New Rivals 100
Rivals updated their 100.
Changes in Michigan recruits:
Shane Morris drops from 16 to 22.
Mike McCray drops from 44 to 55.
Chris Fox Drops from 46 to 57.
Patrick Kugler drops from 54 to 73.
Kyle Bosch drops from 60 to 77.
Dymonte Thomas drops from 77 to 95.
Jake Butt falls outside the top 100 from 96.
New Rivals 100 http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/rankings/rank-3053
Old Rivals 100 with interest in Michigan http://mgoblog.com/mgoboard/2013-rivals-100-out
They hate us!
I think that fans of most teams will feel that their players have dropped. The initial Rivals 100 came out so early this year that there is no way that they had time to evaluate film on everyone. As more film rolls in you are going to see more new names in the top 100, which will bump everyone back.
Higher ranked prospects (top 50) appeared to fall 5-10 spots while the guys in the bottom half of the initial top 100 fell between 10-20. This appears to be simply due to new names entering the list. I still love the class Hoke is puting together.
* Also, relatively few OL ranked near the top. I only counted 4 in the top 60 (including one of ours - Chris Fox). Is it a down year for linemen or is it easier to rank skill positions higher this early on?
Lots of new names showing up in the Top 100 or just a lot of moving around? Just interesting that all of Michigan's recruits dropped a little bit.
Derrick Green all the way up to #12 and a 5*.
Its been a little while now was Green the one who we told we were kind of full at RB at the time when we were still holding out for Ty? I thought there was a RB who wanted to commit but we didn't want to take or something along those lines.
Yep, he's the one. I think he's overrated by Rivals. They're impressed with how he looks, but he doesn't play like the beast that he looks like in person. I really don't think he's the #12 recruit in the country. If you watch his film, he doesn't have great balance and he doesn't show the great speed (4.37) that has been reported.
Did us turning him away when we did effect our chances with him? I mean I am sure it didn't help but are we still in the running to land him?
Where does Scout, ESPN, and 24/7 have him Mag?
I don't think it particularly helped, but I don't know if it hurt, either. The Rivals mods think Michigan has a good chance at Green, but most other sites think he'll go somewhere down south. I usually agree with the Rivals guys, but here not so much. I think Green will end up elsewhere, and I don't think that necessary would have changed even if the coaches weren't waiting on Ty Isaac to decide before going after him hard.
I'm not sure where Green is ranked by the other sites off the top of my head, but I know Rivals is higher on him than anyone else by a pretty significant margin.
Oh well, Hoke and Mattison know what they are doing and I'm gonna rely on their judgement of talent.
Shane was the top QB at the Midwest Regional competition and earned an invite to the National Elite 11 this summer. He is ranked ahead of everyone that he beat out at the Ohio camp, but by no means does it mean that he is the best QB in the country. He will get his chance to prove himself this summer in Cali.
* Also, if you're bent on Morris, he is currently ranked higher than Andrew Luck was coming out of HS. Kid has a lot of potential.
I think that is the primary reason they have dropped as they have not done anything to "improve" their status while some other prospects may have impressed Rivals at their camps that allowed them to jump in the rankings.
I guess I can understand some of them dropping because of inactivity in regards to the camp circuit. They're usually the site that's the highest on our commits.
It's evil Herc. He has a goatee.
But it had an awesomely bad "if you like this..." link...
they gotta find some way to make an give an SEC team the top ranking. really not nice
Now our class sucks.
There were some uncommitted guys at the top of the list that fell, too (Cravens, Tunsil, etc.). It's entirely possible that Rivals has simply re-evaluated their rankings since February and decided that people weren't rated correctly. Rivals does the best job of ranking prospects according to NFL Draft order, so maybe they know what they're doing...
I disagree with this one post of yours, so by your logic, you don't know what you're doing every time you post.
I was pointing out, in my own way, that it's perfectly possible to think someone generally knows what they're doing and yet disagree with them on one particular point. I don't see any contradiction; saying someone knows what they're doing doesn't mean you have to robotically think they're right 100% of the time.
