New Rivals 250 Released
Congrats to the seven Wolverines inside the Rivals 250 which was released today.
Kyle Kalis #21
Erik Magnuson #49
Ondre Pipkins #59
Joe Bolden #152
James Ross #163
Royce Jenkins-Stone #182
Terry Richardson #217
Other Prospects include
Stefon Diggs #8
Joshua Garnett #28
Yuri Wright #57
Taylor McNamara #97
Jordan Payton #120
Bri'onte Dunn #136
Amara Darboh #208
Wes Brown #249
Other Notes:
- Jenkins-Stone dropped out of the Top 100
- Strobel dropped out of the Top 250
- Pipkins jumped over 100 spots into the Top 100
- Kalis is now a 5 star
-Jordan Diamond (Still 4 Star) Dropped out of the 250.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:40 PM ^
I wonder why RJS dropped so much.. he had a great season.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:46 PM ^
"As a junior, Jenkins-Stone played an aggressive, downhill style of football player and was all over the field. We saw him live in two and a half games as a senior, though, and he had lost that aggressive style and was playing back on his heels. Jenkins-Stone has also grown very little since we saw him the first time as a sophomore and that raises questions about his ability to add the necessary strength and bulk to play inside in college.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:48 PM ^
I feel like its been said rjs is good but should be a project for the next level...ross is the most college ready of our lbs. i could be wrong...
November 29th, 2011 at 1:51 PM ^
Yeah, I think either Ross or Bolden would be the most college ready. I'm not sure about Ringer.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:00 PM ^
RJS is getting the M-Rob treatment ie. early body development making him highly touted but leaving a chance for other kids to catch him.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:58 PM ^
It's a good thing we won't need him right away then with the entire LB core returning plus having two starting freshman.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:34 PM ^
It's kind of nice to be in the position of not having an immediate, glaring need at linebacker. Here's to having three returning starters and solid returning depth next year.
[NOTE TO SELF: read FreddieMercuryHayes' posts before commenting]
November 29th, 2011 at 2:02 PM ^
I hate that size argument. Are they going to expect, say Steve Elmer, to continue to grow so he won't drop in rankings? These are kids. Some are matured and nearly finished growing when 16. Hardley any have the resources of a college program to gain good weight before college.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:57 PM ^
Allen Trieu noted the same thing towards the beginning of the season, but saw a noticeable change as CT closed in on the playoffs and subsequent championship. So if you're big into rankings, this is bad. If you're not, it shouldn't make any difference to you
November 29th, 2011 at 3:15 PM ^
We still have recruits? I thought they all left as soon as Urban Meyer took over.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:42 PM ^
Honestly, after Josh Hemholdt left TheWolverine... he has become a class A douche lord... it seems like he shies away from mich prospects in an attempt to save face against all the other B1G team sites... the fact that LOCAL people can acknowledge Wormley's talent along with three other recruiting services, and Josh refuses to place him in front of other joke ass prospects blows my mind...
Buckeyegrove.com even puts Wormley as a top 5 prospect in Ohio and Josh has him at #21 in the state?!
Whatevs, I guess his play will do the talking.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:49 PM ^
He has not liked Wormley even when he was with thewolverine.com. At this point it seems almost personal that he is ranking him so low.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:10 PM ^
Helmholdt didn't like Wormley as a player, ever. There were always questions about Wormley's motor, and he wasn't the only one.
Frankly, I haven't seen him show any bias against Michigan recruits, but maybe I'm wrong.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:16 PM ^
Wormley's motor was the concern that Helmholdt had.
And you're right, it has been addressed by multiple services, and multiple game reports, how Wormley would disappear at times, esp against inferior competition. Part of this may be scheme, but with his frame, it was expected that he dominate every snap...
Fair or not, who cares? I'm excited in having reinforcements of the D-line!
November 29th, 2011 at 2:57 PM ^
It will be interesting to see what the Recruiting Service do now since Chris Wormley was named Division 1 Co-Defensive player of the Year in Ohio.
Probably drop him some because he is heading to Michigan.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:42 PM ^
November 29th, 2011 at 1:47 PM ^
Strobel surprised me, I have really high hopes for him, I picture him as our JJ Watt.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:22 PM ^
Didn't Strobel just take a huge leap in the scout rankings?
November 29th, 2011 at 3:06 PM ^
November 29th, 2011 at 5:20 PM ^
He jumped into the Scout top 100. Seems ridiculous for Rivals to drop him out of the 250 just because they haven't evaluated him this year. Considering Mentor was a top team in Ohio this year, and played in some good matchups, this is on Rivals to do their job. I am slowly beginning to like Scout and 247 better than Rivals. Rivals needs to step their game up in my opinion.
November 30th, 2011 at 12:25 AM ^
so you are saying that since scout put him in their top 100, rivals should have blindly followed suit? sorry, but that is irrational, rivals did the right thing by dropping him due to lack of evaluation, now if they don't evaluate him at all, then their bad.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:49 PM ^
Good to know. I was very surprised by this considering he had a great season by all accounts.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:46 PM ^
http://footballrecruiting.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1300500
^ That is the link summarizing all the changes. Helmholdt seems pretty harsh on Royce, considering Royce lead his team to a state championship I don't really understand where he is coming from. In addition Rivals releases some new 4 stars tomorrow that didn't make the 100 or 250 so maybe Chris Wormley will finally get the 4th star he should have gotten a long time ago. Also Godin, Braden, Funchess, and Ojemudia are right on the verge of getting a 4th star too. A 5.8-6.0 ranking is a 4 star and they are all on the cusp.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:47 PM ^
Well according to Josh, Chris is exactly where they want him....as well as Braden
November 29th, 2011 at 1:51 PM ^
I guess winning Defensive POY in Division 1 Ohio football makes you the worthy of not even being a top 20 player in your state. Honestly the south and west coast bias of Rivals really makes me mad. There's only 1 person in the state of Michigan ranked in the top 100 (Burbridge) and he's #100. I miss Wiltfong leading the charge there.
November 29th, 2011 at 1:48 PM ^
Helmholdt has been pretty adamant that he thinks Wormley is hugely overrated.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:33 PM ^
our app is better than your app
November 29th, 2011 at 2:09 PM ^
Strobel dropped out of the top 250 during the August re-rank. He was in the original top 250 in May and hasn't reappeared on the list since then.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:28 PM ^
He's ranked 73rd by scout.com.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:17 PM ^
Pipkins has been in the top 100 for a while now. Same with Strobel dropping out of the 250.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:31 PM ^
It seems we have plenty of recruits that are liked by one or two services, but not liked at all by others, it's very strange. Is this common? We only have a few recruits that all the major services; rivals.com, scout.com, and 24/7 -- rank the same.
November 29th, 2011 at 2:49 PM ^
It is uncommon because they want to differentiate themselves from their competitors. For example RIvals.com's huge reveal when the released their rankings was having Dorial Green-Beckham as their #1 overall guy.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:27 PM ^
I think it's silly to say that one service is right or wrong when it's a 50/50 coin toss between a couple players. Dorial Green-Beckham is a future superstar wide receiver, and it's easier for receivers to translate their skills immediately to the next level. Arik Armstead, for example, is a guy who doesn't have a position (is he a DE, DT, or OT at 6'8"?) and even if he does, those positions are more difficult to project.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:48 PM ^
I don't disagree with DGB being number one. I just wasn't shocked when Rivals said that they would have a surprise for their rankings.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:03 PM ^
November 29th, 2011 at 3:23 PM ^
This is not true. Rivals tends to be the most accurate as far as four/five stars, at least throughout the years. All of the sites have some hit and miss. Averaging the most accurate with less accurate data makes the conclusion less accurate.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:31 PM ^
Yep. Rivals has been more accurate when predicting first round draft picks, for example. On average, Rivals gives higher star rankings to players picked in the first round than Scout. 24/7 and ESPN are both somewhat new at it, so it remains to be seen how consistent they'll be.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:51 PM ^
November 30th, 2011 at 1:32 AM ^
I still think you're off with the reasoning aspect. For my subjective weight to be better than Rivals, I would have to know more than them. I'm relatively football educated, but I would guess that I am in the vast majority as far as not being talented at predicting draft choices or even college success (it makes little sense to measure draft choices when we are concerned with collegiate success...). I like obsessing over Michigan football. If I didn't, then I'd just go by Rivals.
November 29th, 2011 at 3:46 PM ^
Sorry if this isn't the correct place to post this, it is long. Feel free to delete or move wherever...
We’ve heard all the comments about Dunn not being a good fit for Urban Meyer’s offense. Dunn himself believes (or believed) that. While I think we all know that Dunn would be better preparing himself as an NFL back by coming to Michigan, I thought I’d take a deeper look at the issue. We all believe things like Urban doesn’t use big backs, he doesn’t feature running backs in his offense, to the extent that he does run the ball, he spreads it around a ton, etc. etc. I thought we should look at some data so we can better evaluate those contentions.
My bottom line if I were advising Dunn would be to listen to what Urban has to say but put more of an emphasis on objective data. That data supports what this board has been saying for weeks - Michigan is a much better fit if he wants college to prepare him to be a featured back in the NFL.
URBAN MEYER
Bowling Green 2001 - Rushing yards split fairly equally 3 ways with the QB leading in yards and TDs. QB Harris (129 carries 600 yards, 8 TDs) RB Alls (129 carries 553 yards 3 TDs), RB Gibson (97 carries 443 yards 3 TDs)
Bowling Green 2002 - Rushing yards split 3 ways again RB Joe Alls (122 carries 800 yards 4 TDs) QB Harris (186 carries 740 yards 20 TDs), RB Pope (101 carries 580 yards 4 TDs)
The two years after Meyer left, RB production went up in yards and TD's and Pope ran for 1000 yards both years.
Utah 2003 - RB Warfield (237 carries 975 yards 15 TDs) QB Smith (149 carries 500 yards, 5 TDs)
Utah 2004 - RB Johnson (165 carries 800 yards, 14 TDs) RB Ganther (109 carries 650 yards 2 TDs) QB Smith (135 carries 630 yards 10 TDs)
As Meyer implemented his offense more, it appears he was moving away from a feature back and the production of the feature back went down
Florida 2005 - RB by committee. RB Wynn (130 carries 621 yards 7 TDs), RB Manson (81 carries 365 yards 2 TDs), RB Moore (48 carries 277 yards, 1 TD)
Florida 2006 - More of the same. RB Wynn (143 carries 699 yards, 6 TDs), QB Tebow (89 carries 470 yards, 8TDs), WR Harvin (41 carries 428, 3 TDs), RB Moore (54 carries 282 yards, 2 TDs)
Florida 2007 - More of the same, except top RB is now behind a QB and a WR. QB Tebow (210 carries 895 yards 23 TDs), WR Harvin (83 carries 764 yards 6 TDs), RB Moore (104 carries 580 yards 6 TDs)
Florida 2008 – More of the same, top RB again behind a QB and WR. QB Tebow (176 carries 673 yards 12 TDs), WR Harvin (70 carries 660 yards 10 TDs), RB Rainey (84 carries 652 yards 4 TDs), RB Demps (78 carries 605 yards 7 TDs), RB Moody (58 carries 417 yards 1 TD)
Florida 2009 – More of the same RB by committee. QB Tebow (217 carries 910 yards 14 TDs), RB Demps (99 carries 745 yards 7 TDs), RB Rainey (89 carries 575 yards 5 TDs), RB Moody (58 carries 378 yards 3 TDs), RB Gillislee (31 carries 267 yards, 1 TD)
Florida 2010 – Not even worth breaking down. 6 players rushed for over 200 yards. 6 players had over 50 carries. No player had over 92 carries. RB Demps led with 511 yards. 1 of the 6 was QBs and one was Rainey who now was listed as a WR.
Compare that to Borges
Indiana 2002 – Top 3 rushers all RBs. RB Washington (174 carries 688 yards 9 TDs), RB Lewis (104 carries 458 yards, 0 TDs), RB Taylor (48 carries 229 yards, 2 TDs)
Indiana 2003 – Top 3 rushers all RBs with one feature back. RB Green-Ellis (yes, The Law Firm) (225 carries 938 yards, 7 TDs), RB Taylor (116 carries 464 yards, 3 TDs), RB Lewis (90 carries 398 yards, 3 TDs)
Auburn 2004 – Almost all rushing yards by a two back system. Special talents Ronnie Brown (153 carries 913 yards 8 TDs) and Cadillac Williams (239 carries 1165 yards, 12 TDs).
Auburn 2005 – Featured RB Kenny Irons (256 carries 1293 yards, 13 TDs), RB Lester (52 carries 339 yards 5 TDs), RB Smith (56 carries 289 yards, 3 TDs)
Auburn 2006 – Featured RB Irons (198 carries 893 yards 4 TDs), RB Lester (104 carries 510 yards, 9 TDs), RB Tate (54 carries 392 yards 3 TDs). Irons had a number of nagging injuries that year (according to Wiki)
Auburn 2007 – Featured RB Tate (202 carries 903 yards 8TDs), RB Lester (125 carries 530 yards 3 TDs), RB Fannin (84 carries 448 yards 5TDs). Note Borges then left and Auburn went more pass spread (2008) the following year and Tate’s number went down to 159 carries for 664 yards before bouncing back under Malzahn’s (more Borges-like spread???recollection and eyeball test only) to 263 carries for 1362 yards and 10 TDs in his senior season.
SDSU 2009 – RB Sullivan (154 carries 558 yards 4 TDs), RB Kazee (86 carries 371 yards 2 TDs)
SDSU 2010 – RB Hillman (262 carries 1464 yards 17 TDs), RB Kazee (67 carries 314 yards 3 TDs)
Michigan 2011 – QB Robinson (208 carries 1163 yards 13 TDs) RB Toussaint (174 carries 1011 yards 9 TDs) RB Smith (49 carries 296 yards 2 TDs), RB Shaw (31 carries 199 yards 3 TDs)
The data supports what Borges has been telling us all along – that he wants a featured back and only deviates from that if he doesn’t have such a talent at his disposal. Urban, no matter what he says, runs a ton with scat backs and only uses players like Dunn as situational runners, not featured runners. Furthermore, as Urban gets further into his tenure he uses his running backs less and less.
I would tell Brionte that unless Urban deviates from what has worked for him the past 8 years you are looking at the following projections.
If Brionte Dunn is a very good college back and stays injury free, during the years that he is the best back at either school he would be looking at twice and many carries at Michigan and twice the yardage production. My best guess would be over 200 carries for 1200-1600 yards per season at Michigan versus 100ish carries for 600-800 yards at OSU. That is an enormous difference and is one that turns a potential Heisman candidate into an anonymous back at a good school.
I am a homer, but to me the decision seems obvious if Brionte can detach himself from his childhood aspirations of playing for OSU. If he cannot, then I wish him well. He’ll still be a good player, he just won’t get the recognition and attention that his talent deserves.
Go Blue!
November 29th, 2011 at 4:09 PM ^
Thank you for looking into that. It is nice to see the actual data rather than hearing people talk about it. I'll graph it and hand it to Bri'onte.
November 29th, 2011 at 4:12 PM ^
one of my old co-workers in that list for Bowling Green. Reminded me about talking to him about Meyer years ago and his exact words were "Good coach, knows his sh!t. But, one of the biggest assholes you'll ever meet."
November 29th, 2011 at 6:21 PM ^
You should make this into a diary.
November 29th, 2011 at 8:00 PM ^
Does Borges go on any recruiting visits? I bet he could wow some guys with his offensive knowledge, but he seems a little, err... stationary.