Who is the More Talented Football Team? The Michigan Wolverines or the UConn Huskies?
by Maize n Brew Dave on Aug 12, 2010 2:40 PM CDT
in Michigan Football
Email
PrintWhile perusing the interwebz yesterday I started trying to compile a list of opposing blog previews of Michigan for the 2010 season. In doing so I came across a 2010 Michigan preview done by our SBNation colleagues over at The UConn Blog. The Preview is quite good, and done without the standard "LOL! Wur N Deir HOUZE! LOLverines!" that seems to accompany so many previews these days. If I had a gripe, it would be to substitute Stephen Schilling for David Molk on the list of key offensive personnel, but that's just me.
However, while going through their thoughtful preview, I saw this at the end of it:
Despite those concerns, the bottom line is thatUConn is the more talented team and the Huskies should win this game. Although it is by no means a lock that they will, the team better look good, because otherwise it might get pretty depressing around these parts. [Ed. Note - Emphasis mine.]
Now that's something I didn't expect to see. UConn has definitely made strides since becoming a Division 1 football program. They are consistently competitive and are probably the second or third best team in the Big East this season (Sorry, UConn fans, I've got Pitt winning the Big East this year). But the assertion that they are more talented than Michigan, even with the last two down years, seems a bit off to me.
So, to either refute or support their conclusion, I decided to dig up the recruiting profiles for each starter on the UConn team and contrast that with the recruiting profile for Michigan's starting lineup. I know this isn't the most scientific method of determining "talent", but it's the best information we've got without getting into the cross conference "who's better than who" nonsense. Every one of the kids playing on September 4 was once subject to the same scrutiny and evaluation by an independent source, in this case Rivals for simplicity, and each of them received a star grade based on their projected effectiveness at the college level and talent.
Let's be clear, talent is not a predictor of performance. Michigan or UConn may be the most talented team on the field over Labor Day Weekend, but talent does not ensure victory. Believe me when I say that Michigan fans are very much attuned to this truth. Talent is nothing unless matched with desire. Michael Jordan may have been the best basketball player of his generation, but he was also the most ruthlessly competitive person the game had ever seen. And he will admit, with a giant smile on his face, that it was his competitiveness that drove his success.
This little exercise is just to check the numbers and see which team's starters are considered the most "talented." Which team has the greater desire and competitive nature will have to be determined on the field.
After the jump, I'll break down the UConn starting roster, player by player..
The UConn Offense
LT Adam Masters(RSo., 6-4, 270) Two stars
LG Mathieu Olivier(RSr., 6-6, 276) Two Stars
C Moe Petrus (RJr., 6-2, 292) Two Stars
RG Zach Hurd(RSr., 6-7, 323) Two Stars and this beyond awesome photo
RT Mike Ryan (RJr., 6-5, 332) Two Stars
TE Ryan Griffin (RSo., 6-6, 240) Two Stars
TE John Delahunt(RSo., 6-3, 243) Two Stars
TB Jordan Todman (Jr., 5-9, 190) Two Star
TB Robbie Frey(RFr., 6-0, 199) Two Stars
FB Anthony Sherman (Sr., 5-11, 242) Two Stars
QB Zach Frazer(RSr., 6-4, 236) Four Stars
QB2 Cody Endres(RJr., 6-4, 223) Two Stars
WR Michael Smith (Jr., 6-0, 200) Two Stars
WR Kashif Moore(RJr., 5-9, 177) Two Stars
WR Isiah Moore (RJr., 6-1, 183) Two Stars
For purposes of keeping things fair, I'm using the end of spring practice depth chart as reported by the New Haven Register. If these position rankings aren't correct, or if someone else has taken a slot, please let me know and i'll correct it. However, the rankings are pretty clear, this is an offense comprised entirely of two star recruits and Zach Frazer. Irrespective of how these kids performed last season, these are their numbers and the numbers that many coaches and programs relied upon while recruiting their teams. If there's one thing you can definitely say about this team is that it is veteran. Two stars or not, they did better a much more talented Notre Dame squad last season, so keep that in mind.
