 3rd round
Zach Gentry – 5th round
2020 NFL Draft
Cesar Ruiz – 1st round
Josh Uche – 2nd round
Ben Bredeson – 4th round
Khaleke Hudson – 5th round
Michael Danna - 5th round
Michael Onwenu – 6th round
Donovan Peoples-Jones – 6th round
Jon Runyan – 6th round
Josh Metellus – 6th round
Jordan Glasgow – 6th round
Draft Picks
1st Round Picks – 5
2nd Round Picks – 1
3rd Round Picks – 8
4th Round Picks – 5
5th Round Picks – 5
6th Round Picks – 7
7th Round Picks – 0
Position Breakdowns
QB – 1 (6th round)
RB – 0
WR – 3 (3rd, 4th, 6th rounds)
TE – 2 (5th, 5th rounds)
OL – 6 (1st, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 6th rounds)
DL – 8 (1st, 1st, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 4th, 5th, 5th rounds)
LB – 5 (1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th rounds)
DB – 6 (1st, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 6th, 6th rounds)
Clearly Michigan has not developed enough NFL QB's, RB's, and WR's. After five years, Harbaugh can only hang his hat on a 6th round QB, that transferred in his first year. The lack of elite QB play has clearly hindered Michigan's WR groups for the last five years. For as run oriented Michigan had been, they have yet to get a single RB drafted.
Michigan does a pretty dang good with every other position. While Michigan does a good job of getting players into the draft, it's not like their stockpiling the elite players into the 1st and 2nd Rounds like OSU and Bama. Majority are Day 3 players.
Is there a talent gap...yes. Clear evidence on the field when Michigan plays OSU and teams like Bama in a bowl. Can Michigan overcome that talent gap...yes, with better coaching and development.
Michigan has to develope an elite QB if they ever wish to play with the big boys. An elite QB can translate into much better RB and WR play. Michigan has a shot at it this year with Speed In Space in year two. I'm cauious with those expectation because of a new, inexperience QB, and a brand new offensive line. It's going to take time.
Harbaugh is finally moving Michigan into the new age of college football. If Michigan starts winning on the field againt against great opponents, recruiting will take care of itself.
Harbaugh is finally moving Michigan into the new age of college football.
I expect that Michigan will "modernize" just in time for the game to change again and they'll be playing catch-up and trying to adjust to what successful programs are doing again.
I don't know that having a two minute offense will ever go out of style. I think we could safely adopt that one.
Let's stick with our current four minute offense. It's twice as good.
This is a much more compelling and relevant argument than others made on this thread about Michigan's "skill position" problem. The numbers do tell a story of a lack of playmakers over the last few years, and I would largely agree. However, I would add two points for context:
- Important to remember that all position groups are not created equal. Only 1 player can star at QB, 1 at RB and maybe 2 at WR (in general, of course schools like Bama might have the luxury of having more NFL talent at those positions on the roster at the same time). Thus you would expect fewer draft picks at these position groups than any other you are comparing them against (excluding TE)
- Even elite college offenses can struggle to produce a lot of NFL draft picks at skill positions. Clemson has been a powerhouse over that same time period you analyzed and has produced exactly 1 QB drafted and 1 RB drafted since 2017. So you don't think I'm cherry-picking, I would acknowledge that those numbers should rise next year with Lawerence and Etienne and Clemson has been incredibly successful at producing NFL drafted WRs
Even our first round picks were not spectacular for us, for the most part. Bush is the only one who was really an impact player for two solid years, Charlton maybe close. But Ruiz, Peppers and Gary were all elite recruits who were good to very good, but not great for us. The NFL drafted Peppers and Gary high because they saw freakish athleticism, not great on-field productivity in college.
Ruiz was anywhere between good and great at Michigan. He definitely lived up to his billing and would have been amazing in his fourth year had he not left early. You can't put him in the same sentence as Rashan.
A guy not winning a Heisman doesn't mean he isn't great. Peppers was a unanimous All-American. Those voters may not be infallible, but I trust they know the difference between good and great most of the time. Ok, he wasn't Woodson, but then if Woodson is the bar one has to pass for your satisfaction of greatness, nothing's going to make you happy.
Never mind Woodson. Compare Malik Hooker's production at Ohio State to Peppers at Michigan. Which would you have rather had?
The original discussion is about impact players. Hooker and Peppers were both very much impact players.
Harbaugh is a better coach than he is a salesman.