Online Now 3352

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2125
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3385
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

The Official Michigan, MSU, and 1 Random Guy from Arky Thread

  • SpartanRocky said...

    Right now I'll say 3. Bama is an L. I think MSU beats UM, and I think tOSU gets UM at the end of the year.

    I think MSU loses @Wisconsin and to Nebraska at home. Tie-breakers determine the representative, because I think Nebraska loses @tOSU and to UM.

    I see three losses for UM too...Bama, @Neb and @ OSU. Michigan won't lose at home (and remember Dantonio can't beat teams on the road that are actually good - i.e. 8+ wins.) so I don't think MSU will be able to beat UM.

    I think MSU loses to Nebraska, @ Wisco and @UMich. MSU only loses at home to Nebraska who is a "sneekily-good" team this year.

    Neb owns the tie-breaker on both UM and MSU, so I hope they stumble somewhere.

    Peterklima

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    Looking back at Chris Rock's profile, man has Michigan's recruiting changed since Hoke arrived.

    2011
    20 kids committed to Michigan
    4, 4*'s
    16, 3*'s
    5 of those kids are no longer with the program, Tony Posada, Chris Barnett, Kellen Jones, Greg Brown, and Chris Rock.

    2012
    25 kids committed to Michigan
    14, 4*'s
    11, 3*'s

    2013
    18 kids committed to Michigan at this point.
    15, 4*'s
    3, 3*'s

    Big talent shift happening.

    I looked a little more into the numbers. I took each recruit, added them together and came up with the average recruiting rating per recruit for each year.

    2011 Michigan's 20 recruits had an average rating of 86.2.
    2011 MSU's 21 recruits had an average rating of 84.6.

    2012 Michigan's 25 recruits had an average rating of 90.5.
    2012 MSU's 20 recruits had an average rating of 85.3

    2013 Michigan's 18 recruits have an average rating of 91.7.
    2013 MSU's 7 recruits have an average rating of 86.7

    Looks like Michigan had an MSU type of recruting cycle with the end of the RichRod cycle and Hoke trying to keep the class intact.

    Since then, Michigan has enjoyed an average of almost 5 points per kid difference. SpartanRocky talked about there not being much of a difference between a high 3 and a low 4, which I agree with. I think he also said that one you start looking at a difference of 5 or more points between kids, then that is a big difference, which I agree with also.

    Both teams recruiting look to be getting better, but Michigan made that huge jump in Hoke's first full year in recruiting. The talent gap that was closing, looks to be moving farther apart again.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    I looked a little more into the numbers. I took each recruit, added them together and came up with the average recruiting rating per recruit for each year.

    2011 Michigan's 20 recruits had an average rating of 86.2.
    2011 MSU's 21 recruits had an average rating of 84.6.

    2012 Michigan's 25 recruits had an average rating of 90.5.
    2012 MSU's 20 recruits had an average rating of 85.3

    2013 Michigan's 18 recruits have an average rating of 91.7.
    2013 MSU's 7 recruits have an average rating of 86.7

    Looks like Michigan had an MSU type of recruting cycle with the end of the RichRod cycle and Hoke trying to keep the class intact.

    Since then, Michigan has enjoyed an average of almost 5 points per kid difference. SpartanRocky talked about there not being much of a difference between a high 3 and a low 4, which I agree with. I think he also said that one you start looking at a difference of 5 or more points between kids, then that is a big difference, which I agree with also.

    Both teams recruiting look to be getting better, but Michigan made that huge jump in Hoke's first full year in recruiting. The talent gap that was closing, looks to be moving farther apart again.

    Very interesting. Can you do this same comparison for the Rich Rod years? Or start with Dantonio's first year?

    signature image

    "As far as the downvotes. It's a gnat biting an lion" -- A member of tRCMB Justice League, taking the internet WAY WAY too seriously.

    Rocket_Play ●

  • MSU goes 12-0. Michigan goes 7-5 with losses to Bama ND MSU Neb OSU. We lose in Indy go to the Alamo. Michigan gets an at large to the orange bowl. All Michigan fans say that proves they're better again cause they're in the orange and we lost to purdue in Indy. They say this in all sincerity and recall the great teams of 1911 while they're preaching about this 16 year old kid from tupelo Mississippi who just took an official visit to the campus most of them have never walked through.

