Updated 2014 ESPN 300 rankings out; Michigan at #6 overall
Version 3 of the 2014 ESPN 300 is out. In the overall team rankings, Michigan fell three spots to #6, but I'm not even worried. Everybody ahead of us has class sizes bigger than ours (Miami, Tennessee, and FSU are all over 20 already), and it's obviously still a long way from signing day.
I don't have historical data, so no context for where our recruits are ranked, but here's where they are in this latest edition:
2. Jabrill Peppers
72. Drake Harris
76. Bryan Mone
112. Lawrence Marshall
118. Ian Bunting
122. Juwann Bushell-Beatty
123. Michael Ferns
128. Wilton Speight
146. Mason Cole
Da'Shawn Hand inched up 1 spot to #4 on their rankings.
#jptta?
Other prospects of interest:
4. Da'Shawn Hand
6. Adoree' Jackson
9. Marlon Humphrey (only included because of the excitement of him being in Ann Arbor. I realize there's basically zero chance of us landing him, but I had never heard of him before the tweet that was reported earlier)
22. Damian Prince
51. Marshon Lattimore
67. Malik McDowell
92. Parker Westphal
Sorry if I missed this in the other thread, but did Marlon Humphrey even meet with the coaches when he was in AA?
Don't know, but I don't think so. I think he was just in the area for a track meet and took a picture for Peppers. The only reason I included him was because he came up recently, and I didn't know he was so highly ranked. Not trying to imply that he'll choose Michigan or anything.
I didn't think you were implying.
I wasn't going to get overly excited unless he was there to actually meet with the coaches.
RE: Humphrey
I posted in the twitter pic thread, but not sure if anyone saw it. Rivals board said he was in Ypsi for a track meet and they're not sure if he even visited campus (he wasn't planning to). So he really shouldn't even be considered "of interest" in my e-pinion.
They are far more likely than Adoree Jackson at this point.
Nicholson is listed at 252.
Juju (listed as John Smith) is at 41.
I'm surprised Nicholson is rated so much lower than Westphal. I'd rather have Montae at this point.
Completely agree
Right now, of those prospects, 247's Crystal Ball has us better than 50% with Hand, McDowell, and Westphal. If we could bring in those three, that would be tremendous.
2014 is so 4 days ago
Tom Luginbill, in this write-up, explains the movement of Da'Shawn Hand from 5 to 4:
• Top five shuffle: DE Da'Shawn Hand (Woodbridge, Va./Woodbridge) jumps Virginia DT Andrew Brown (Chesapeake, Va./Oscar Frommel Smith) with Hand now sitting at No. 4 and Brown dropping to No. 5. This moves is entirely based on consistency during multiple viewings we have now had of both players. In time and depending on where he signs, Hand could actually be a Jack linebacker/rush player or 5-technique as we are not convinced he is a pure edge player.
Did we consider him a pure edge player? In my mind he was always a 5-tech.
Depending on personnel around him, he has the potential to fit in at both. He can be a WDE early and by the time he bulks up by a SDE. By the time he would be an upper classman at Michigan, I would expect him to be moved around so defenses can't pin point him and based on down and distance. Run heavy: WDE. Pass heavy: SDE. Mix in some rush backer on some downs and that's pretty much what I'd expect out of him eventually.
It will be nice to see the Michigan logo behind 2 of the top 4 recruits in the country
Seeing the Iowa logo in the top 50 is surprising.
You can do much worse than going to Iowa. In fact, you'll be hard pressed to find many better than Iowa at maximizing potential on the O-line, particularly inside.
Kirk Ferentz in an OL guy right?
Actually played LB at UConn, but has coached OL his whole life, including with the Browns when they were coached by Belichick and later with the Ravens when the Browns moved to Baltimore. 6 years total as an OL coach in the NFL and several before that at Iowa before becoming the Iowa HC. He went on to coach I believe 3 of his sons at Iowa, all offensive linemen, and I believe 2 of them are now coaches under him (which I'm kind of skeptical about, but that's beside the point).
I've always been a big supporter of Ferentz. He was one of the first coaches I reached out to before I went into coaching and he was kind enough to write back a hand written note several pages long to a then high school version of myself when he had no obligation to do so (for what it's worth, Carr was one of the few others that did the same). On top of that, he's produced very well there, so besides my personal bias, there's that.
Been surprised how far Iowa has fallen of late - seems everytime I watch a game they are on their 7th RB of the season but Iowa used to hold the slot that perhaps a MSU/Northwestern currently resides in, in the pecking order. They have some nice players here or there but it appears the depth has fallen off or something else is amiss there - I don't purport to be an expert on their program so not sure what happened.
