247 Sports: Jim Harbaug's recruiting success

Submitted by LLG on

"Michigan has signed 35 four-star or five-star prospects in those two years under Harbaugh, tied for second-most in the nation with Ohio State and behind only Alabama (38), after signing 51 the previous five years (No. 12 in the country), as shown in the charts above. The class the Wolverines just signed this year featured both quantity (30 commits) and quality (21 four-star or five-star prospects), with 70% of the signees being at least four-star prospects – the best mark put up by Michigan since reliable recruiting data became available in 2002. . . . "

"What has also changed is where that blue-chip out-of-state talent is coming from . . . .Michigan has signed five such prospects from New Jersey over the last two years, including five-star defensive tackle Rashan Gary and the most in the country, and more even than Rutgers (three). That includes three apiece from California and Florida, and more from Indiana and Colorado (two apiece) than from Ohio (one)."

There are graphs and maps and such in the article, if you care to click.

LINK

Craptain Crunch

July 7th, 2017 at 7:02 AM ^

Until Michigan wins the big games consistently, like OSU and Msu and wins the B1G ten, his recruiting success is meaninhles. Just examine Brady Hoke's recruiting success and one will understand.

1VaBlue1

July 7th, 2017 at 8:05 AM ^

Read the linked story...  Harbaugh is recruiting better than Hoke, and differently.  Aside from that, you don't win big games without good players.  Good coaching can only take you so far - without some talent on the field, you will continuously lose close games.

Feel free to say stoopid things like "recruiting is meaningless".  But also say it when defending MSU's lack of talent and subsequent losing record.  After all, recruiting is meaningless and therefore had nothing to do with MSU's 3-9 record last year.

(BTW, since recruiting is meaningless, I guess its fair to expect Illinois to win 8 games this year because they have a Super Bowl winning coach in Lovey Smith...)

MEZman

July 7th, 2017 at 9:25 AM ^

I was a Bears fan at the time (don't really watch the NFL anymore) and it was a miracle that he made it to that Super Bowl. I'm still not sure if it was really good coaching (on defense) or pure luck.

Perkis-Size Me

July 7th, 2017 at 9:44 AM ^

MSU has had nowhere even remotely close to the talent level that UM and OSU have had over the last 7-8 years and they still made a habit of routinely beating both of them. This last year notwithstanding.

Talent matters for sure. But developing talent and putting your players in a position to succeed is more important. Prior to this last season, Dantonio arguably did that better than anyone else.

funkywolve

July 7th, 2017 at 3:44 PM ^

is better than Patterson and Whittingham.  Peterson is proving at Washington that what he did at Boise wasn't just being a big fish in a small pond.  

I'm sure Mork would be happy to show Patterson and Whittingham MSU's college football playoff appearance, 3 conference titles, a Rose Bowl win and a Cotton Bowl win.

MotownGoBlue

July 7th, 2017 at 6:35 PM ^

Patterson has 6 conference titles, 1 Rose Bowl win, 2 time AFCA/AP/Bear Bryant/Eddie Robinson/SN/Woody Hayes award winner, with a .734 all-time winning percentage, 9-6 in bowl play, 6 top 10 finishes including a #2 and #3 in the final polls. Arguably had the #1 team in 2010 (13-0). Whittingham has 1 conference title, 1 Fiesta Bowl win, 1 Sugar Bowl win, 1 time coach of the year award(s) with a .675 all-time winning percentage, 10-1 in bowls, and finished as high as #2 and #4 in the final polls. Arguably had the #1 team in 2008 (13-0). Mork is a career .647 coach, 5-5 bowls...best finishes: #3 and #5. That playoff appearance: Alabama 38 MSU 0. What were you saying?

Richard75

July 7th, 2017 at 11:21 AM ^

First, MSU "routinely beating" OSU is overstating it. Dantonio is 3-5 against Ohio State. Second, in terms of players actually in uniform, it's laughable to say that MSU wasn't remotely close to U-M in talent. Michigan's supposed talent level was puffed up by a boatload of ciphers: Cissoko, Dorsey, Christian, Poole, Turner, Bell, LaLota, etc. Dantonio maximized his talent, no doubt, but this narrative that he was outcoaching superior Michigan players is nonsense. I mean, he was hardly the only one beating up on Michigan in those days. The talent Michigan actually had on the field was quite ordinary.

S Carolina Wolverine

July 7th, 2017 at 9:08 AM ^

agreed 110%

 

0-2

 

thrashed in the 1st meeting vs the arch rival

choked away a victory last year .... I know, I know, the spot ....blah, blah , blah ...should never have been in that scenario after having a large lead

 

UM can be great .... having said that, gloating on 2nd fiddle to osu is sad ... they are far and away much better perceived than UM right now .... the only way to undo that is win the damn game!

 

GO BLUE FROM GOD'S COUNTRY!

Khaleke The Freak

July 7th, 2017 at 9:50 AM ^

The old signature wins argument. Florida, Colorado, Wisconsin, Penn State and MSU are signature wins in my book. Obviously would have loved OSU last year and another MSU win the year before but Coach is getting some signature wins.

Perkis-Size Me

July 7th, 2017 at 10:26 AM ^

MSU would disagree. I know they're a flaming heap of dogshit right now, but they beat arguably the greatest OSU team ever assembled on the road with a backup QB, and they had nowhere even close to the talent level/recruiting stars that OSU had. 

I don't disagree that better recruiting helps. But it's hardly a rule. Developing your players and putting them in a position to succeed is, in my opinion, far more important. Something the previous regime here could never seem to figure out. 

blue in dc

July 7th, 2017 at 12:17 PM ^

Signature wins are more likely to come after you've had a chance to develop talent? Harbaugh lost three games by a total of 5 points in year 2. Dantanio's year 2 - 9-4, including a 38 point loss to Ohio State, a 31 point loss to Penn State, a 12 point loss to Georgia and a 7 point loss to California.

redjugador24

July 7th, 2017 at 2:40 PM ^

MSU's run is definitely an exception to the rule and my head will explode if I have to try to convince you that teams are more likely to succeed with better talent. 

 

as a rule
phrase of rule
 
  1. 1.
    usually, but not always.
    synonyms: usuallygenerally, in general, normallyordinarilycustomarily, for the most part, on the whole, by and large, in the main, mainlymostlycommonlytypically
    "as a rule, we eat in the kitchen"

 

somewittyname

July 7th, 2017 at 12:57 PM ^

9 for pointing out that winning is better than recruiting, while also dubiously suggesting we're struggling with MSU and that we should be consistently beating OSU. Also failing to realize the connection between recruiting and winning. This is McFarlin level insight.

AA Forever

July 7th, 2017 at 10:53 AM ^

but correct point when people start lying about what you said. You never said flat out that "recruiting is meaningless", and all of the downthreaders know that. Your point that recruiting means nothing until and unless you start winning the big games with that talent is dead on, though. If Harbaugh went 9-3 and lost to OSU every year, it wouldn't matter how well he recruited.

Sten Carlson

July 7th, 2017 at 4:19 PM ^

What point is that? If, for the sake of argument, Harbaugh were to recruit at the current level but never beat OSU, what then? Is there someone out there who anyone thinks is a better guy for Michigan? That's what I don't get about this discussion. To me, if JH can't do it (especially give the level at which he's recruiting) then nobody can -- at least until Meyer moves on. I don't believe that's going to happen, but neither can I think of a better alternative. IMO, Harbaugh beat OSU already in only his second try, in Columbus at that. He's going to win his fair share of OSU games, but to me, regardless of how that game goes, it's all about how well he's recruiting -- he's building a program that is ultra competitive while also fully and truly embracing the student-athlete philosophy. Others can shit can that idea as pie in the sky, but it's clear that he's striving for excellence in both arenas. If that means that they might not win as many as possible, so be it. But I, for one, don't think the two are incompatible, just more difficult. That's the Michigan Difference to me.

HAIL-YEA

July 7th, 2017 at 5:41 PM ^

I agree 100% with all of this. I don't understand people who talk about pressure to win or talk about what happens if he doesnt beat OSU. If Harbaugh can't do it than we are just shit out of luck because we arent getting anyone better, any talk about what he needs to do is pointless. And in my mind he is 1-1 against Urbz, that was not a 1st down.

Mr. Yost

July 7th, 2017 at 7:09 AM ^

The problem is THIS class. We need 4 top 10 (preferably top 5) classes in a row. This class doesn't have the size and right now it doesn't have the 5* talent either. If we can get 4 top 10 classes in a row...that's a huge step for Harbaugh bringing a national championship and sustained playoff appearances. Right now we're aiming for specific years like most other teams. We all know realistically ON PAPER last year we had a great shot and assuming we improve and develop...next year we'll have a great shot. Recruit top 10 classes every year and have Saban, Meyer, Harbaugh as your head coach and you're a title contender every year and you're definitely thinking playoff every year. Doesn't matter who leaves.

Mr. Yost

July 8th, 2017 at 8:19 AM ^

And more Trolling from you... But anyway, to actually add something to this thread rather than obsess over every post made by one poster who I say I don't like but love to follow around online...my point is this. Go look at the National Championship teams (winner and loser) in the playoff era and look at their 4 most recent recruiting classes. Clemson is the only one who had a down year. I just remember seeing a graphic and it stood out. It basically said...if you can recruit elite talent for 4 straight years you should be in the national championship game. We are very close to doing just that. Even if it's a small class if we can get some game changers and elite level true freshman. Next year could be that year. We won't rely on them, but by January 2019...they'll be difference makers. Cam Robinson, Minkah Fitzpatrick, OJ Howard. If we can get some true freshman in this class that help us at the end of the year like those guys...I truly believe we're that close.

93Grad

July 7th, 2017 at 9:19 AM ^

Our class is more than half full and most of our remaining top targets are likely headed elsewhere. Sure we can turn some of that around with a good season, but this will most assuredly be a down year both in quantity and quality from our last two classes

redjugador24

July 7th, 2017 at 10:11 AM ^

The size of the class will be down, but the quality of players will be juuuuust fine... it's extremely early to be concerned about recruiting updates - not just for commitments, but for the scouting services to shuffle their player rankings based on camp evals, senior year tape, and offers/interest from major programs.  Don't believe me - see Alabama's #51 ranked class.  Something tells me they won't end up there.  Guaranteed we land a few impact players that aren't widely considered UM leans right now by the recruiting services, and we'll lose a commit or 2 along the way too.  Happens every cycle.  

blue in dc

July 7th, 2017 at 11:23 AM ^

From 247 2016 average recruiting rank - 90.03 2017 average recruiting rank - 91.03 Current 2018 recruiting rank - 90.55 Looks reasonably comparable. As for the rest of the class, if you don't think that Harbaugh is going to fill it with high quality recruits, I'm not sure whose recruiting you've watched for the last several years.