Latest recruiting rankings

[GoBlueInAtlanta]

Courtesy of Maize n Brew.


TEAM RANKINGS
Some team recruiting rankings have been released, and all I can say is oh-boy-oh-boy-oh-boy-oh-boy-oh-boy!

Scout:
#1 Michigan
#2 Texas
#3 Florida
#11 Penn State
#12 Notre Dame
#21 Ohio State
#22 Michigan State

Maxpreps:
#1 Michigan
#2 Texas
#3 Florida
#13 Penn State
#18 Notre Dame
#20 Michigan State
#25 Wisconsin

 

[hungry]

and we're not even to September yet...

 

[jever4321]

If that doesn't get you fired up, you're a Spartan.

 

[uofm06marine]

That boasts well for our future, now let's see how this year goes.

 

[GoBlueInAtlanta]

That bodes well for our future, now let's see how this year goes.

Fixed it for you.



Yeah, I'm anal-retentive.

 

[dannydiggler]

Rankings are pointless.. While I'm excited, it really doesn't mean jack. Rivals didn't even have a Midwest recruiting analysis until a couple weeks ago.. In 2006 Michigan had a top 5 class and I didn't see them win a major BCS bowl game.. Just saying

 

[GoBlueInAtlanta]

Danny Diggler[/color]]Rankings are pointless.. While I'm excited, it really doesn't mean jack. Rivals didn't even have a Midwest recruiting analysis until a couple weeks ago.. In 2006 Michigan had a top 5 class and I didn't see them win a major BCS bowl game.. Just saying

So do you mean - Rankings are totally pointless - or - mostly pointless - or somewhat pointless?

Are you saying it doesn't matter if a team has a top ten class every year as opposed to a 25+ ranking every year?

 

[dannydiggler]

I'm saying clearly we've acquired talent. We all know that. But ratings aren't everything, it takes more than high star ratings and 5.8's and above to turn a team into a contender. Not all highly touted recruits pan out, another thing we know. Some of Michigan's best recruits / players in our late history were 3 star guys.. People sitting in offices behind computers imo don't determine how things will pan out. They just aren't as important as a good coaching staff, like we have along with things that can't be taught or measured through 40 times and 7 on 7 camps. Basically, rankings are for fans.. Coaches know what they are getting regardless of what a " senior recruiting analyst " says.

 

[wolverine304]

then why do the top teams always have top recruiting classes?

 

[Mitchrapp]

Its a good start.

 

[dannydiggler]

Michigan has had a top 15 class every year until last year, a top ten in 2008 and 09..Would you consider us a top team? By you're logic with that many highly touted recruits we should be a bcs contender... Texas has had a top 5 class almost every year and they went 5-7 last year... A&M is mopping the floor with recruiting, would you say they are a top team every year? Last year the powerhouse known as UCLA was #8 last year... Kids get over hyped... The lower rated kids esecially since the rivals and scout age have been the stars at Michigan. Braylon and Hart aside, one of the best guards in the big ten was a 2 star recruit.. Patrick Omameh ring a bell.. Look at all the lower ranked recruits beating up on the blue chippers in the secondary.. 2 blue chippers at corner transferred due to competition... Why isn't Dan O'neil the next Jake Long.. He had a 6.0 rating from Rivals...There are way too many examples to go on so i'll make it easy... Basically Coaches eye for talent > An analyst sitting behind a desk

 

[Mitchrapp]

Maybe you're right, they should aim for the 2 star prospects year after year. This way they have more time for golf.

 

[Mitchrapp]

And I think everyone gets your point. No quarantees. I still rather be one than 20.

 

[dannydiggler]

Pretty lame sarcasm for a moderator. You at least know what I'm getting at. I feel more than comfortable with the recruits we have coming in but if we aren't ranked in the top 5 what does it matter? Chris Wormley is ranked as a 3 star by rivals.. He could easily be our best defensive recruit. They are just stars and numbers.. It means nothing if they aren't on the field playing at their potential.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Not sure what your point is?

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Courtesy of Maize n Brew.


TEAM RANKINGS
Some team recruiting rankings have been released, and all I can say is oh-boy-oh-boy-oh-boy-oh-boy-oh-boy!

Scout:
#1 Michigan
#2 Texas
#3 Florida
#11 Penn State
#12 Notre Dame
#21 Ohio State
#22 Michigan State

Maxpreps:
#1 Michigan
#2 Texas
#3 Florida
#13 Penn State
#18 Notre Dame
#20 Michigan State
#25 Wisconsin

Rivals doesn't have us ranked poorly either:

1. Texas
2. Michigan
3. FSU
4. Florida
5. Miami
11. PSU
16. ND
23. OSU

 

[hungry]

Danny Diggler[/color]]Michigan has had a top 15 class every year until last year, a top ten in 2008 and 09..Would you consider us a top team? By you're logic with that many highly touted recruits we should be a bcs contender... Texas has had a top 5 class almost every year and they went 5-7 last year... A&M is mopping the floor with recruiting, would you say they are a top team every year? Last year the powerhouse known as UCLA was #8 last year... Kids get over hyped... The lower rated kids esecially since the rivals and scout age have been the stars at Michigan. Braylon and Hart aside, one of the best guards in the big ten was a 2 star recruit.. Patrick Omameh ring a bell.. Look at all the lower ranked recruits beating up on the blue chippers in the secondary.. 2 blue chippers at corner transferred due to competition... Why isn't Dan O'neil the next Jake Long.. He had a 6.0 rating from Rivals...There are way too many examples to go on so i'll make it easy... Basically Coaches eye for talent > An analyst sitting behind a desk

So if you hear that Michigan has landed a commitment of a 5 star recruit, you're not excited? If given the choice between a 5 star recruit and a 3 star recruit, which would you choose? Are you equally excited when Michigan lands a 3 star prospect as you are when you hear that Michigan lands a 5 star prospect? Do you think coaches want 5 star prospects more than 3 star prospects? Do you think there is a possibility that they get a 3 star prospect because they can't get a 5 star prospect?