Lots of injuries hurt them last year and their skill guys weren't extremely good. OTs struggled a bit as well and Vandenberg suddenly forgot how to play QB, meaning they pretty much ran inside zone all day every day, except for the occassional PA off of it.
Perhaps more importantly, they lost their DC Norm Parker and their D-line coach a few years back. The defensive front is what held Iowa together in the past on defense, they were so solid at the point of attack that they could run cover 2 and pretty much nothing else, and just be very good at running that.
I have a few bones to pick with the direction of the program, including the hiring of some of Ferentz's sons, getting rid of one of the best WR coaches in the nation in Soup Campbell, and some of the things they are doing on defense (not to mention what happened with the S&C program). That was always a program that had to take risks on some kids because who else was coming to Iowa to play football outside of the corn-fed wrestlers. It kind of caught up with them. I don't know if they'll get back to where they were not long ago, but as far as O-line is concerned they are in pretty good hands, and have some young guys up front on defense that should start improving in the next couple years.
Recruiting averages caught up with them. You can find diamonds in the rough and you can develop, and to a certain extent you can be better than everyone else at that. But eventually if all you've recruited is average players, it's going to catch up. They got fairly lucky a few years ago with Stanzi, Klug, Sash, Moeaki, and Clayborn supplementing a disciplined group of well-coached players. But when you don't hit the 3* lotto and no impact players surface, you have have Iowa of the last two years.
Sparty will be Iowa again and Iowa will be Sparty. That's why I loved Brian's line after the MSU game this year, "It doesn't matter if MSU or Iowa is Iowa. What matters is in Schembechler Hall, and MSU players watching Michigan play Alabama know it."
Yes I get your point but Iowa was not a flash in the pan program that was good for 5 years. They were in the 2nd tranche behind UM/OSU through much of the 80s in the Hayden Fry era. At the end of his career in mid 90s they trailed off but in the 80s they had a couple of 10 win seasons. Other than 88-89 they won 8,9, or 10 games every year - and thats when you topped out at 12 games total. Then Ferenz had them back at that level for quite a time too. Just sounds like depth issues and some coaching situations per the other poster.
1989 5-6
1990 8-4
1991 10-1-1
1992 5-7
1993 6-6
1994 5-5-1
1995 8-4
1996 9-3
1997 7-5
1998 3-8
1999 1-10
2000 3-9
2001 7-5
2002 11-2
2003 10-3
2004 10-2
2005 7-5
2006 6-7
2007 6-6
2008 9-4
2009 11-2
2010 8-5
2011 7-6
2012 4-8
166 wins, 123 losses, 2 ties. A pedestrian 57 winning percentage (8-4 is obviously 66%, well above Iowa's average during that time). I agree better than Sparty, but probably because they won more big games and took better advantage of their upcycles. They got a lot of credit for that 2002-2004 stretch, and by backing that up with 2008-2009 (plus the BCS win). But this is the type of performance you'd expect from a program that recruits at the level they do.
I'm handpicking a time but Ferentz run from 2002-2009 was pretty solid. Thats a 7 year time frame. Fry had a similar/better run essentially the entire 80s. Not sure what happened in 98-00 - trying to figure out how a Big 10 team managd to win 1 game... eek.
Michigan was like 44 - 10 (pre-RR) against Iowa ? The last game at Iowa, was one of our poorest efforts since Hoke arrived.
Go Blue!
It isn't about quantity. People should stop worrying so much about class rankings. What matters is the coaches' addressing the needs of the depth chart, which is what they have been doing.
Wow, Tennessee at #2? I haven't really followed recruiting that much. Is that due to the class of their class or quality?
I'm guessing it's mainly due to the size. They've already got 24 verbals. Of those 24, 12 are 4-star recruits, 9 are 3-stars. I wouldn't expect them to remain that high once other schools start filling their classes up. For reference, UCLA finished 12th overall last year with 24 commitments. Of those 24, 12 were 4-stars, 11 were 3-stars. I know rankings are always relative, but I wouldn't expect to see Tennessee finish any higher than that.
For years, TN always had one of the top recruiting classes. For years, they underperformed. I started ignoring TN when it came to recruiting, as it never predicted future performance on the field. I will change that approach when TN is relevant again.
I agree with all you say. If memory serves me, though, didn't they underperform, given the talent level, even when Fulmer was there? I seem to remember one or two classes where there were ranked at or close to #1 in the country back in the late-90s, early aughts.
