The Talent Differential

Submitted by Bluestreak on

I see how the board is full of 'how this team has underperformed  yadda yadda.

Our talent differential compared to elite programs is still too wide

 

Consider this. Since 2013

- We have 4 recruits with 247 score above 98, OSU has 15, Alabama 26!!

- Put another way, for every Peppers we have, OSU has 4 equivalent difference makers, Alabama has 6.5 equivalent difference makers.

 

It doesn't get any better when we look lower down the depth chart.

- We have 21 recruits above a composite score of 95 since 2013, OSU has 44, Alabama 55

 

The point I'm trying to make is that unless we get an equivalent number of difference makers, having program that contends for National Championships is a pipedream. Unfortunately, all the top programs have similar high level player development and facilities. It comes down to having players with the highest ceilings and developing them to their potential.

 

Underperform is what OSU did (against Clemson).

Clemson had 16 recruits above a composite score of 95 ... compared to OSU - who had 33!You can tack some of that to youth but not all of it.

UMForLife

January 2nd, 2017 at 8:33 AM ^

You really think Don Brown did not think about this? They just did not have any other option. We do not have an option like peppers unless you play freshmen. That is the beauty of Hoke recruiting. He was very good at finding DL and not LBers. You keep saying out prepared but I am not hearing what would be the fix. I am not expecting one as you and I are just keyboard coaches, but I trust Don Brown to know his s***. FSU is just a better team with better athletes and we are missing a irreplaceable player. May be next year we develop a couple but I have not seen another player yet.

schreibee

January 2nd, 2017 at 1:21 PM ^

I LOVE (all Caps) Don Brown! Someone pointed it out way earlier in this thread but his attitude is 
"we're coming - every snap" even if sometimes that gets you burned on a long one. Awesome!

But think back to Wiscy's lone score - who was on the RB?

It happened again vs msu, osu and several pretty devastating times vs fsu - McCray or Gedeon singled on a speedy RB coming out of the backfied on a pass route. 

People keep replying to my points with "Yeah, but no Peppers, what could he do?"

And my answer, in summary to wrap this thread up, is if Gedeon was covering Cook then it has nothing to do with Pep not being out there - that would be if Metellus got burned, or whoever replaced #5 on any given snap.

Fisher saw this and game-planned specifically for it, we did not make an adjustment to a pretty glaring hole in the "Always Attacking" scheme. I hope we do in future and I hope to get some super speedy LBs out there too!

I have stipulated that Jabrill would have limited or even shut down some of Cook's big runs - but those receptions (3 for 62, each leading to a score) were back breakers.

and yet AGAIN - we had the lead with under a minute to go and no Peppers and missing Butt for a good bit. Peppers' returns alone are likely enough to get us the few more pts we needed. 

UMForLife

January 2nd, 2017 at 12:45 AM ^

Out prepared? How do you know? We kicked three field goals for crying out loud. If we would have converted one of them, it would have looked different. If you are saying we were out prepared because we didn't have plan B for Peppers, so be it. Don't know if we could have replaced Peppers. FSU just had a few big plays but overall their offense was held in check. Our OL was not a match their DL. That was the story.

RudolphINaa

January 2nd, 2017 at 9:30 AM ^

Non peppers game plan!? Really. Hey it's official peppers is out! so let's run a four WR set and see how Michigan matches up with us....Mike McCray vs D.Cook. The inability to limit the absence peppers with proper personal was the biggest issue in the first half. Extremely frustrating as though the Michigan defense completely overlooked this issue.

I just can't get over the fact that the coaching staff let this match up happen.

MGoStrength

January 1st, 2017 at 11:33 PM ^

I think what gets everyone is that Harbaugh at Stanford was able to beat superior talent in USC.  When you consider how he turned around the 49ers some expected that we could immediately compete with OSU (and other top programs) because he's Jim Harbaugh.  I still think he will, but it will take some time for his recruits to develop and slowly start chipping away and getting more national level out of region guys.

schreibee

January 1st, 2017 at 11:40 PM ^

C'mon people - back in November we were all adament we didn't lose to osu, it was stolen from us.

Now that we laid a bit of an egg vs fsu suddenly we didn't beat osu & likely won't soon what with their excellent recruiting...