We've already covered extensively that the chances a player is an All-American in college and is drafted into the NFL grows exponentially according to star ranking. Do you not want players that statistically have a better chance of being All-Americans and NFL draft picks? Even if you don't care about the player in the NFL or after he leaves Michigan, to be a draft pick means that he must have done some things well in college.

Don't point out the exceptions to the rule and say that since they're are a few exceptions that it discounts the general principle.

 

[hungry]

Give me Texas' last 10 years over our last 10 years anyday, even with 1 5-7 season...

 

[MAIZEandBLUE09]

Danny Diggler[/color]]Michigan has had a top 15 class every year until last year, a top ten in 2008 and 09..Would you consider us a top team? By you're logic with that many highly touted recruits we should be a bcs contender... Texas has had a top 5 class almost every year and they went 5-7 last year... A&M is mopping the floor with recruiting, would you say they are a top team every year? Last year the powerhouse known as UCLA was #8 last year... Kids get over hyped... The lower rated kids esecially since the rivals and scout age have been the stars at Michigan. Braylon and Hart aside, one of the best guards in the big ten was a 2 star recruit.. Patrick Omameh ring a bell.. Look at all the lower ranked recruits beating up on the blue chippers in the secondary.. 2 blue chippers at corner transferred due to competition... Why isn't Dan O'neil the next Jake Long.. He had a 6.0 rating from Rivals...There are way too many examples to go on so i'll make it easy... Basically Coaches eye for talent > An analyst sitting behind a desk

This topic has been beat to death - simply put, you are wrong. There is a significant correlation with a recruits star ranking and success. That doesn't mean a two star can't be a star and a 5 star can't be a bust. Let's use Michigan as an example. We've had 10 five star recruits in our history according to Rivals.

Gabe Watson
Prescott Burgess
LaMarr Woodley
Chad Henne
Kevin Grady
Brandon Graham
Stephen Schilling
Ryan Mallet
Donovan Warren
Will Campbell

So far of the 10 - only 1 of them has been a bust, not earning a starting position ever, and that's Kevin Grady. Big Will still has some time to go but even including him in the "bust" category would mean that only 2 of 10 five star recruits were busts. Of the other 8 players 3 of them were arguable one of the best players at their position Michigan has ever had: Henne, Graham and Woodley. The other five were either good or really good players at Michigan, maybe not all stars, but were good players while here. Statistically there's a 30% shot that if Michigan lands a 5 star recruit that they'll be one of the best player's we've ever had at the position.


Now I'm not going to go count up all the two and three star players we've had since 2002 but I can assure you for that every 1 Mike hart that comes through there are 25 other two and three star players than never even crack the two deep.

And the same would be true if you counted up all the four star players and compared them to the three star players. There's a greater probability of success at the program being ranked higher.

The point of all of this - You want highly recruited and ranked kids to make up as much of your roster as possible.

What happened at Texas is not evidence of recruiting rankings gone wrong because you're forgetting the previous 9 years where they won 10+ games and a BCS national championship. It's more so evidence of putting all your eggs in a 1 QB basket.

 

[bamf16]

Danny Diggler[/color]]Michigan has had a top 15 class every year until last year, a top ten in 2008 and 09..Would you consider us a top team? By you're logic with that many highly touted recruits we should be a bcs contender... Texas has had a top 5 class almost every year and they went 5-7 last year... A&M is mopping the floor with recruiting, would you say they are a top team every year? Last year the powerhouse known as UCLA was #8 last year... Kids get over hyped... The lower rated kids esecially since the rivals and scout age have been the stars at Michigan. Braylon and Hart aside, one of the best guards in the big ten was a 2 star recruit.. Patrick Omameh ring a bell.. Look at all the lower ranked recruits beating up on the blue chippers in the secondary.. 2 blue chippers at corner transferred due to competition... Why isn't Dan O'neil the next Jake Long.. He had a 6.0 rating from Rivals...There are way too many examples to go on so i'll make it easy... Basically Coaches eye for talent > An analyst sitting behind a desk

This topic has been beat to death - simply put, you are wrong. There is a significant correlation with a recruits star ranking and success. That doesn't mean a two star can't be a star and a 5 star can't be a bust. Let's use Michigan as an example. We've had 10 five star recruits in our history according to Rivals.

Gabe Watson
Prescott Burgess
LaMarr Woodley
Chad Henne
Kevin Grady
Brandon Graham
Stephen Schilling
Ryan Mallet
Donovan Warren
Will Campbell

So far of the 10 - only 1 of them has been a bust, not earning a starting position ever, and that's Kevin Grady. Big Will still has some time to go but even including him in the "bust" category would mean that only 2 of 10 five star recruits were busts. Of the other 8 players 3 of them were arguable one of the best players at their position Michigan has ever had: Henne, Graham and Woodley. The other five were either good or really good players at Michigan, maybe not all stars, but were good players while here. Statistically there's a 30% shot that if Michigan lands a 5 star recruit that they'll be one of the best player's we've ever had at the position.


Now I'm not going to go count up all the two and three star players we've had since 2002 but I can assure you for that every 1 Mike hart that comes through there are 25 other two and three star players than never even crack the two deep.

The point of all of this - You want highly recruited and ranked kids to make up as much of your roster as possible.

What happened at Texas is not evidence of recruiting rankings gone wrong because you're forgetting the previous 9 years where they won 10+ games and a BCS national championship. It's more so evidence of putting all your eggs in a 1 QB basket.

Bazinga