Oklahoma running back Taylor Tatum has signed with Michigan out of the transfer portal. Originally a 2024 recruit, he signed with the Sooners after being very high on Michigan.
Tatum is listed at 5'10", 212 lbs. He played in eleven games as a freshman in 2024, running 56 times for 278 yards and 3 touchdowns. But he only played on game in 2025, notching 1 carry for -1 yard against South Carolina. He will be a redshirt sophomore this fall with three seasons of eligibility remaining.
Hailing from Longview (TX) Longview, Tatum was a 4-star, the #1 running back, and #48 overall in the 247 Composite in the 2024 class. He's currently a 3-star, the #11 running back, and #151 in the transfer portal rankings, though those are constantly fluctuating and I don't really understand how those rankings are made.
Tatum is a solid running back, but I'm not sure there's anything that truly stands out about him. Even on his high school film, he was one of those players who had good speed but didn't show a ton of elusiveness or power. In a way similar to someone like Karan Higdon, he will probably play well when the line is creating holes and he will probably struggle to create things on his own when the line is overmatched.
Michigan is bringing back Jordan Marshall, who was the backup to start the 2025 season and ended up starting several games, finishing with 150 carries for 932 yards and 10 touchdowns. They also signed 5-star and #1 running back Savion Hiter in the 2026 class. However, it appears that starter Justice Haynes will hit the transfer portal and play elsewhere in 2026, and both Bryson Kuzdzal (326 yards, 4 TD) and Jasper Parker (93 yards, 2 TD, now committed to Arkansas) jumped in the portal.
So here's a look at how the depth chart has changed:
Justice HaynesJordan MarshallJordan MarshallTaylor TatumBryson KuzdzalSavion HiterJasper ParkerMicah Ka'apana
Tatum's highlights from his senior year of high school:
Seems like a decent RB depth option but whatever. The best thing about Tatum is that it probably means Haynes isn't coming back.
ReplyDeleteHaynes is an excellent RB but he is also very very expensive. If Michigan was to have 3 expensive RBs (Marshall and Hiter are locked in as 2) that would be egregious budget mismanagement. You would be actively taking away from other positions (e.g., WR or DB) for incremental benefit at RB.
Some fans were cheering for this and in the pre-NIL era I would have wanted Haynes back too of course, but times have changed. Now it would have been a disaster.
This commitment is more a relief than anything else.
On the topic of portal player rankings:
ReplyDelete" those are constantly fluctuating and I don't really understand how those rankings are made."
I think it's become real confusing and really lost it's meaning. While the rankings are ostensibly still the same as always (a prediction of NFL draft status) they are no longer reflecting value to college football teams.
Let me give a specific example in Carson Beck. He was a 4 star recruit out of high school (composite top 10 QB but outside the top 250 national recruits). Basically, the sites were saying this isn't a 1st round caliber NFL talent but he ranks in a range where he would be a draftable QB. To a college team that means he's a good prospect but there's a high degree of uncertainty (maybe 50/50 at best) that he's going to be a good starter. But that uncertainty exists for pretty much any kid out of high school so it is what it is.
Fast forward 4 years and Beck is still a 4 star because he's still probably not a 1st round NFL talent. He's more of a day 2 guy. So his POTENTIAL as far as the NFL goes hasn't really changed. And the recruiting sites essentially hit the nail on the head in their evaluation out of high school* BUT BUT BUT -- his VALUE to a CFB team is exponentially different. Now he's one of the highest paid players in all of CFB, a plug and play starter getting more money than most NFL drafted QBs and he's one of the biggest reasons Miami is in the national championship game.
When you rank recruits out of high school on the same basis of POTENTIAL as proven college starters -- that's a systematic disconnect from the thing that we college football fans care about - value to the program.
Another way to think about it is expected value. Carson Beck out of high school was a 4 star recruit and your typical 4 star recruit no more likley to be a P4 starter than he is to be a career backup or down transfer. Carson Beck as a grad transfer meanwhile has an expected value of Heisman contender. In other words a blue chip 5 star out of high school is less valuable to a team than a proven starter 4 star senior. The stars are missing the point.
When everyone was equally uncertain because we were comparing a bunch of high school kids to each other, it was all well and good. But now that things like the 80% likelihood that a 5 star from high school will NOT be drafted in the first round (whose median expectation is maybe something like all conference 2nd team as a senior and drafted in the 7th round) can't just be waved off as "well that was just our best guess at the time".
The RISK is no longer a factor that can be ignored.
on.
DeleteAnother example : John Henry Daley is an all american edge and plug and play starter but listed (like Carson Beck) as only a 4 star because he's not quite projected to go in Round 1 of the draft. Meanwhile Carter Meadows (who is probably 1/3 likely to bust, 1/3 likely to be OK, and 1/3 likely to be excellent -- so maybe a 10% chance at best of ever being as good as Daley should be for Michigan in '26). Daley is probably getting paid a whole lot more than Meadows (I don't know but I would bet my house) because he is way more valuable in 2026. Meadows MAY be better someday but Michigan can't count on that especially since he could be in the portal in a year (like Ty Haywood and all the others).
So that's another example where a 5 star is clearly less valuable than the 4 star. The star system is broken as a means of evaluating player VALUE because it ignores age, experience, and certainty by explicitly being focused on NFL draft potential. What worked in the pre-portal era no longer works.
PS
DeleteFirst person/website to figure out how to get more realistic player value evaluations out to the market will probably profit enormously.
My simple suggestion -- keep 2 parallel star systems. 1 for potential (i.e., NFL) and 1 for current value (i.e., NIL). The one that is potential is valuable for high school recruiting (i.e., status quo) and to some extent the younger side of the portal (i.e., freshman transfers). But the current value version is valuble to assess the portal and estimate relative NIL compensation.
The two get in closer alignment each year as risk/uncertainty drops with time. By the time someone is a grad transfers they should be pretty much aligned because now potential and value are the same thing (from a college perspective).
The VALUE one is the one you use for portal purposes to evaluate classes. And you might as well do this for everyone whether they are in the portal or not, if you want to be accurate about it.
In other words change how you evaluate. Evaluate based on current value (performance), not based on best case scenario (i.e., potential). Evaluate based on the expected value for the upcoming season. So go ahead and list Bryce as a 5-star recruit based on his potential but also make him a 3-star player as a freshman because he's going to take his lumps most likely and be a below average big 10 QB as a freshman. And go ahead and make John Henry Daley a 5-star since he's an all american and his 3 star status out of high school is just an interesting footnote of the past.
/essay
*Recruiting site nailed Beck as long as you look at the stars (4 star says he's draftable but not day 1). But they are exceptionally wrong if you look at rankings placing him 19th in overall QBs, below guys like Ethan Garbers, Harrison Bailey, DJ Uiagalelei, Hudson Card and JaQuinden Jacks.
Kuzdal's replacement, but more explosive
ReplyDeleteHe may be RB2, but I wouldn't be surprised if Hiter is ahead, and Tatum pulls a CJ Hester
Now, I haven't watched him (yet), but his write-ups are similar elsewhere, and he may have some trouble holding the rock
Still, I'd rather go cheap on RB3 and save some money for a dangerously thin defense (at all three levels)