B1G Roster Power Ranking

[daddyhoosier]

I should have had this out by last Friday but this is a power ranking of current Big Ten Rosters. This is not measuring resume, I basically looked at the last five recruiting classes from a couple different sources and then looked at PFF's Preseason All Big Ten Team. Then mashed 'em all together in a magic spreadsheet.

1. Ohio St - according to Rivals they had more 5 stars (18) than ten B1G teams had 4 stars
2. Michigan - more stacked than I realized
3. Penn St - they've out-recruited Michigan but Michigan has developed better (and won quite a few more games)
4. Wisconsin - Wisconsin gon' Wisconsin
5. Iowa - Iowa football
6. Maryland - The Terps are a problem through the air
7. Michigan St - Nothing about their roster makes me say, "Oh no, they are beasts!"
8. Nebraska - 37 4 stars (Rivals) but not many wins to show for it, only Illinois has less representation on PFF's Preseason All Big Ten Team
9. Minnesota - P.J. Fleck
10. Purdue - Indiana and Purdue pretty even
11. Indiana - Goooo Hoosiers!
12. Northwestern - Seven 4 stars in the last five years but they still beat Nebraska (37 4 stars)
13. Rutgers - Schiano is a great coach, they play hard, they're moving in the right direction. At some point this is a lazy take. They have improved but they're still a work in progress.
14. Illinois - They were 14th on all three of my lists. No disrespect though I think they are a decent football team.

 

[daddyhoosier]

I would also add that the gap between Wisconsin at 4 and Indiana and 11 really isn't that big.

 

[TomEric4756]

We saw Penn St. out talent Purdue in the 4th quarter. … Purdue helped a lot.

If we could only develop OL talent as consistently as Wisky.

 

[TomEric4756]

It’s clear, Illinois wasn’t the 14th best OL, DL and LB in the Big Ten on Sept. 2nd.
#2 May not be the best RB in the Big Ten, just the 2nd or 3rd best.

 

[cubuffsdoug]

I should have had this out by last Friday but this is a power ranking of current Big Ten Rosters. This is not measuring resume, I basically looked at the last five recruiting classes from a couple different sources and then looked at PFF's Preseason All Big Ten Team. Then mashed 'em all together in a magic spreadsheet.

1. Ohio St - according to Rivals they had more 5 stars (18) than ten B1G teams had 4 stars
2. Michigan - more stacked than I realized
3. Penn St - they've out-recruited Michigan but Michigan has developed better (and won quite a few more games)
4. Wisconsin - Wisconsin gon' Wisconsin
5. Iowa - Iowa football
6. Maryland - The Terps are a problem through the air
7. Michigan St - Nothing about their roster makes me say, "Oh no, they are beasts!"
8. Nebraska - 37 4 stars (Rivals) but not many wins to show for it, only Illinois has less representation on PFF's Preseason All Big Ten Team
9. Minnesota - P.J. Fleck
10. Purdue - Indiana and Purdue pretty even
11. Indiana - Goooo Hoosiers!
12. Northwestern - Seven 4 stars in the last five years but they still beat Nebraska (37 4 stars)
13. Rutgers - Schiano is a great coach, they play hard, they're moving in the right direction. At some point this is a lazy take. They have improved but they're still a work in progress.
14. Illinois - They were 14th on all three of my lists. No disrespect though I think they are a decent football team.

I think the perception of Rutgers is old. Prior to Schiano, signing a 4-star was a challenge. In his first Rutgers class in 2021, Schiano signed three 4-stars. Last year's class had six 4-stars and three transfers who were former 4-stars coming out of HS. Schiano is good at developing talent once they are on campus. Schiano is still washing off the stink from Chris Ash.

 

[Coach Geez]

I would also add that the gap between Wisconsin at 4 and Indiana and 11 really isn't that big.

That talent gap between Indiana and Penn State is almost the same as the talent gap between Ohio State and Penn State if you can believe that. Just goes to show you what kind of level Ohio State is on.

 

[daddyhoosier]

I think the perception of Rutgers is old. Prior to Schiano, signing a 4-star was a challenge. In his first Rutgers class in 2021, Schiano signed three 4-stars. Last year's class had six 4-stars and three transfers who were former 4-stars coming out of HS. Schiano is good at developing talent once they are on campus. Schiano is still washing off the stink from Chris Ash.

I'm not sure if you are agree with me or disagreeing.

 

[kmathum]

I think the perception of Rutgers is old. Prior to Schiano, signing a 4-star was a challenge. In his first Rutgers class in 2021, Schiano signed three 4-stars. Last year's class had six 4-stars and three transfers who were former 4-stars coming out of HS. Schiano is good at developing talent once they are on campus. Schiano is still washing off the stink from Chris Ash.

hated to see him take that job. rutgers is going to be a tough out for everyone from now on. hope he doesn't stay long.

 

[Jackskip23]

hated to see him take that job. rutgers is going to be a tough out for everyone from now on. hope he doesn't stay long.

Tennessee should’ve hired him when they had the chance. They were monumentally stupid to pass on him.

 

[kmathum]

Tennessee should’ve hired him when they had the chance. They were monumentally stupid to pass on him.

i agree. but i think the guy they got now is going to do well.

 

[cubuffsdoug]

I'm not sure if you are agree with me or disagreeing.

I was just saying Rutgers is doing better than the perception of the program being poor all around. I don't think they will ever recruit at Ohio State or Michigan level, but I think they can reach the middle of the pack level in the B1G. Schiano's recruiting success in the 2000s crushed Syracuse, Boston College, and Pitt's push to own New Jersey. It left a strong impression that Michigan and Penn State doubled their efforts to re-establish roots in NJ once Schiano left for the NFL.

Schiano did a fantastic job changing the perception of Rutgers not only out of state, but the in-state recruits ate it up. One of the things Schiano and his staff did when he was first hired in 2000 was visit every HS in NJ/Eastern Pa./NYC. On behalf of Schiano, a Rutgers donor gave hospitals across the state mini Rutgers football and a Rutgers children's book to all newborns. By Schiano's 4th year at Rutgers, things started to pay off for the program. The support for the program reached levels never seen before. People wanted to go to Rutgers. The type of players committing to Rutgers was different and much better. Schiano began to bag many 4-stars and a few in-state 5-stars like Darius Hamilton and Nate Robinson. Schiano is repeating this blueprint, and so far, it appears he's having similar success at the same stages.

 

[Sope Creek]

I should have had this out by last Friday but this is a power ranking of current Big Ten Rosters. This is not measuring resume, I basically looked at the last five recruiting classes from a couple different sources and then looked at PFF's Preseason All Big Ten Team. Then mashed 'em all together in a magic spreadsheet.

1. Ohio St - according to Rivals they had more 5 stars (18) than ten B1G teams had 4 stars
2. Michigan - more stacked than I realized
3. Penn St - they've out-recruited Michigan but Michigan has developed better (and won quite a few more games)
4. Wisconsin - Wisconsin gon' Wisconsin
5. Iowa - Iowa football
6. Maryland - The Terps are a problem through the air
7. Michigan St - Nothing about their roster makes me say, "Oh no, they are beasts!"
8. Nebraska - 37 4 stars (Rivals) but not many wins to show for it, only Illinois has less representation on PFF's Preseason All Big Ten Team
9. Minnesota - P.J. Fleck
10. Purdue - Indiana and Purdue pretty even
11. Indiana - Goooo Hoosiers!
12. Northwestern - Seven 4 stars in the last five years but they still beat Nebraska (37 4 stars)
13. Rutgers - Schiano is a great coach, they play hard, they're moving in the right direction. At some point this is a lazy take. They have improved but they're still a work in progress.
14. Illinois - They were 14th on all three of my lists. No disrespect though I think they are a decent football team.

What about the OL talent? Is there a site geared for that?

I went through the roster and looked at the ratings of the OL players in separate searches. A few had no rating . . . a few were under .8500, but there are several - ten out of the 21 listed - who came out of high school as 3*s with ratings over .8500. The ratings per class are all over the place . . . some with no recruiting ratings and some with .8600 and up. The 8 players we're relying on to play OL have an average rating of .7569 (if you count the one for whom I could not find a rating) and .8515 if you throw out that one guy without the rating. Five have ratings of over .8500 . . . and four have ratings of over .8625.

So it looks like ratings on average do matter . . . at least on the OL. There are a couple of highly rated frosh on the roster . . . I'd kind of like to see what they're like. But then I'm not at practice every day and I really don't know much about OL play.

 

[daddyhoosier]

I was just saying Rutgers is doing better than the perception of the program being poor all around. I don't think they will ever recruit at Ohio State or Michigan level, but I think they can reach the middle of the pack level in the B1G. Schiano's recruiting success in the 2000s crushed Syracuse, Boston College, and Pitt's push to own New Jersey. It left a strong impression that Michigan and Penn State doubled their efforts to re-establish roots in NJ once Schiano left for the NFL.

Schiano did a fantastic job changing the perception of Rutgers not only out of state, but the in-state recruits ate it up. One of the things Schiano and his staff did when he was first hired in 2000 was visit every HS in NJ/Eastern Pa./NYC. On behalf of Schiano, a Rutgers donor gave hospitals across the state mini Rutgers football and a Rutgers children's book to all newborns. By Schiano's 4th year at Rutgers, things started to pay off for the program. The support for the program reached levels never seen before. People wanted to go to Rutgers. The type of players committing to Rutgers was different and much better. Schiano began to bag many 4-stars and a few in-state 5-stars like Darius Hamilton and Nate Robinson. Schiano is repeating this blueprint, and so far, it appears he's having similar success at the same stages.

Thank you for sharing. I'm curious to see how far along they are. I guess I'm not expecting a big jump from them this year but I definitely don't automatically put that one into the win column any more. Gone are the days of rutger.

 

[daddyhoosier]

What about the OL talent? Is there a site geared for that?

I went through the roster and looked at the ratings of the OL players in separate searches. A few had no rating . . . a few were under .8500, but there are several - ten out of the 21 listed - who came out of high school as 3*s with ratings over .8500. The ratings per class are all over the place . . . some with no recruiting ratings and some with .8600 and up. The 8 players we're relying on to play OL have an average rating of .7569 (if you count the one for whom I could not find a rating) and .8515 if you throw out that one guy without the rating. Five have ratings of over .8500 . . . and four have ratings of over .8625.

So it looks like ratings on average do matter . . . at least on the OL. There are a couple of highly rated frosh on the roster . . . I'd kind of like to see what they're like. But then I'm not at practice every day and I really don't know much about OL play.
[/Rutgers.

PFF does player grades and that becomes more useful as the year goes along. But there's a pay wall. And you have to play to get graded.

 

[Champs1976]

What about the OL talent? Is there a site geared for that?

I went through the roster and looked at the ratings of the OL players in separate searches. A few had no rating . . . a few were under .8500, but there are several - ten out of the 21 listed - who came out of high school as 3*s with ratings over .8500. The ratings per class are all over the place . . . some with no recruiting ratings and some with .8600 and up. The 8 players we're relying on to play OL have an average rating of .7569 (if you count the one for whom I could not find a rating) and .8515 if you throw out that one guy without the rating. Five have ratings of over .8500 . . . and four have ratings of over .8625.

So it looks like ratings on average do matter . . . at least on the OL. There are a couple of highly rated frosh on the roster . . . I'd kind of like to see what they're like. But then I'm not at practice every day and I really don't know much about OL play.

The problem isn't just the ratings out of high school, but the developmental opportunities for OL players coming to IU. If you were a highly talented OL prospect in HS, why would you come to IU? Wouldn't you want to go somewhere where there is an OL coach that can get guys to the NFL, preferably as high draft picks? Wouldn't you want to go somewhere where players have demonstrably better skill sets after four years than they did as frosh? That is the fundamental problem with the OL, we generally can't recruit the top notch prospects because they know they won't be coached to their ceiling potential.

Based on program history, no matter how well liked Allen is and his LEO philosophy, IU must generally take three star talent and somehow develop them to four star talent, not just on the OL but elsewhere on the roster. Sure IU will get some four star rated players now and then, but the bulk of players IU gets committed are three stars. The only way for IU to succeed in football is a great strength and conditioning program coupled with excellent OCs and DCs and teaching position coaches. Preferably those coaches bring to the table experience in teaching the nuances of their position of responsibility that is equal to or a cut above other program assistant coaches. When that isn't present, the position underperforms or fails.