Stay the course people! 

MGoStrength

January 2nd, 2017 at 1:00 PM ^

Years from now no one remembers why you lost, they just see the W/L records and there's nothing anyone can do to take away that win from OSU or give it to us. It's gone forever. That's why it was so heartbreaking. Losing 3 games by 5 points counts the same as losing 3 by 50 points, unless you're looking as Sagarin

pbmd

January 1st, 2017 at 11:33 PM ^

I don't know about under performed
What Michigan does is lose to osu though
We finally beat msu
Contend for national championship?
We can't win the BiG and in the last 2 playoff games BiG teams lost 69 to 0
No doubt-Alabama probably has Michigan outclassed at every position and every pkayer1 through 85
When Alabama loses it is an accident



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

LSAClassOf2000

January 1st, 2017 at 11:34 PM ^

The point I'm trying to make is that unless we get an equivalent number of difference makers, having program that contends for National Championships is a pipedream.

I don't think that's strictly it though....we were a play or two away from being perhaps in the CFP this year, and if you move away from recruiting rankings as being more than just one of many indicators and accept that a large part of this is also maximizing the talent that you do have (even if it isn't talent that you recruited), that becomes obvious. That is to say, it's a very dynamic issue.

You can find difference makers in more places than just the 4 anf 5 star listings, but you have to employ a staff that can develop those players. We have the luxury of being able to get a decent mix of highly touted names but also to develop those players as well as players that might not be as highly ranked. You can recruit "difference makers", but you can also develop them. If you can do both, you'll have a team that gets into the CFP eventually.

We're just fine. 

Don

January 2nd, 2017 at 1:06 AM ^

That's especially important considering the geographical distribution of the nation's best players—if you look at Scout's top 300, for example, it's stunning how few of them are kids from the upper midwest. The vast majority are from the south and far west, mainly CA. That makes Michigan's recruiting challenge significantly tougher than schools located in those regions.

Harbaugh has shown that he has the ability to recruit with any coach in the country on even terms, but it's unrealistic in the extreme to expect Michigan to pull as many five star kids from the south as Alabama and other southern powers do.

Michifornia

January 1st, 2017 at 11:35 PM ^

I don't care if we had less "recruiting stars."  If we had a decent QB and arguably a better starting RB, this season goes very differently.  It's so easy to look back and draw all these conclusions.  Of course I want us to get the highest rated players, but to keep saying we just aren't athletic enough blah blah blah is getting old.

Yes Alabama has clearly the most talent.  But Washington pretty much shut them down.  This is college football.  There's a lot more that goes into each game than the number of 4 star or 5 star recruits.  Ask Iowa...

Harbaugh and his staff will have us contending every year.  We suffered 3 excruciatingly close losses this year.  Osu did not beat us.  I think we will compete every year as long as Harbaugh is here.  

GO BLUE!!

bluenectarine

January 2nd, 2017 at 1:10 AM ^

When will the average layman learn what every football coach in America knows....skill players matters a GAZILLION times more than offensive lineman... Watch a football game and tell me Dalvin cook, Deshaun Watson or Aaron Rodgers needs a spectacular Oline versus vice versa

MGolem

January 2nd, 2017 at 12:33 AM ^

Demonstrated that elite RB talent transcends the limitations of his o line. If we had an elite running game or an elite QB we would have gone undefeated (at least until we got into the playoffs). This is college football. Elite skill players, especially QB and RB, make all the difference. Speight was not elite and I doubt he ever will be, even with a stellar o line. He just misses on too many throws. Once Harbaugh has his Michigan Andrew Luck, or we develop a running game like Alabama, we will really get rolling. Until then we have a definite ceiling.

FLwolvfan22

January 1st, 2017 at 11:36 PM ^

Where's our Michcigan style QB? Speight showed a few flashes this season but the first half was awful and the offensive line which was terrible and not of course giving Speight time to throw. Need better talent, with QB's coming up in line we should be good there, now Offensive line? Should be geting better. This will be a 3-4 year process to pull ourselves up from Hokemania.

MFanWM

January 1st, 2017 at 11:36 PM ^

I still say that given the deficiences on Oline and w Speight still obviously hurting, going to a spread look with four wide and Evans as a featured back would have been ideal for at least half the plays.  

Get some additional speed on the field that can get quick separation and make FSU spread out and put some significant pressure on the back seven.

Instead, Harbaugh/Drevno stuck with a power concept with play action passing and 5-7 step drops that just did not play well against the strengths/weaknesses.  

Just my opinion, but think of the last game Lloyd coached against Florida...spread and let the ball fly and it opened up a lot of good lanes for running.

SeattleWolverine

January 2nd, 2017 at 12:30 AM ^

Totally agree with this. It seemed like Speight was really struggling to throw downfield after the injury. OK, can't help that if it's his collarbone, but if the defense gets compressed because you aren't passing vertically, you need to think about ways to create spacing or stretch them horizontally. Toss sweeps to DeVeon are not the answer. 

 

Also, shotgun?

 

 

funkywolve

January 2nd, 2017 at 1:11 AM ^

Maybe it's just me but it seemed last year, UM had some new creative plays just about every week that surprised the defense.  Not sure if that was due to Ruddock being a 5th yr senior and 3 yr starter (granted the first two were at Iowa) but it didn't seem like the offensive staff had that same creativity working this year.

jdon

January 2nd, 2017 at 12:38 AM ^

Because there are some solid criticisms to our offense the last four games... however, that is who Harbaugh is: he is stubburn as fuck and he is going to make this team tough enough to run the game out on the ground or die trying.

This year we died trying.  I think we will run the table next year because of it.

call me an optimist but I think this weakness will not last.

jdon

 

M-Dog

January 2nd, 2017 at 1:00 AM ^

I have my fingers crossed, because the play calling regressed to a DeBordian level in November and December . . . .without the caliber of players to make it successful.

There were flashes during the season that Harbaugh / Drevno were more dynamic than that, but it went away in crunch time.

 

drzoidburg

January 2nd, 2017 at 7:55 AM ^

3 of the last 4 games were against the best defenses of the season and always play like shit at Iowa. But really all season Speight has been just a "game manager" not a playmaker, and the OL was so awful against Florida St, what can you expect of anyone? Even Washington's QB looked like a scrub against Bama for the same reason. Without a functioning OL, no team can do anything, and those are still Hoke's guys, who had to unlearn everything from their first 1-2 years

snarling wolverine

January 2nd, 2017 at 1:06 AM ^

Get some additional speed on the field that can get quick separation

Did we have receivers that can do that? Darboh/Chesson weren't great in this regard, and Perry was suspended.  And of course Peppers was out, if we were planning on using him there.

If we run a passing spread and our WRs don't get open quickly in space, Speight's probably in trouble against FSU's pass rush.  He was under enough pressure with the presence of a TE and Smith on the field.

 

 

BornInA2

January 1st, 2017 at 11:38 PM ^

I believe we led in the last minute of every game we lost. Counter-intuitively, our defense unable to make stops for 60 seconds cost us those three games.

Speight was Sad-Ghost Rudock in the Orange Bowl. Just not accurate or consistent.

Our offensive line...that, to me, is the big deal. No RB can run *through* defenders consistenly. Please MOAR holes. And MOAR time for Speight to pass would help, too.

But yes, I also agree with the OP: Coaching is only going to take you so far. We might hit the jackpot and be able to beat a team across a big recruiting gap once in a while, but if this is going to be something other than "remember when we beat OSU five years ago?" we gotta get more raw talent. If for nothing else to compensate for the Derrick Green/Ty Issac/Ondre Pipkin busts that are inevitable.

I'll refrain from speculating how the recruiting gap came to be and why it persists.

funkywolve

January 2nd, 2017 at 12:26 AM ^

Michigan won the time of possession battle against FSU.  Michigan ran 74 plays and had the ball for 34:17 seconds.  FSU ran 62 plays and had the ball for 26:43.  Michigan only had three, 3 and outs.

Against OSU, Michigan ran 79 plays and in regulation had the ball for 31:13 seconds.  OSU ran 82 plays and had the ball for 28:47.  (no time stats are kept for overtimes).  Michigan only had three, 3 and outs and one of them was their last possession of regulation.  

Iowa - yeah, Michigan lost the time of possession and had 5 three and outs.