By comparison, the lowest rated offensive player for Michigan is surprisingly Patrick Omameh, whom Rivals slated as a two star recruit. After that, the Michigan offense is comprised of three, four and five star recruits all of whom have impressive offer sheets. Each of Michigan's starting receivers and TE Kevin Kogerare slated as four star recruits. Starting tailbacks Mike Cox and Vincent Smith are both three star recruits. The rest of the offensive line is two four stars (David Molk and Taylor Lewan), a Five Star Stephen Schilling, and a three star Mark Huyge. According to the talent evaluators, Michigan has the edge in paper talent.
The UConn Defense
DE Jesse Joseph (So., 6-3, 231) Two Stars
DT Kendall Reyes(RJr., 6-4, 287) Two Stars
DT Ryan Wirth(RSo., 6-2, 275) Two Stars
DT Twyon Martin (RJr., 6-2, 270) Two Stars (they were listed as "or" so I sloted all three DT's even though only two will start).
DE Marcus Campbell (Jr., 6-2, 227) Two Stars
[As a side note, UConn's starting DE/LB Greg LLoyd who was second on the team in tackles last season with 91, was lost for the season to a knee injury.]
"Husky" LB Jory Johnson(RSo., 6-1, 219) Two Stars
MLB Scott Lutrus(RSr., 6-3, 240) Two Stars
WLB Lawrence Wilson (RSr., 6-1, 217) Two Stars [BTW, he led the Big East with 140 tackles. The next closest in conference was at 109].
CB Blidi Wreh-Wilson (RSo., 6-0, 184) Two Stars
S Jerome Junior(RSo., 6-1, 208) Two Stars
S Kijuan Dabney (Sr., 6-0, 214) Two Stars
CB Dwayne Gratz(RSo., 6-0, 190) Three Stars
So, just like with the offense, this is a defense built on the backs of two star talent that are arguably outreaching their projected talent level. for comparison's sake the lowest rated starter on Michigan's defense is Jordan Kovacswho was not rated out of high school. To Kovacs' credit he was a Freshman All American, but I don't think you're going to see him on any kind of watch lists in the future. Unless the kid has another gear in his running that we haven't seen yet, i think he's pretty close to his ceiling. The next lowest rated recruit on Michigan's starting defensive roster is J.T. Floyd, who was still a three star cornerback with a bevy of BCS offers. After that, probably three star Greg Bankswho had everyone in the midwest on his recruiting tail. Obi Ezeh and Troy Woolfolk were both three star recruits as well. However, after that, everyone left is four star or higher.
The Takeaway
What I think our friends at the UConn Blog are getting at is that UConn is a veteran laden, talented group. They've got plenty of depth and a lot of good players. Looking at Michigan's roster, however, I think you'd be hard pressed to find areas where the Huskies possess higher rated recruits. Talent only goes so far unless you've got guys that will execute. Personally, I feel that football is one of those games where effort can top talent in any game. And if you've got organized talent, well, you're in great shape.
It's impossible to deny that the Huskies are a talented team, though I don't believe they're as talented as Michigan is position-by-position. What they are is a very organized and well coached team, and that by itself may be enough for them to trump Michigan's talent advantage.
But we won't know whether this analysis holds up until the teams take the field on September 4th.
28 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Let me fix it for you Dave...
You certainly slipped on the keyboard when you said: “the preview is quite good”… surely you meant to say, “The preview is quite laughable”, and even that is being kind.
Let’s see, they have Donovan Warren as our top returning defensive starter. They do nothing but write one or two sentences on glittering generalities regarding football. They make a legitimate claim that their team is more TALENTED than Michigan’s… Let’s compare and contrast this against what Markus was able to put together on their squad, which by the way returns all of ONE more starter than our team.
http://www.maizenbrew.com/2010/3/12/1369274/never-too-early-for-a-michigan
THAT’S how you do a preview UConn blog. Christ.
GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/
They did fix that.
However, in terms of reality, I’d say they’re fairly rooted in reality… as far as homer previews go. I’ll cut ‘em some slack. At least they didn’t name anyone that’d been killed falling off a balcony as a player to watch in 2010.
BOOM!
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on Aug 12, 2010 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions
Grammar Police
noted and fixed.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on Aug 12, 2010 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions
No wonder you let me write stories for this stie.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Aug 12, 2010 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions
So where do you draw the line - talent vs W/L???
2009 UConn vs Notre Dame or South Carolina would look very similar if you compared the stars. Then watch the games. UConn routed USC and pulled out a win over a ND squad filled with 4- and 5- star talent. In the past 2 seasons, UConn’s had 6 guys drafted, UM has had 5. CBS sports ranks 3 UConn kids in the top 150 for the 2011 draft (We’ll only have 5 or 6 senior starters in our lineup on Sept 4), only one from UM. Coaching definitely has an impact on the final outcome, but we are building a winner and sending our 2-star kids to the NFL – which tells me that the stars don’t mean a lot for recruits from the Northeast.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/prospectrankings?tag=fastFacts.nfl;Prospect%20Ratings
I'm not sure you can use NFL draft stock to rate talent
given that a) drafting is hardly a science and b) by your own admission UConn has more seniors i.e. more pro-ready kids. It’s not that they’re more talented per se but simply more polished.
I truly believe that Michigan is the more talented team but that UConn is the better team. As a lifelong Iowa Hawkeye fan I am very familiar with this concept. Try and convince me that 8-5 Oklahoma wasn’t more talented than the majority of teams they lost to last year.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Aug 12, 2010 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions
What you meant to say...
Was that UConn has the more experienced team, Michigan the more talented team, and we’ll find out who’s better on September 4th.
GO BLUE! http://www.maizenbrew.com/
It's why we play the games.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
by Kyle McCann't on Aug 12, 2010 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions
A tiny issue with one statement, Dave.
Personally, I feel that football is one of those games where effort can top talent in any game.
Effort is certainly part of it, but the reason guys like Saban and Ferentz are paid so much is, much like NCAA basketball, coaching has a much more direct effect on the college game than in the pros.
Less memorable than Sam Okey's Hawkeye career.
5-22
I’ll be the first guy to say that UConn fields a talented team in 2010, especially on offense with the QBs, TBs and OL. There good enough to play 4 quarters against anyone. There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic heading into the Michigan game in September.
But UConn’s road game record is definitely not one of them:
5-22 in Big East road games since 1998.
17-33 in all road games since 1998.
I guess MSU, Iowa, and OSU fans are not alone in believing that Michigan has now become Indiana. UConn Huskies fans believe it also.
Michigan Stadium is going to be a tough venue for UConn. Just my opinion.
Go Blue!
Agreed.
The Big House will be rocking for the UConn game in less than a month. I do think the atmosphere for the first game post-renovation will be incredible, yet I’m extremely nervous for the talent vs. experience/coaching/etc. reasons outlined above as well as the general state of our D. I feel comfortable about our offense and the production we’ll have but I’ll only be able to keep one eye open when our defense is on the field.
Here’s to rooting for a defense like Cincy’s last year that came out of nowhere from utterly expected glaring weakness to somewhat less glaring weakness that can keep a few less points off the board than the other team’s.
by Good Ol' Oakley on Aug 12, 2010 7:00 PM CDT up reply actions
5-22
1st of all, UConn has only officially been in the Big East since 2004. 2nd of all, this team is new and building depth yearly. So obviously you will see a weak road game avg as the team worked to get stronger while building depth. But you will gradually see more road wins each year from 2004 forward. UConn’s O-line will dominate Michigan’s Defense just as they dominated the 4 and 5 star defenses of ND and South Carolina. They will win the TOP battle as well. Stars do not validate talent. Perform on the field does. Get real. Just ask the fans of those two teams, who were saying the exact same thing we’re hearing here. They are believers now.
by rockmoore22 on Aug 12, 2010 10:03 PM CDT up reply actions
I thought I was the only one that saw that...
Thanks for addressing this Dave. I read that earlier and questioned it and I thought it was an absurd thing to say. It really invalidated his opinions as totally biased during what was previously a fairly well assessed matchup. Despite the previous record, the players we have are much better than the 2 star overacheivers that are comprise their roster. I’m not at all saying they are bad, but I most certainly will say that if players from both teams were re-recruited, more of ours are going than theirs.
UConnBlog guy here. Here is the response to the "talent" issue I posted back over at my place.
I’ll grant you that Michigan clearly pulls in recruits that are more highly regarded than the guys UConn gets. However, if those recruits consistently underperform, whereas UConn’s overperform, and do so consistently, I’m going to give UConn the nod as the more talented squad. You can’t live on your Rivals rating forever. I know UConn flys way under the national radar, but Randy Edsall has somehow developed a legitimate program in Storrs. We may be thin in the secondary, but we’re at least secure everywhere else and have some serious talent on the O-line, at running back and in the linebacker corps.
I’ll be there as well, and I can’t wait. I think it’ll be a great matchup and should be quite the game.
by Andrew Porter on Aug 12, 2010 9:24 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
One, in 2007.
They were co-champions with a RichRod coached WVU team. Not bad considering they joined the conference in 2004.
by Andrew Porter on Aug 13, 2010 2:59 AM CDT up reply actions
Let me save them the response
How many half titles have we shared? A title’s a title.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on Aug 13, 2010 7:23 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah
Big Ten “press” has no room to be calling out people for talking about shared titles, at one point I think we gave out four of them in one year.
Not that I condone any of this crap—there are obvious tiebreaks you can apply to almost all of the "shares"—but it is what it is at this point and the CCG will settle it soon anyway.
But I will say, regarding talent
Stars seem to be to be a ranking of the tools available to a certain recruit. Was Pryor really the absolute best football player in the country when his sr year of HS? The services seem to have a lot more interest in “tools” and “potential” when they rank than actual talent. If Michigan’s players were highly recruited by young and underperforming, and UConn’s players are ranked lower in HS but with more experience and exceeding expectations, there’s an argument there for UConn to claim to be more “talented” in 2010. Not saying I have any idea who is right, or that I think it’s even worth arguing about, but I understand where there’s room for contrasting opinions.
Nailed it
There’s room to argue every which way. I think a lot of the ratings are based on “Potential” rather than anything else. But isn’t potential “talent?”
There’s no right answer here, but the rankings seem to be the best available indicator of the tools that a particular school has to work with. How the coaching staff uses those tools…well… that’s another story.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on Aug 16, 2010 7:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Let me stand up for my compatriot briefly
I just took out Phil Steele’s 2010 guide, and looked at his “Top X” individual rankings for each position. It’s not a complete picture, and it’s obviously subjective (though no more so than Rivals.com assigning one of five possible ratings to a player).
QB: UConn 41st, Michigan is not on the list
RB: UConn 16th, Michigan is not on the list
WR: Neither team in the top 76
TE: UConn 23rd, Michigan 19th
C: UConn 31th, Michigan 15th
OG: UConn 17th, Michigan 4th
OT: Neither team in the top 64
DE: UConn 17th (in fairness, this guy’s out for the year), Michigan 51st
DT: UConn not on the list, Michigan 23rd
ILB: UConn 10th, Michigan 34th
OLB: UConn 6th, Michigan not on the list
CB: Neither team in the top 73
FS: Neither team in the top 73
SS: UConn 42nd, Michigan 36th
Again, obvious caveats (subjectivity, doesn’t account for depth). But I’m just not seeing this immense talent advantage for Michigan. UConn is clearly better at QB, RB and LB; both teams aren’t good in the secondary, Michigan has a slight edge on the lines.
