I have a bit of a man crush on Harbaugh. I like following him and what he does next. Bottom line is he likes winning and will do so however he can.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Again, I gave completely valid reasons on why I don't think he would be considered the number one guy.  I'm sure you sat down and watched tons of game film on all these guys just like the rest of us to formulate your opinion though, so we'll leave it to you scouting expert.

 

Nope, I haven't, so I often defer to people who have especially when all of those people form a consensus opinion.

---

Nope, I haven't, so I often defer to people who have especially when all of those people form a consensus opinion.

 

It's very obvious that you live and die by other peoples rankings instead of actually knowing the actual process and how they come up with those rankings.  You're also bull headed enough to believe that there is an extreme difference in talent between this years #1 and #2 when the #2 guy was the #1 guy to start the year.....

---

It's very obvious that you live and die by other peoples rankings instead of actually knowing the actual process and how they come up with those rankings.  You're also bull headed enough to believe that there is an extreme difference in talent between this years #1 and #2 when the #2 guy was the #1 guy to start the year.....

 

You're bullheaded enough to cite June 2015 articles written before these guys played their senior season and in All-American games. Looks like we're both bullheaded.

---

 

I never said recruiting will be an issue, just saying this is a top class because of quantity not quality.  You are right about them having a good amount of 4* and 5* recruits.  While this is true, the issue are their grades.  There is a reason Michigan is the only top 10 NSD team with an average below 90.  There is a reason Michigan is barely ranked above teams with only 20 recruits, instead of 29.  It's because their 4* and 5* recruits are not graded very high.  Yes, #7 Georgia only has 13 4* and 5*, but they are ALL graded at above .90 (more like .94).  Yes, #8 USC may only have 13 4* and 5*, but all but ONE is ranked above .90 (once again, more like .94).  1/3 of Michigan's 4* and *5 are ranked below .90 and more on the 3* side of the rankings.

 

 

Lol. The more I look into this, the more silly you sound.

 

Current overall rankings:

5. Michigan

6. USC

7. Ole Miss

8. Clemson

9. Georgia

10. Auburn

 

Scores using 247's calculator:

Michigan top 20 recruits: 278.25

USC's top 20 recruits: 271.73

Ole Miss' top 20 recruits: 277.14

Clemson's top 20 recruits: 274.90

Georgia's top 20 recruits: 275.61

Auburn's top 20 recruits: 270.12

 

 

Scores using 247's calculator:

Michigan's top 10 recruits: 222.17

USC's top 10 recruits: 217.18

Ole Miss' top 10 recruits: 220.89

Clemsons's top 10 recruits 220.90

Georgia's top 10 recruits: 220.78

Aurburn's top 10 recruits: 214.79

 

 

Michigan has higher a higher rated top 10 and a higher rated top 20 than every other team currently ranked 5 through 10. In other words, Michigan has a top 10 class in terms of both quantity and quality. Thanks for showing me this calculator to help prove me point.

---

If Michigan had only had 25 spots instead of I believe 30 available, these are the guys likely not signing Letters of Intent:

 

1. Dytarious Jackson is unlikely to a part of the 2016 class for several reason (notice he hasn't signed his LOI yet).

2. Josh Metellus (S) or Devin Gil (S) - One oesn't keep an offer if Michigan doesn't have so much extra room.

3. Eddie McDoom (WR) or Nate Johnson (WR)- See above

4. Steven Spanellis (OL) - See above

 

 

So remove Jackson, Spanellis, Metellus or Gil and McDoom or Johnson. Let me know how that affects their overall rankings and average ranking. Michigan's overall recruit average right now is 89.45 on 247. Take out:

Jackson 83.76

Metellus 85.41

McDoom 87.94

Spanellis 85.43

 

A 4th grader would be able to look at that end tell you that the average would go up considering all 4 players are below the average.

 

 

Edit:

I just took those 4 players out using 247's calculator and they still have a top 10 class afterwards. Why? Because Michigan has quality in this class, not just quantity.

Man, you are brilliant.  Take out the lesser values in a series to increase the average.  Who would have thought?  Do you really think the ONLY reason Michigan signed those lesser recruits was because they could backdate them to 2015?  That's absolutely the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

---

New signature because HIGH SCORE found the periodic table offensive. Pathetic LOL

1. First of all, stop moving the goalposts. Your thesis is that Michigan's class is ranked so high because of quantity and not quality. I just used a tool that you cited to show you that Michigan's top 10 and top 20 quality are right on part with everyone else that rounds out the top 10 team rankings. Can you at least concede you were mistaken on the quality of recruits Michigan is bringing in?

 

2. No, that is not at all what I said. If Michigan had a lower limit of scholarships they don't take both late commit WRs in McDoom and Johnson. They don't take both late commit Safeties in Gil and Metellus. Dytarious Johnson misses out on the class due to academic reasons. The late Spanellis commitment came out of nowhere and I don't think Michigan recruited him hard. I believe he would be the 4th guy Michigan would not have offered if they were worried about a scholarship limit.

 

Taking guys out of the class that likely wouldn't have had commitable offers makes much more sense than simply taking guys out of the class that enrolled early. Guys like Brandon Peters, Ahmir Mitchell, Devin Bush, and Kareem Walker were never at risk of not being recruited. Guys like Eddie McDoom, Nate Johnson, Josh Metellus, and Devin Gil were.

---

Man, you are brilliant. Take out the lesser values in a series to increase the average. Who would have thought? Do you really think the ONLY reason Michigan signed those lesser recruits was because they could backdate them to 2015? That's absolutely the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

He's really not worth your time. You have completely valid points and they either completely go over his head or he will completely ignore them because they dont fit the Michigan agenda.

---

He's really not worth your time. You have completely valid points and they either completely go over his head or he will completely ignore them because they dont fit the Michigan agenda.

 

Josh don't be like that. I showed him that his point was mistaken by using the very tool he told me I should use. I don't blame him for not doing the leg work and actually going through and comparing the classes like I just did, but don't pretend like what I just showed doesn't disprove his thesis.

 

 

This info right here...

 

"Scores using 247's calculator:

Michigan top 20 recruits: 278.25

USC's top 20 recruits: 271.73

Ole Miss' top 20 recruits: 277.14

Clemson's top 20 recruits: 274.90

Georgia's top 20 recruits: 275.61

Auburn's top 20 recruits: 270.12

 

 

Scores using 247's calculator:

Michigan's top 10 recruits: 222.17

USC's top 10 recruits: 217.18

Ole Miss' top 10 recruits: 220.89

Clemsons's top 10 recruits 220.90

Georgia's top 10 recruits: 220.78

Aurburn's top 10 recruits: 214.79"

 

 

...disproves his thesis "Michigan is a top class based on quantity, not quality". Michigan's top 10 and top 20 recruits of 2016 compare favorable to the rest of the teams rounding out the top 10.

---

Hostiletakeover, can we now agree that Michigan had a top 10 class in terms of quality and quantity per the ranking site you cited?

---

Hostiletakeover, can we now agree that Michigan had a top 10 class in terms of quality and quantity per the ranking site you cited?

Anyone can twist and turn numbers to fit the agenda. Just let it go.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Anyone can twist and turn numbers to fit the agenda. Just let it go.

 

It wasn't and turning numbers, man. It was simply showing that the top 10 and 20 recruits for Michigan compare favorably to the top 10 and 20 recruits to the other teams rounding out that top 10. It's foolish to say that Michigan's class doesn't have the quality of those classes.

---

It wasn't and turning numbers, man. It was simply showing that the top 10 and 20 recruits for Michigan compare favorably to the top 10 and 20 recruits to the other teams rounding out that top 10. It's foolish to say that Michigan's class doesn't have the quality of those classes.

It was absolutely manipulating things as you saw fit. You kidding me here?

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

It was absolutely manipulating things as you saw fit. You kidding me here?

 

How?

 

He was saying that Michigan only had a top ranked class because Michigan signed so many recruits (28). I simply compared Michigan's top 10 and top 20 recruits to the schools Hostiletakeover was saying had better quality than Michigan. It was an objective comparison between top 10 and top 20 players. 

---

How?

 

He was saying that Michigan only had a top ranked class because Michigan signed so many recruits (28). I simply compared Michigan's top 10 and top 20 recruits to the schools Hostiletakeover was saying had better quality than Michigan. It was an objective comparison between top 10 and top 20 players. 

Yea, you're right

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"