    Bump this on 12-20-12 cause the world ends the following day.

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • Rocket_Play said...

    Very interesting. Can you do this same comparison for the Rich Rod years? Or start with Dantonio's first year?

    I can do that tonight or this weekend, and I would have to us Rivals. 247 is nice for this type of stuff.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    I can do that tonight or this weekend, and I would have to us Rivals. 247 is nice for this type of stuff.

    Numbers like these I'm sure interest you guys. I respect the fact you enjoy them. If you're bored I'd like to see Wisconsin added to this average I guess as far back as 07. Just because MSU and whisky clearly have been the best two teams in the conference the past couple of years.

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • Peterklima said...

    I see three losses for UM too...Bama, @Neb and @ OSU. Michigan won't lose at home (and remember Dantonio can't beat teams on the road that are actually good - i.e. 8+ wins.) so I don't think MSU will be able to beat UM.

    I think MSU loses to Nebraska, @ Wisco and @UMich. MSU only loses at home to Nebraska who is a "sneekily-good" team this year.

    Neb owns the tie-breaker on both UM and MSU, so I hope they stumble somewhere.

    FWIW, Hoke can't beat 8+ W teams on the road either, so you're going to have to include @ND as an L for UM . . . and maybe even @Purdue. If that happens . . . well, then UM isn't an 8+ W team anymore and MSU should beat them in AA wink_msu

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky ●

  • D.Wags said...

    Numbers like these I'm sure interest you guys. I respect the fact you enjoy them. If you're bored I'd like to see Wisconsin added to this average I guess as far back as 07. Just because MSU and whisky clearly have been the best two teams in the conference the past couple of years.

    I thought OSU/Wisco were the bests team two years ago and Wisco/MSU was the best team this year. But that's just my opinion.

    Peterklima

  • D.Wags said...

    Numbers like these I'm sure interest you guys. I respect the fact you enjoy them. If you're bored I'd like to see Wisconsin added to this average I guess as far back as 07. Just because MSU and whisky clearly have been the best two teams in the conference the past couple of years.

    I will see what I can do, but if that was the case tOSU should be thrown in as well.

    I really didn't realize the gap so far this year and last year was so big between Michigan and MSU in recruiting. 29, 4* kids so far in the last 2 classes for Michigan, and this class isn't done.

    This post was edited by xxmgobluexx on 5/11/2012 at 10:45 AM

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • Peterklima said...

    I see three losses for UM too...Bama, @Neb and @ OSU. Michigan won't lose at home (and remember Dantonio can't beat teams on the road that are actually good - i.e. 8+ wins.) so I don't think MSU will be able to beat UM.

    Never a good strategy to throw around criticisms that are actually more applicable to your own coach.

    I'll help you out: @Michigan State, @Iowa

    Oh wait, Iowa actually only had 7 wins, so I guess that means Hoke can't beat teams on the road that are actually just mediocre (i.e. 7+ wins). Sorry.

    TerryLove ●

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    I looked a little more into the numbers. I took each recruit, added them together and came up with the average recruiting rating per recruit for each year.

    2011 Michigan's 20 recruits had an average rating of 86.2. 2011 MSU's 21 recruits had an average rating of 84.6.

    2012 Michigan's 25 recruits had an average rating of 90.5. 2012 MSU's 20 recruits had an average rating of 85.3

    2013 Michigan's 18 recruits have an average rating of 91.7. 2013 MSU's 7 recruits have an average rating of 86.7

    Looks like Michigan had an MSU type of recruting cycle with the end of the RichRod cycle and Hoke trying to keep the class intact.

    Since then, Michigan has enjoyed an average of almost 5 points per kid difference. SpartanRocky talked about there not being much of a difference between a high 3 and a low 4, which I agree with. I think he also said that one you start looking at a difference of 5 or more points between kids, then that is a big difference, which I agree with also.

    Both teams recruiting look to be getting better, but Michigan made that huge jump in Hoke's first full year in recruiting. The talent gap that was closing, looks to be moving farther apart again.

    Just out of curiosity, are you employed? It seems like you are posting on here literally every day at 30 minute intervals.

    TerryLove ●

  • TerryLove said...

    Just out of curiosity, are you employed? It seems like you are posting on here literally every day at 30 minute intervals.