Now yes, part of the reason Andrew brushed Michigan off just a tad was because UConn is very experienced and Michigan is not. But IF our seniors are better than your sophomores – Andrew thinks they are, you’re free to disagree – I think it would be fair to say UConn is more talented. We’re playing this year. We’re not playing in some theoretical future where both teams play each other with each player reaching his prime at kickoff.
Orange Bowl/dual Final Fours or bust in 2011. We're going all-in.
Not so fast my friend
I believe you were looking at Phil’s “Top Players” list, which covers draft-eligible players only. Michigan’s team is very young, so therefore we will not have many players on a list that omits true sophomores and lower. His position group (individual unit) ratings are as follows:
Quarterback: Michigan is 21. Connecticut is unranked.
Runningbacks: Michigan and Connecticut are unranked.
Receivers: Michigan and Connecticut are unranked.
O-Line: Connecticut is 25. Michigan is unranked.
D-Line: Connecticut is 27. Michigan is 34.
Linebackers: Connecticut is 28. Michigan is unranked.
Secondary… we both are terrible.
Special teams: Michigan is 34. Connecticut is Unranked.
Connecticut has a slight edge, the average of their three best position groups is 26.66. Michigan’s average is 29.66.
Phil’s team rankings in his power poll (which removes the schedule as a factor and ranks teams purely on talent) has Michigan at 39, and UConn at 47.
Take from that whatever you want, as stated in the OP, Michigan has a large recruiting ranking edge, UConn has a few more talented position groups, and Michigan has a more talented team as evidenced by Steele’s power poll.
by the_white_tiger on Aug 12, 2010 10:31 PM CDT up reply actions
My mistake on the "draft eligible" thing...did not see that.
But I think you made my point for me…according to Steele, UConn has more draft-ready prospects (despite their large recruiting ranking disadvantage), UConn is even or slightly better at every position group except QB and ST (despite their large recruiting ranking disadvantage), UConn is basically even in a pure talent poll (despite their large recruiting ranking disadvantage.)
Shouldn’t that indicate that maybe the recruiting rankings are at best a rough estimate? Could I get a Notre Dame fan to back me up here?
Orange Bowl/dual Final Fours or bust in 2011. We're going all-in.
by Kevin Meacham on Aug 12, 2010 11:04 PM CDT up reply actions
I do state that the rankings are subjective and open to being wrong
however, I wouldn’t rely on the “draft-ready” aspect of the Steele rankings as half of Michigan’s starters are underclassmen. With the number of seniors and upperclassmen on UConn’s roster, naturally they’re more experienced, physically a little more mature, and there’s more history on which to base an “draft evaluation”.
I’ll take steele’s rankings on the individual units, however. But here’s the caveat, Steele doesn’t rank those units on talent, he ranks them on previous play and natural progression. If he ranked it on talent alone Florida, Texas, USC and Miami would have everyone of those categories locked up. Performance as a unit is what trumps here and why, for instance the recruiting star laden but grossly underperforming Michigan linebacking corps is unranked, whereas the lightly recruited but consistently good UConn unit is ranked.
Again the purpose wasn’t to discuss whose unit is better (hur hur hur), the point was to look at raw talent and who is getting the most out of it. UConn clearly has maximized the talent that’s come through its doors whereas Michigan has clearly squandered a significant portion of what’s come through Ann Arbor.
Maize n Brew
Because Football is Better with Beer
by Maize n Brew Dave on Aug 13, 2010 7:37 AM CDT up reply actions
well put Dave..
but let’s not forget he said “more talented” AND “has more potential” than Michigan. I personally think that the upside in Ann Arbor is much higher than the upside in UConn. Does anyone see an overachieving UConn team having a better year than an overachieving Michigan team? I feel like the Huskies could be playing as well as they can, and doing so quite well from what I’ve been reading where Michigan plays as well as they can (talent and schematically) then we are clearly a class above UConn.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
