 |
| Massillon (OH) Washington cornerback Gareon Conley surprised many by being ranked #63 |
- Shane Morris starts at #37
- Gareon Conley starts at #63
- Mike McCray starts at #75
- David Dawson starts at #92
- Logan Tuley-Tillman starts at #97
- Dymonte Thomas starts at #98
- Chris Fox starts at #105
- Jourdan Lewis starts at #107
- Kyle Bosch starts at #112
- Taco Charlton starts at #115
- Patrick Kugler starts at #121
3. Laremy Tunsil - OT - Florida
4. Vernon Hargreaves III - CB - Florida
12. Eli Woodard - CB - New Jersey (Ohio State)
14. Montravius Adams - DT - Georgia
15. Su'a Cravens - S - California
21. Cameron Burrows - CB - Ohio (Ohio State)
23. Robert Foster - WR - Pennsylvania
27. Kendall Fuller - CB - Maryland
34. Leon McQuay III - S - Florida
36. Keith Ford - RB - Texas (Oklahoma)
37. Shane Morris - QB - Michigan (Michigan)
39. Adam Breneman - TE - Pennsylvania (Penn State)41. Joey Bosa - DE - Florida
42. LaQuon Treadwell - WR - Illinois
46. Jaylon Smith - LB - Indiana
52. Darrell Daniels - WR - California
56. Eddi Vanderdoes - DT - California
57. Michael Hutchings - LB - California
59. James Quick - WR - Kentucky
62. Priest Willis - S - Arizona
63. Gareon Conley - CB - Ohio (Michigan)
68. Ty Isaac - RB - Illinois69. Chris Hawkins - CB - California (USC)
72. Ethan Pocic - OT - Illinois
73. Dorian O'Daniel - LB - Maryland (Clemson)
74. Demorea Stringfellow - WR - California
75. Mike McCray - LB - Ohio (Michigan)
77. Kevin Olsen - QB - New Jersey78. Jake Raulerson - OT - Texas (Texas)
82. Jonathan Allen - DE - Virginia
83. Derrick Green - RB - Virginia
85. Justin Manning - DT - Texas
86. Shaq Wiggins - CB - Georgia (Georgia)
88. Elijah Daniel - DE - Indiana
91. Colin McGovern - OT - Illinois (Notre Dame)
92. David Dawson - OG - Michigan (Michigan)
95. Hunter Bivin - OT - Kentucky (Notre Dame)
97. Logan Tuley-Tillman - OT - Illinois (Michigan)
98. Dymonte Thomas - S - Ohio (Michigan)
104. Matt Rolin - LB - Virginia
105. Chris Fox - OT - Colorado (Michigan)
107. Jourdan Lewis - CB - Michigan (Michigan)
112. Kyle Bosch - OG - Illinois (Michigan)
115. Taco Charlton - DE - Ohio (Michigan)
119. Tashawn Bower - DE - New Jersey120. Joe Mathis - DE - California
121. Patrick Kugler - C - Pennsylvania (Michigan)
123. Greg Webb - DT - New Jersey (Penn State)130. Marquez North - WR - North Carolina
131. Standish Dobard - TE - Louisiana (Miami)
142. Evan Lisle - OT - Ohio (Ohio State)
145. Alquadin Muhammad - DE - New Jersey
147. Antwuan Davis - CB - Texas
149. Sebastian Larue - WR - California
Wow -- Conley is the front-runner for this year's Isaiah Bell award, which goes to the player that gets more love from ESPN than the other services. Hopefully his career arc will be better.
ReplyDelete@ Anon,
DeleteI think he career arc will be better just with the fact that we have a better coaching staff. Also Conley is most likely not going to be a position switcher when he gets here. Bell had the misfortune of coming in as a big S and then moving to LB.
Conley is supposed to get a bump on some of the other services.
DeleteThunder,
ReplyDeleteObviously, more talent is better than less, and recruiting rankings do a decent job of reflecting talent. But...they don't actually affect it.
What they do affect, potentially, is player attitudes.
To that end, I've argued that, once a recruit is committed to Michigan (meaning the coaches are comfortable with what he brings in term of talent), that I'd rather a recruit get ranked LOWER by a recruiting site than higher. I still want to get the uncommitted 5-star types, but once a player commits, I no longer have much interest in what recruitniks think of them.
This personal view (or, if you prefer, hypothesis) is long held, but has recently gained a lot of traction. The '13 class seems openly excited about their individual and class rankings. They make comments that, indicate they think this is a notable accomplishment. They use the rankings as an affirmation to make bold claims about winning 4 national titles (or whatever.)
My concern is that recruits are increasingly taking this stuff too seriously. Posada and Barnett come to mind as guys with good recruiting rankings who weren't willing to do the work. Obviously there are many counter examples but...aren't we ultimately better off with a talented prospect getting 'dissed' than 'honored'?
You might be thinking of someone else, but Tony Posada was a mid-to-low 3-star to all major services.
DeleteMore generally, I'd have to see some compelling evidence to buy the claim that high rankings tend to hinder future performance. On the flip side, I think it's plausible to think that hype over rankings can actually help a class come together -- Shane Morris et al pointing to their status as the best-regarded recruiting class in the country seems like it would have a positive effect on non-committed blue chip players in '13 and '14 who aren't afraid of competition and who have a reasonable expectation to compete for national championships wherever they land.
I don't know, Lankwonia. I guess I'd have to see some evidence for what you're saying. I really don't see it as an issue. I think college players want to be ranked #1, but I don't see it hurting #1-ranked teams. Kids with high recruiting rankings still do well at the college level.