I know Carr was not fired but I think many would argue he was nudged out. If you replace the word fired with nudged out what you described with Fulmer and the ensuing mistake sounds almost identical paralleled to Michigan. Of course the guy after the mistake seems to be doing far better here than there....
Wasn't that long ago when Florida-Tennessee was what LSU-Alabama is today.Many that would argue Carr was "nudged out" would be wrong. Carr was beloved by the administration in no small part due to the confidence Schembechler had in him, and the fact he delivered a national title. Carr pretty much called his shot. He knew 06-07 was the window when he wanted to retire. Whether or not he informed anyone in the administration about this is another debate. Those two years were his last opportunity to put together good seasons given the talent he had on hand. That's part of why Michigan had such a dropoff in recruiting toward the end of his tenure. Michigan with Carr was not the same as Tennessee's situation with Fulmer. They were only similar in that both transitions into new coaching staffs were disasters.
Interesting how many recruits are from the South (esp. LA and AL), TX and California. I wonder if it's because of the athletes, because of expectations, or because that's where the scouts are? I know this has been commented on in the past, but the difference seems stark given that there are roughly the same number of athletes coming out of SEC territories as B1G territories.
Given the percentage of top recruits out of the Sunbelt, it's amazing how well we're doing getting so many highly-ranked players.
Just a given fact that Southern states and CA produce the most talent.
I really don't care about winning a mythical recruiting championshiop. Once you stack multiple top 10-12 type of classes back to back there are no excuses and the coaching staff needs to go out there and develop and execute. This link is from after the 2011 season so its a bit dated but it shows the average recruiting class for the previous 5 years for the final AP 25. Normal suspects at the very top but you can see the Stanfords, Wisconsins, Oregons averaged in the late teen to 40s. Say what you want about Wisconsin and Stanford had Luck but again if you finish 5th or 12th or 9th in any year it really does not matter. Once you have accumulated these type of classes back to back to back, you are in the mix and your coaches need to deliver. At this point the coaching staff in year 2015 forward will have their entire class in, and the first batch will be hitting their prime. The offensive line will be stacked witht the last 2 classes and hitting their stride and young skill position players everywhere on offense and a faster, althetic defense in Mattison's mold will be primed. It will be time to deliver.
p.s. the bottom of the link has the big "miss" teams (highly ranked classes who didnt even finish top 25 - at the time ND and OSU were on it but a year later they were both top 5) - it remains a wonder how Mack Brown retains his job.
You make a good point. I think there are a number of factors beyond simply recruiting top-ranked talent and coaching that determine on-field success:
1) Luck (and not just the Stanford QB). You don't know who you have until they're on campus. HS performance and #s (40 times, etc) only tell you so much. The best talent evaluators in the world can be wrong, and often are, because humans are quirky.
2) Injuries.
3) How the team gels.
4) Scheduling (even the best teams will have off weeks, and weak opponents give better odds of being able to afford it)
5) Position coaching--how are the players developing as inidividuals in their positions, in the weight room, etc. Also, are the best players evenly distributed among the positions or well-suited to the schemes run by the O and D?
6) Game coaching--probably the most over-rated of these.
Yes my comment about delivering is not "win the national championship" but in a 4 team playoff Michigan should be competing for the Big 10 slot every year, from 2015 onward. By definition that is being a real player for the Big 10 championship not a 'dark horse' or 'one of 5 teams I a bunch who could do it.'
Of your points I can't point to any Big 10 program not benefiting from an easier schedule than SEC teams. Its a top heavy conference but the propensity to slip up against a pretty darn good team in the SEC is much higher than here where the quality of the conference has "sucked" since 2006 at the minimum. I think point #5 is the most important after player evaluation. I may be in the minority but in the 2000s I felt the Carr staff did not get the most out of a lot of players. I say that based on the fact there would be kids who were nice players in college but they would get to the NFL and blossom to another level. Seems like we did not get all we could out of some of them. I contrast that to what Mattison did with the 2011 defense and I am hopeful that won't be the case.I have no insider information, but I remember a quote from a rival coach toward the end of the Carr era in which he said, basically, that when they got on the field warming up and looked across at Michigan, the UM players were all faster, bigger and stronger than the coach's players, but UM didn't seem to play as dominantly as they looked.
Interesting list, I'm surprised they have Bushel-Beatty so high. The kid is huge, but he isn't near the athlete of Mason Cole. JBB has the potential to be a good B1G starter, while Cole has all conference potential. They also have Harris a bit lower than everyone else, but I know Luginbill has stated in the past the importance they place on DEs, QBs, and OTs over all other positions.