All that means is maybe I don't know what I'm doing. But regardless, just because Green is overrated at #12 (in my opinion) doesn't mean that the rest of the rankings are suspect. If the other 99 guys on the list are accurately ranked, then that's a success, regardless of whether Green ends up being a bust or not.
(For the record, I don't think Green will be a bust, but I just don't think he's the 12th-best player in the country.)
I think E.J. Levenberry is too high at #21, Jonathan Allen is too high at #35, Dorian O'Daniel is too high at #40, and Mike McCray is too high at #55. It's hard to say that a lot of guys deserve to be higher than they are among the top 100 players, but I do think Joe Mathis is a little low at #71.
This was quite helpful. For the record, I read your posts quite often. Ive actually been reading the blog since I joined but have decided to take a more active / vocal role.
Cheers,
OP
...and do I think they are above it? Hardly. Rivals and the others have created an industry out of thin air and it works due to drama. They won't go over the top and harm their credibility but some tinkering by adjusting the rankings to slightly downgrade committed and upgrade uncommitted prospects sure rings my conspiracy theory chimes.
Couldn't it also be that the best athletes really like all the attention and have the freedom to choose later (since teams will hold spots for them), so perhaps the fact that they move up in the rankings is actually a function of their talent and resulting desire for drama?
Rival these NUTS!!!
Those kids we recruited had their football skills diminished because someone changed the number at which they were arbitrarily ranked! Jerks!
Really not worth the gnashing of teeth, rending of garments that will ensue. But this is a fun topic to discuss during the 'dead season'.
The ranking after all the summer camps, 7-7 tourneys, All-star camps like Elite11 and the Opening, where our verbals go head-head against other elite prospects, will be a more representative ranking.
Also, don't forget how play/film during the senior season plus play at the all-star practices can positively impact rankings (see Pipkins, Ondre).
I'm most interested to see how Dawson's ranking changes this time around.
Well there goes my dream of our recruits being ranked 1 through 18. Such a disappointment.
Just a reminder, we had a total of 3 guys in the Rivals 100 in 2012: Kalis, Pipkins (5*) and Magnuson (4*). This year we have 6 this early and we still have a good shot at adding 1-2 more (Poggi, Treadwell).
Commits usually tend to drop a bit, but I am a little surprised Dawson didn't break top 100 yet; isn't he one of the guys participating in the rivals 100 challenge?
For anyone interested, this is what happened to OSU recruits:
- Cameron Burrows dropped from 7 to 13
- Eli Woodard went up from 28 to 19
- Joey Bosa dropped from 14 to 20
- Jalin Marshall dropped from 41 to 48
- Evan lisle droped from 83 to out of the top 100.
I haven't gone through the numbers, but I'm going to make the relatively safe assumption that uncommitted players got a significant higher bump than committed players. It might be shady practice, but Rivals is a business and creating more top prospect drama over the next few months drives subscribers.
Also, I made a Google spreadsheet comparing OSU and Michigan classes if anyone wants to compare the rankings across the 4 main services: Spreadsheet - updated as of today.
I support this theory - most of the 'risers' are likely uncommitted. Rivals has to keep everyone interested until January after all.
The Rivals guys addressed this: During this period it's the guys who show themselves in camps as as deserving bumps got them, comitted or not. Dawson and Lewis will move, but they were far enough down that a bump into the 100 right now would be a stretch. They say that McCray and Morris performed well, but only solidified that they were previously placed where they should've been. Other players move up past them, because they're the hot performers who outplayed their rankings.
It seems like all these guys got a bad deal, but once you look at the deviation of talent in a widespread ranking system like this, 10-20 spots really doesn't mean anything.
So you're saying OSU's recruits only dropped an average of 9 spots while Michigan's dropped an average of 10??? Conspiracy!!! I tell you!!! Conspiracy!!! Damn You Urban Meyer!!!
may be #22 on Rivals, but he's #1 in my heart. Followed, obviously, by Jehu Chesson and then Jake Butt at #2 and #3 respectively.
Not creepy at all.
Rivals formula: USC/SEC comittment = +10; Michigan comittment = -10.