DeleteBarnett had some issues aside from "not wanting to do the work." I don't want to say much more than that, but he had/has a lot going on in his life. I'm hoping that he finds some success.
The recruiting class momentum issue is a solid point. If the ratings help attract more talent - then great. I'm just not sure that's really a big deal. Every year we talk about how this recruit or that is really talking to a lot of kids and bringing them on board (e.g. Ricardo Miller), but it hard to produce evidence that it has tangible effects. Same for recruiting rankings. Kids say a lot of things matter, like academics - and then they end up going somewhere else. The biggest factors seem to be prestige and coaching personalities. Maybe recruiting rankings effect prestige significantly, maybe not.
DeleteTwo clarifications:
1. Posada was not a great choice to use for an example given his recruiting rankings, but the point is that plenty of highly-rated prospects don't pan out - and with many of them, the issue wasn't talent. It was motivation. Other examples just from the last few years: Forcier, Turner, Christian, LaLota, Stokes, etc. I obviously can't say what effect recruiting rankings have on these kids not panning out at Michigan but...it's a logical that they could play a role in some cases.
2. I recognize that these rankings are generally not life-altering events. I'm not saying high rankings doom all recruits, obviously. Good recruits mostly get good rankings. But rankings themselves don't make recruits any better. Recruiting rankings don't much matter either way. To the small extent that they do... what is gained by the high ranking for the individual? Unless confidence is an issue (unlikely with star football players, but possible), they can't have a positive effect. I'm saying if they do have any effect - it is negative. So rooting for ESPN or whoever to move guys up is silly IMO.
Regarding #1: It seems like you're suggesting that recruiting rankings in recent years might have negatively affected motivation, but what about in 2002? Or 1992? There were recruiting ratings back then, although they weren't known as well. I don't know that a kid in 2012 is any more negatively affected by a high rating than a kid was in 2005 or 2000.
DeleteRegarding #2: You never know with some people. Some kid who's ranked #250 and gets pissed off about that might bust his butt, add weight, get faster, play well, and get boosted to #50. Once he sees that hard work paying off, maybe he'll say "Okay, so THAT'S what I have to do to be successful. I have to bust my butt, eat right, etc. I did all those things, and people noticed." I think your argument could easily go the other way.
Yeah, I think it's changed with the internet and the rise of recruiting services. Not many people, especially high school kids, were willing (or cared) to pay to get the recruiting magazines sent in the mail during the 90s and even in the 00s the information was still pretty limited. Recruits, like fans, have much more information now. And, it does seems like people are transferring faster and more often than they used to...but maybe I'm just getting old and forgetting. Regardless, my point wasn't really to compare 1992 to 2012.
DeleteRegarding the rankings working as a motivator - that could be true. I've never heard recruits talk like that though. I HAVE heard a lot of recruits make comments that give off the vibe that they feel a sense of entitlement. The change I'm seeing in recent years is that the rankings are being treated as an accomplishment by some recruits. I think that attitude is dangerous.
Again, I don't think it's a huge deal one way or the other, but people act like the rankings are a really big deal. I get that it's a fun way for fans to stay interested in the offseason, but some people are reading way too much into it.
DeleteI just don't think it helps anyone for our recruits to move up in the rankings. There have been a few valid situations brought up here that I hadn't considered. I do see where it could help, potentially, but IMO these are less likely than the scenarios where it hurts. Call me a pessimist.
Continued indifference sounds like the wisest course.
Levenberry?
ReplyDeleteLevenberry's not on the list and I'm not too surprised. I'll have a scouting report up on Thursday
ReplyDeleteI'm not surprised either. As I've mentioned before, Levenberry lacks game speed and is not a quick-twitch athlete. Not an explosive LB at all. He is a kid that physically matured faster than a lot of his peers, is smart, and well coached. That combination got him recognized pretty early. Watch his film, though. He's not elite. Good player, however, that I'd still take.
DeleteI await your scouting report. I'm always curious about guys who receive national buzz and all the sudden drop like a rock.
DeleteI don't think Levenberry has dropped like a rock. I think Rivals ranked him high, Michigan fans latched onto that ranking, and not all the other recruiting services were ever on board with that rating.
DeleteI came onto this site today to specifically ask Thunder about his thoughts on Levenberry, so I'll be back on Thursday for sure. Like MFan4Life said, he does seem to lack game speed, but he does have good instincts and seems to play fairly strong. When he gets near the ball, he makes the tackle and can go through blocks quite effectively. Not thrilled with him as an insider backer, but maybe he could grow into a WDE.
DeleteWhat seems to be accelerating is lists to drive eyeballs.... and if you can be slightly contrarian with your list that gives you.... eyeballs. None of these services really take into account competition and then watching a kid at a skills camp seems to always improve their take because they got to talk to him and write a story and get.... eyeballs. Really don't know how you can discern much more than very best, best, good. Even that has a lot of room for error.
ReplyDelete@Lankownia. You have an interesting point, but there is a clear benefit of having our recruits get higher rankings. According to interviews with a number of the top uncommitted prospects, joining a top-ranked class can be a major attraction. Also, Posada was one of our lower ranked recruits.
ReplyDeleteYou beat me to the punch regarding Posada. He was a 3-star to all four major recruiting sites.
DeleteThunder,
ReplyDeleteHow do you compare Jaron Dukes with Jeremy Jackson when Jeremy was a high school senior? I remember Jeremy had some impressove offers, while being a generic 3-star.