    For the last 17 years.

    I won't be on much next week or the following week, heavy workload scheduled. Thanks for asking.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    I looked a little more into the numbers. I took each recruit, added them together and came up with the average recruiting rating per recruit for each year.

    2011 Michigan's 20 recruits had an average rating of 86.2. 2011 MSU's 21 recruits had an average rating of 84.6.

    2012 Michigan's 25 recruits had an average rating of 90.5. 2012 MSU's 20 recruits had an average rating of 85.3

    2013 Michigan's 18 recruits have an average rating of 91.7. 2013 MSU's 7 recruits have an average rating of 86.7

    Looks like Michigan had an MSU type of recruting cycle with the end of the RichRod cycle and Hoke trying to keep the class intact.

    Since then, Michigan has enjoyed an average of almost 5 points per kid difference. SpartanRocky talked about there not being much of a difference between a high 3 and a low 4, which I agree with. I think he also said that one you start looking at a difference of 5 or more points between kids, then that is a big difference, which I agree with also.

    Both teams recruiting look to be getting better, but Michigan made that huge jump in Hoke's first full year in recruiting. The talent gap that was closing, looks to be moving farther apart again.

    Very interesting analysis. Thanks for that.

    What you said about the HS talent gap is very true. But I'd guess that it's (at least somewhat) altered by player development. That's why, in a couple years, we'll have to compare COLLEGE talent (for example, by looking at the number of All B10 guys).

    MD's staff does an excellent job at player development. I know that Hoke and Co. are touted for their player development too, but it's still too early to judge.

    Final Countdown

  • Final Countdown said...

    Very interesting analysis. Thanks for that.

    What you said about the HS talent gap is very true. But I'd guess that it's (at least somewhat) altered by player development. That's why, in a couple years, we'll have to compare COLLEGE talent (for example, by looking at the number of All B10 guys).

    MD's staff does an excellent job at player development. I know that Hoke and Co. are touted for their player development too, but it's still too early to judge.

    For sure.

    Michigan missed that under RichRod, and looks to be getting that back with Hoke and company in place.

    Then there is the whole eye for talent thing with kids with common offers, but that has been discussed before.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • TerryLove said...

    Never a good strategy to throw around criticisms that are actually more applicable to your own coach.

    I'll help you out: @Michigan State, @Iowa

    Oh wait, Iowa actually only had 7 wins, so I guess that means Hoke can't beat teams on the road that are actually just mediocre (i.e. 7+ wins). Sorry.

    You must be new here.

    Dantonio's record is clear from years at MSU. Nothing definitive can be said about Hoke at UM yet (good or bad) IMO.

    Peterklima

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    For sure.

    Michigan missed that under RichRod, and looks to be getting that back with Hoke and company in place.

    Then there is the whole eye for talent thing with kids with common offers, but that has been discussed before.

    Question: when do you see UM starting to take smaller recruiting classes (below 20)?

    There has definitely been attrition because of the coaching and system transition. When do you see that stopping? Attrition is good in the sense that it allows you to take more guys and have a statistically better chance at getting a guys who can contribute. But it also hurts depth and experience.

    When do you see the class size being reduced and at what number do you think it'll stay constant?

    Final Countdown

  • Rocket_Play said...

    Very interesting. Can you do this same comparison for the Rich Rod years? Or start with Dantonio's first year?

    Just a quick glance at 2010 looks pretty close again per rivals. I got:
    Michigan - 5.65
    Michigan State - 5.62

    jimtaco

  • Final Countdown said...

    Question: when do you see UM starting to take smaller recruiting classes (below 20)?

    There has definitely been attrition because of the coaching and system transition. When do you see that stopping? Attrition is good in the sense that it allows you to take more guys and have a statistically better chance at getting a guys who can contribute. But it also hurts depth and experience.

    When do you see the class size being reduced and at what number do you think it'll stay constant?

    Well if you lose just 1 or 2 guys a year to attrition you can average 22/23 recruits a year.

    I just checked Michigan's scholarship situation and i don't know if we will get a small class below 20. It should of been the 2013 class because we only have 13 scholarship seniors but we have had so much attrition that we are looking at 23 or so for that class. Maybe the 2014 or 2015 classes might hit right around 20 but i don't see Michigan having a smaller class than that anytime soon.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine ●

  • Peterklima said...

