Recruit Michael Uini trending to Georgia
Crystal balls trending heavy to Georgia - only could find a short blurb on Diehard Sports, but its being reported in a bunch of places. Dagger.
https://247sports.com/Season/2024-Football/CurrentTargetPredictions/
Steve Windings put his to Georgia too - any insiders with info? I would assume this is now a 90% Georgia lock from being a 90% Michigan lock.
Play with Bama/Georgia, we're gonna take our licks sometimes I guess.
Please edit the "l" out!
What “I”?
already been done. its a secret.
There's no I in weeny. Those who stay will beat Georgia.
Disappointing, really liked him as a prospect. But UGA did just put an OT in the 1st round, have we done that since Lewan?
While putting your position in the first round of the NFL draft certainly matters some. There are many variables that go into recruiting a 17-year-old kid. I doubt UM was held back because UGA said "look at their terrible record of developing NFL lineman".
You do? I think for Georgia it can be simple. Yes, we won the recent awards, but Georgia's OL has been just as good or better (by many accounts) in that time. If we're 1A, theyre 1B.
They can show him footage of that OL getting run over by a historic Georgia defense 2 years ago.
He's a high 4 star, not a 3 star -- they can show him what he'll go against in practice every week and how all those guys are top 25 picks in the NFL. Our guys are not top picks. They go later in the draft. That might resonate with a lower tiered player, but elite OL would expect to go higher in the draft than the 3rd/4th round, which is when most of our guys have gone.
As much success as we've had on the OL, its been as a unit, and not necessarily as individuals. Look at Paris Johnson last year. Nobody said OSU's OL was amazing, but they put a guy in the top 10. Whether we like it or not that *can* resonate with kids.
But, like you said, many things factor in.
Claiming that we are OL U over Bama and Georgia is silly over the past few years - awards or not. They are elite with elite players who win in college and go high at the next level.
On the one hand, turning 5* recruits into first found picks shouldn't be considered that impressive. Athletically, that is where they should end up. On the flip side, it is all about how it is presented to the recruit. If they are just telling them about the number of first rounders they send to the NFL and the big $ contracts they get, they are not wrong and it sounds great. It is just that dozens of schools can turn a first round talent into a first rounder. Development is far more impressive to accomplish and somehow seems far less important to many top recruits.
On top of that, Georgia has zero accountability for their players. Kirby will let them do literally anything as long as they win games.
many can, but only few get the chance to do it. why would you, as a recruit, take that chance anywhere else? some do, most dont. thats why the programs that churn them out tend to continue to get more of the same. We are certainly not a 'doesnt produce nfl talent' school, but the level of bama/osu/georgia talent in the nfl at the current time - and i'd add ND to that... is a big step above us. Miami and others do as well. The biggest diff is... Bama/Georgia also win title after title and hardly ever lose games. Tough to argue. But the good news is, there's always another dude ready to step up.
School tends to get overlooked in these conversations, but that's going to be part of the draw for some kids and decidedly not for others. This doesn't mean that Georgia has no good programs, but a challenging undergraduate slate might not be real appealing--could even look daunting--to some kids. I've always felt okay with that.
EDIT: Posted this bc as I read up and down there was not a single mention of academics, and it clearly makes a difference for many players. Don't see that this is controversial. Tried not to knock GA too much, bc that's lazy, and it's actually a decent school. But if you know that you're going to come to M and work very hard at the academics, that may not be your intent.
Not accurate, -1
" turning 5* recruits into first found picks shouldn't be considered that impressive. "
48% of 5 star players across college football don't even get drafted at all.
Fun with Maths!!! What you say is both true AND misleading.
Not a stats guy (and not willing to do the work) but I guarantee you that the "hit rate" on 5* OL Dwarfs that of 4* OL which dwarfs that of 3* OL etc. -- and this will be true even given OL being among the hardest position to project out of HS..
Calling someone out but admit to being lazy, hilarious. Go debunk your own theory, it will take you like 4 minutes.
Well, there are only 32 first round picks per year, so if there are more than 32 5* players per year, then the hit rate will automatically be less than 100%. Add in injuries, discipline issues, etc., and of course that number comes down. But I still contend that 'Bama or Georgia having 5 x 5* athletes in a class makes it FAR more likely that they will place some in the first round than teams that have one or no 5* athletes in their class. If you start out with the cream of the crop and are not the top NFL talent producer, then you are doing something wrong.
Like the old joke, "How do you make a small fortune? Start out with a large fortune." They have an embarrassment of riches, and some subset of them become top draft picks. This shouldn't be surprising.
yeah bingo
- Evan Neal (22)
- Alex Leatherwood (21)
- Jedrick Willis (20)
- Jonah Williams (19)
If you start at OT @ Bama there is a pretty good chance you are going 1st round.
It's been a hot minute since Backus, Hutchinson, Long etc.
Look at where those prospects were rated going into bama. So bama just has to develop at the norm for them to get drafted there. Look at where our guys are coming in at, and leaving at.
2016 (Jonah Williams) - Three 5* recruits. Jonah Williams is the only one drafted in the 1st round. One drafted in 2nd round, one undrafted.
2017 (Jedrick Willis) - Six 5* recruits and Jedrick Willis WASN'T one of them.
Of the six 5* there were 2 1st round picks, a 2nd round pick, a 6th round pick, and 2 UDFA.
As much success as we've had on the OL, its been as a unit, and not necessarily as individuals. Look at Paris Johnson last year. Nobody said OSU's OL was amazing, but they put a guy in the top 10. Whether we like it or not that *can* resonate with kids.
Johnson was the number eight ranked recruit and number one offensive lineman on the 247 composite in 2020. So, OSU didn't "develop" him. He was already a projected first round pick coming out of high school.
This is the thing that drives me nuts when I hear talk about Bama, Georgia, Clemson and OSU "getting guys to the NFL". Almost without fail, the "guys they get to the NFL" are guys who were very highly regarded coming out of high school (i.e. top 100 prospects) and those teams simply didn't screw those guys up.
I strongly suspect that if you compared high school rankings vs. draft position for the various college teams UM would fare much better at the actual development of prospects than the "elites" like Bama, UGA and OSU. I doubt the record of those "elites" at getting guys ranked below 250 (i.e. not expected to be drafted) into the NFL draft is impressive at all.
But if you are a top recruit, wouldn't it make sense to go to a program that doesn't screw it up?
The few super elite recruits Michigan has gotten recently have been drafted where expected (see: Gary, Peppers, Dax Hill) so UM hasn't screwed up the few elites they have gotten.
The plain fact of the matter is that evaluating recruits is hard. Parsing the 200th best player from the 400th best player is difficult but there are usually about 15-20 super elite guys in every class who are in the "can't miss" category and most of them end up at OSU, Bama or Georgia.
Those super elite guys could play for Kent State and still get drafted in the 1st round because they don't require any development, they could go straight to the NFL if it were permitted.
DPJ?
this is the phil jackson argument. was he great because he had kobe and jordan? or was he great.
In fact The Athletic did just this comparison about a month ago.
While Michigan did well in getting players ranked ~250-500 drafted (top 10 I believe for classes '13-'19 or so) the undisputed leader in getting players ranked below the elite level drafted was, unfortunately, the osu.
Though I suppose Uga & bama could counter that they take so few players ranked below 250 that the study barely applies to them 🤷♂️
Couple of comments:
1. Would it be better to characterize Michigan as IOL U, as our best linemen over the past few years have been on the interior? Ruiz was a first round pick IIRC. Zinter and Keegan may end up being day one or day two picks. Ulu won the Rimington and Outland trophies but his draft stock was impacted by physical limitations and positional inflexibility. Onuwenu is another interior lineman who got drafted and has succeeded in the NFL.
2. Could the disparity in first round talent and Michigan's OL draft picks be due to "measurables". When was the last time we had a prototypical left tackle (e.g., height, arm length, strength)? Jaylen Mayfield was a second round pick, but was more of a RT or Guard in the eyes of the League (has played G primarily in the NFL). Paris Johnson is an example of a player who has all the physical tools, but wasn't fully developed by his coaching staff. Those types of linemen get scooped up in the first round because teams feel they can develop them into an elite player. Had Michigan got Isiah Wilson, he would have likely still been a first round draft pick (but maybe would have survived longer in the league because of the structure/character development at Michigan). Same goes for a lot of the high end OL targets we've missed on. Michigan's tackles have typically been low 4* or 3* players that have reached their potential in college (often after staying four or five years).
3. Do we really need the five star OL? If Michigan's success is built around OL play that requires a complex understanding of the scheme, does an OL that plans on being around for three years give us that? Ruiz was an exception, but generally freshmen and true sophomore OL don't do great. Meanwhile, fourth and fifth year system guys have been good enough to get us to the CFP two years in a row. I'll admit that at the coinflip, it was clear that Vastardis going up against Jordan Davis was going to be a clear problem. But guys like Ulu, Zinter, Keegan are probably good enough to go up against any team. If we can get their equivalents at the edges (some combo of Henderson, Jones, Hinton, and Barnhardt) this year, this could potentially be our best OL of the past three years.
TL;DR: Maybe we have a formula that we should just stick to (i.e., stout, heady IOL that can all pull and get to the second level). Scout the 3.5-4* players and pick the guys that fit your culture and vision despite not having first round measurables. Take a few years to develop those guys mentally and physically, setting them up for a day 2 or 3 selection after they've reached their ceiling by year 4 or 5 in the program.
Edit: Just looked at Sprague and Frazier's ranking. They are in the same grouping with Warren and Uini. Would be great if we got one of them, but not going to be upset if we don't.
on #3:
i think we do - on the DL too. 5 star elite athletes coached at the levels Michigan athletes are coaching, are generally going to outperform 3 and 4 stars. Only a few schools can consistently say theyre as good or better than us - and that list might start and end with bama/georgia. (clemson, usc on offense, ND (under riley), and others are at least in the convo).
I like having a formula - and if our formula got us competitive against Uga and TCu the past 2 years, even if losing, maybe nothing needs to improve. But last year's recruiting class was not elite and though its not the end all be all... it has impacts.
Raises the ceiling if nothing else. then its up to the player and coaches to help that 5 star reach that ceiling. I'd love 25 high 4 stars. but if we are going to take flyers on low guys, id love some can't miss types too
None of this is the sky is falling over this one guy - just sharing based on your #3 comment
That's fair. I would say that I'd rather have 4.5/5 stars at QB, DL/Edge, and CB. IMO those are the positions where the recruiting rankings best correlate with on-field college success. OL and LB are where I've seen the most variance between ranking and finished product.
Worth nothing that I am not by any means an expert on this, just my casual observations as a fan.
Nailed it, well said
I just checked on that. Cesar Ruiz is the only 1st-round O-lineman since Lewan.
It's a little easier to place your players in the early rounds of the draft if you start a few yards up the track with 5-stars like Alabama, Georgia, and OSU. Here's Broderick Jones as a HS recruit:
https://247sports.com/Player/Broderick-Jones-46051865/high-school-211977/
To take an extreme example in another sport, I don't think Duke basketball has placed numerous players in the first round through player development.
I'd suggest Georgia's legal bag (NIL) and their recent championships would have something to do with Uini's upcoming decision.
Chicken and egg though. UM used to run rampant with OL development and high end picks. Then went into the shitter for a while. OSU didn't always get 5* OL. Now they do. What caused them to suddenly get 5*. Bags and no school.
I can see what the person above said - can you imagine going against the Philadelphia Eagles defense (aka UGA) every day in practice? That's alluring. Bama and Georgia and OSU are not here to play school - so you are going to lose out some kids to them no matter what. USC probably is entering that chat too.
p.s. Jones is an anomaly in terms of "first round" OL from OSU - he is their only in a while. Billy Price 2018, Taylor Decker 2016. But they have a good amount in 2nd/3rd round.
Not worried about OL recruiting. Whatever guys we miss on out of HS we can tag em and bag em in the portal.
"What caused them to suddenly get 5*. Bags and no school."
I'm old enough to remember when many people around here thought that the Michigan Money Cannon® was going to even things up in recruiting when we go up against the big dogs. Oh well.
Firing mechanism is in the shop.
I think it's more like the Michigan Money Mortar®:
Yeah, because those people so poorly understood the Michigan community they thought that because we win every contest for charitable giving we'd similarly dominate enriching HS athletes.
I never thought making it legal meant we'd suddenly outbid bama & osu. And, in point of fact, it's still technically not legal to "pay for play".
So....🤷♂️
Should have been Grant Newsome, but we know what happened.
Lol. In all likelihood he silent committed on his Michigan visit. But as they say, that just tells you who you have to beat.
Also it shows that our NIL game is still behind. Not sure we could beat Georgia anyways for him but it doesn't help.
Yep. Michigan's strengths and weaknesses are pretty well known at this point. If I'm recruiting against Michigan, I want to turn it into a bidding war. If I'm recruiting against Miami, I'm gonna flash the championship rings.
Easy to say about Miami now that Gattis is gone. But when he was there you also had to account for the meeting the recruit's mom's carnal needs.
How so?
You are recruiting against the two time champions...
That's advantage Georgia...by a lot. He's also from Texas so maybe he'd rather deal w the heat than the cold...etc.
NIL isn't the answer to every recruiting loss. But that's the current boogeyman
It's never a surprise when a highly-rated recruit from the deep south with no family ties to a northern program commits to an elite program in the deep south.
As much as I want him in our class, it's hard to fault someone for picking Georgia. Back-to-back champion and has arguably taken the helm from Alabama as the dominant team in College Football. Teams like Georgia, Alabama, and for now Ohio State can seemingly pick and choose their recruiting class with little competition. Beating OSU has helped us, but if we want to get to the next tier we need to get to a Championship.
Would love to see Bennett Warren in this class.....Max Anderson was trending hard to Michigan when we "filled up" and then he turned his sights to Tennessee. Warren is doing the same thing based on his social media activity.
Odds are we get him, based on Wingdings recent 6/11 cb.
Odds are we get him, based on Wingdings recent 6/11 cb.
I'm all about 2X odds.
Playing time pitch seems to be working for him. Having a 5 man OL class looking for a 6th be like that sometimes. Also, he probably got paid.
I though Uini was more of a raw project that could become elite in time --- so I'm not sure he was on the docket to start quickly. But who knows.. I just thought those that evaluated saw him as having a higher ceiling than Warren, but more raw skills.... and starting on the OL as a freshman even in this day and age is not an good expectation for a top 5 team. Especially at tackle.
I think Warren was the highly athletic project whereas Uini was more of a finished product. Emphasis on MORE of a finished product because he's still in high school and OL need time.