For example, 2020 was a great season primarily because Kane Wommack was a good DC who, along with Allen, helped elevate that unit. Some position groups on that side clearly had great coaching - Safeties, LBs and CBs.
Sort of the same story in 2019 with Kalen Deboer as the OC elevating the QB and unit effectiveness with his schemes.

Then there was 2021 and the ongoing, five seasons now, ineffectiveness of the OLs.

 

[Jackskip23]

Thank you for sharing. I'm curious to see how far along they are. I guess I'm not expecting a big jump from them this year but I definitely don't automatically put that one into the win column any more. Gone are the days of rutger.

After the beating they laid on us last year, I think we can keep them off the automatic win column indefinitely. In a season of lows, I’m not sure we got much further down than we did that day.

 

[Sope Creek]

The problem isn't just the ratings out of high school, but the developmental opportunities for OL players coming to IU. If you were a highly talented OL prospect in HS, why would you come to IU? Wouldn't you want to go somewhere where there is an OL coach that can get guys to the NFL, preferably as high draft picks? Wouldn't you want to go somewhere where players have demonstrably better skill sets after four years than they did as frosh? That is the fundamental problem with the OL, we generally can't recruit the top notch prospects because they know they won't be coached to their ceiling potential.

Based on program history, no matter how well liked Allen is and his LEO philosophy, IU must generally take three star talent and somehow develop them to four star talent, not just on the OL but elsewhere on the roster. Sure IU will get some four star rated players now and then, but the bulk of players IU gets committed are three stars. The only way for IU to succeed in football is a great strength and conditioning program coupled with excellent OCs and DCs and teaching position coaches. Preferably those coaches bring to the table experience in teaching the nuances of their position of responsibility that is equal to or a cut above other program assistant coaches. When that isn't present, the position underperforms or fails.

For example, 2020 was a great season primarily because Kane Wommack was a good DC who, along with Allen, helped elevate that unit. Some position groups on that side clearly had great coaching - Safeties, LBs and CBs.
Sort of the same story in 2019 with Kalen Deboer as the OC elevating the QB and unit effectiveness with his schemes.

Then there was 2021 and the ongoing, five seasons now, ineffectiveness of the OLs.

I do think IU is getting higher ranked 3*s recently, but there are a few no/low ratings guys too.

 

[Sope Creek]

To daddyhoosier: I don't know what PFF is, but a paywall sends me running. I'm a cheap bastage. Just ask around.

 

[Big Red Crimson Buffalo]

Rushing stats under Allen:
Per game / Per Carry
2017 - 130.1 ypg / 3.5 ypc
2018 - 157.3 ypg / 4.4 ypc
2019 - 130.8 ypg/ 3.8 ypc
2020 - 111.8 ypg/ 3.3 ypc
2021 - 116.3 ypg/ 3.3 ypc
2022 - TBD 32 yards/ 1.2 ypc

 

[TMFT]

Rushing stats under Allen:
Per game / Per Carry
2017 - 130.1 ypg / 3.5 ypc
2018 - 157.3 ypg / 4.4 ypc
2019 - 130.8 ypg/ 3.8 ypc
2020 - 111.8 ypg/ 3.3 ypc
2021 - 116.3 ypg/ 3.3 ypc
2022 - TBD 32 yards/ 1.2 ypc

Looks about right. I would have pegged 2019 as the last time IU fielded a really solid line. And I would imagine the numbers were only down that year because of how Deboer focused so much on the bubble screen game as a pseudo-run game.

 

[Crayfish57]

That talent gap between Indiana and Penn State is almost the same as the talent gap between Ohio State and Penn State if you can believe that. Just goes to show you what kind of level Ohio State is on.

IDK, didn't Penn St have the #1 recruiting class in the nation last yr ?

 

[daddyhoosier]

After the beating they laid on us last year, I think we can keep them off the automatic win column indefinitely. In a season of lows, I’m not sure we got much further down than we did that day.

Touché but I really don't think that outcome is representative of reality.

 

[Jackskip23]

Touché but I really don't think that outcome is representative of reality.

No offense, but it looked pretty real from row 24 in section 6. I’m not saying thats going to happen every season, but Rutgers is clearly on the upswing under GS.