    I thought OSU/Wisco were the bests team two years ago and Wisco/MSU was the best team this year. But that's just my opinion.

    Yeah we beat whiskey two years ago and OSU got to duck us. However, opinions are opinions.

    signature image signature image signature image

    DWags ●

  • D.Wags said...

    Numbers like these I'm sure interest you guys. I respect the fact you enjoy them. If you're bored I'd like to see Wisconsin added to this average I guess as far back as 07. Just because MSU and whisky clearly have been the best two teams in the conference the past couple of years.

    No way. Ohio State was clearly better than MSU unless you are only counting 2 years. If you go at least 3 then its Ohio State easily!

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine ●

  • Final Countdown said...

    Very interesting analysis. Thanks for that.

    What you said about the HS talent gap is very true. But I'd guess that it's (at least somewhat) altered by player development. That's why, in a couple years, we'll have to compare COLLEGE talent (for example, by looking at the number of All B10 guys).

    MD's staff does an excellent job at player development. I know that Hoke and Co. are touted for their player development too, but it's still too early to judge.

    I love the it's still to early to judge but yet Mattison and Borges who you know do a lot of the development as coordinators are very experienced, well respected and 2 of the best coordinators in the business.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine ●

  • Final Countdown said...

    Question: when do you see UM starting to take smaller recruiting classes (below 20)?

    There has definitely been attrition because of the coaching and system transition. When do you see that stopping? Attrition is good in the sense that it allows you to take more guys and have a statistically better chance at getting a guys who can contribute. But it also hurts depth and experience.

    When do you see the class size being reduced and at what number do you think it'll stay constant?

    That's another one I will have to look at later tonight. Look into seniors, juniors... On the roster. I would hope to level off at around 20-23 kids every year.

    xxmgobluexx ●

  • Michigan's losses for 2012-
    Bama
    @OSU
    Maybe @ND.

    We beat MSU at home. Guarantee it. This is for Dwags. MSU will not beat Michigan with a newbie QB, WRs, and TE at the Big House. Denard is going to have a great game against that MSU D.

    Nebraska is a good matchup for Michigan. They struggle to throw the ball and their D has trouble stopping a QB that can run. Michigan pulls off the win in Lincoln.

    signature image signature image signature image

    WillyWolverine ●

  • Maize&Blue said...

    Michigan's losses for 2012-
    Bama
    @OSU
    Maybe @ND.

    We beat MSU at home. Guarantee it. This is for Dwags. MSU will not beat Michigan with a newbie QB, WRs, and TE at the Big House. Denard is going to have a great game against that MSU D.

    Nebraska is a good matchup for Michigan. They struggle to throw the ball and their D has trouble stopping a QB that can run. Michigan pulls off the win in Lincoln.

    I lol'd

    signature image

    BrodieMSU

  • Peterklima said...

    You must be new here.

    Dantonio's record is clear from years at MSU. Nothing definitive can be said about Hoke at UM yet (good or bad) IMO.

    So nothing good or bad can be said about Hoke at UM . . . yet you're predicting that they'll be a 9+ W team (as your rational for MSU losing @UM this year)?

    Out of curiousity, over the last 5 years, can you name all the Big 10 teams that have defeated 9+ W teams on the road? FWIW, not a single Big 10 team accomplished that this year; there were 3 9+ W teams (MSU, UW and UM) and all went undefeated at home. In 2010 . . . oh, look at that. Same thing. 3 9+ W teams (tOSU, MSU, UW) and each lost their only game on the road.

    In 2009 there were 4 9+ W teams: tOSU, PSU, Wisconsin and Iowa.

    tOSU was 7-1 in the conference, with it's only loss @ Purdue

    PSU was 6-2 in the conference. It lost to tOSU at home, giving tOSU the first Big 10 Road W over a 9+ W team in 3 seasons.

    Iowa won @Wisconsin, and Northwestern upset Iowa (the Ricky Stanzi got hurt game) to provide the other "9+ W game road wins)

    In short, it's extremely rare for teams in the conference to win against 9+ W teams on the road. For one, there's not always an opportunity to face a 9+ W team on the road each year. You make it seem as if this is a unique flaw for Dantonio that cannot be overcome.

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky ●

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports