2011 Big Ten Recruiting: Ranking the 12 Teams Based On Position Needs
The 2011 National Signing Day is over.
Now is the time for all of the college football and recruiting experts to analyze and predict the impact or quality of the various classes. Within Big Ten recruiting, along with any conference for that matter, it is essential to look in depth into the prospects that succeed in both quality and purpose.
The purpose of this slide show is to rank the 12 Big Ten teams based on the grading average of the specific prospects that fulfill the position needs of each team.
Before we get started, there will be some discrepancies.
First, the star ranking system is based on expert analysis that obviously is not always accurate pertaining to actual production on the field. Second, I have included prospects that are considered "all-purpose" or "athletes" that may fulfill vacancies of running backs, wide receivers and the secondary positions.
Finally, this ranking is an average grading of only prospects that fulfill positions needs, so not all of the prospects are accounted for.
Without further ado...
No. 12: Minnesota Golden Gophers
1 of 12
Positions Needs: Offensive Center (OC), Offensive Guard (OG), Offensive Tackle (OT), and Defensive End (DE)
Top Commitments
OG Tommy Olson (4-Star), OT Kyle McAvoy (3-Star), DE Drew Goodger (2-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 9 Grade Average: 2.11
While the ranking, statistically, for Minnesota is in last place, there is plenty to be excited about for the future of the Golden Gophers. They acquired nine commitments to fulfill three positions, with guard Tommy Olson likely to make an immediate impact.
What hurt Minnesota was the failure to acquire a center and two of the defensive end prospects had zero stars.
No. 11: Purdue Boilermakers
2 of 12
Position Needs: Running back (RB) and Tight End (TE)
Top Commitments
ATH Raheem Mostert (4-Star), TE Robert Kugler (3-Star), RB Doug Gentry (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 8 Grade Average: 2.125
Danny Hope did a great job in getting several prospects to provide some speed and athleticism for the running back corps. Mostert and Gentry will definitely contribute early to the fledgling Purdue offense. In addition, getting 6' 3" Pennsylvania recruit Kugler was a steal.
No. 10: Iowa Hawkeyes
3 of 12
Position Needs: RB, Wide Receiver (WR), TE, Linebackers (ILB, OLB)
Top Commitments
TE Ray Hamilton (4-Star), ILB Quinton Alston (3-Star), OLB Melvin Spears (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 14 Grade Average: 2.14
This is where the ranking may appear skewed. How does Iowa rank toward the bottom with 14 recruits?
What decreased the average was that four of those prospects ranked 1-Star or lower. Even with the low average, Iowa's 2011 class was more aggressive in getting the players that fit their needs.
Hamilton will be a huge asset for blocking and pro-style passing schemes. The high number of prospects is also nothing to scoff at. With so many athletes to pick from, Iowa will have the depth and talent to continuously compete in the Big Ten.
In addition, Ferentz and Co. will develop most of these 3-star commitments into All-Big Ten contenders.
.jpg?w=256 "Ohio State Team Doctor")
No. 9: Indiana Hoosiers
4 of 12
Position Needs: Secondary positions (FS, SS, CB, DB) and Quarterback (QB)
Top Commitments
ATH Shane Wynn (3-Star), ATH Tre Roberson (3-Star), S Mark Murphy (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 6 Grade Average: 2.3
The majority of the relevant prospects are to serve in the secondary in the near future for the Hoosiers. Ohio recruit Mark Murphy will make the biggest impact for the Hoosier's mediocre defense. If Kevin Wilson's defensive staff can develop these prospects into a productive defensive unit, look for Indiana to potentially upset some powerhouse Big Ten programs down the road.
Two glaring issues is that the Hoosiers only acquired six of these prospects and none of these guys are definitive quarterbacks.
No. 8: Michigan State Spartans
5 of 12
Position Needs: OT, OG, OC, LB
Top Commitments
ILB Lawrence Thomas (4-Star), OLB Darien Harris (3-Star), OC Jack Allen (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 7 Grade Average: 2.71
Mark Dantonio and Co. brought in one of the best linebackers, Lawrence Thomas, and one of the best centers, Jack Allen, to play for the Spartans. These two prospects will certainly have an immediate impact and contribute to MSU's recent success.
The big question for this 2011 class is whether Lawrence Thomas can develop into the caliber of Greg Jones or possibly even better. Allen has the potential to become the best center in the Big Ten within the near future.
No. 7: Illinois Fighting Illini
6 of 12
Position Needs: WR, LB, QB
Top Commitments
ATH Jon Davis (4-Star), ATH Dondi Kirby (4-Star), ILB Ralph Cooper (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 10 Grade Average: 2.80
The 2011 recruiting class for Illinois is an unusual sight. Even though the class has 10 prospects that fulfill significant skills positions, it is surprising that Zook's recruiting skills didn't attract more higher ranked prospects alongside Davis and Kirby.
However, Ron Zook is one of the best recruiters in college football so he may see more potential in these prospects than the expert analysts.
Overall, the Illinois coaching staff did a great job in securing athletes to eventually prosper in specific skill positions.
No. 6: Wisconsin Badgers
7 of 12
Position Needs: Secondary positions, WR, DE
Top Commitments
WR A.J. Jordan (4-Star), DE Jesse Hayes (3-Star), CB Devin Gaulden (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 11 Grade Average: 2.81
This recruiting class was actually phenomenal for Bret Bielema and the Badgers because there were 11 prospects that will assist in the pass defense production. Multiple three star prospects will learn and develop to maintain the staple defense that Wisconsin showcases every season.
The gem is 4-Star WR A.J. Jordan, who might be able to assist with a receiving corps that already possesses Nick Toon.
Overall, Wisconsin's 2011 class will contribute to the Badgers continuing its success under Bielema.
No. 5: Michigan Wolverines
8 of 12
Position Needs: Secondary positions, DE, Defensive tackle (DT), Kicker (K)
Top Commitments
CB Blake Countess (4-Star), DE Brennen Breyer (4-Star), DT Jack Miller (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 9 Grade Average: 2.88
Based solely on position needs, Brady Hoke did an incredible job acquiring the athletes he needed as the Michigan head coach for less than a month. He was able to draw multiple defensive prospects in to attempt to revive the atrocious defense that existed under Greg Robinson's management in the Rich Rodriguez era.
With top notch recruits like Countess and Breyer, Michigan is poised to fight their way back to the top of the Big Ten.
No. 4: Northwestern Wildcats
9 of 12
Position Needs: RB, DE, DT
Top Commitments
DE Max Chapman (3-Star), RB Treyvon Green (3-Star), DT C. J. Robbins (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 5 Grade Average: 3
This is another skewed ranking because the three point average for Northwestern's 2011 class pertains to only five prospects. However, the prospects that fulfill their needs are capable of impacting the Northwestern defense and running game, immediately.
Running back Green might be the one to watch because he likely could serve as another passing target, for quarterback Dan Persa, along with ground running duties.
No. 3: Penn State Nittany Lions
10 of 12
Position Needs: OC, OG, OC, DE, DT
Top Commitments
OG Angelo Mangiro (4-Star), OT Donovan Smith (4-Star), DE Deion Barnes (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 8 Grade Average: 3.25
Joe Paterno and the Penn State coaching staff had to fill multiple vacancies on the offensive line and defensive line. As expected, the Nittany Lions attracted several high quality prospects.
Joe Pa's program values these type of linemen so college football fans and Penn State followers can immediately expect productivity out of several of these recruits including New Jersey prospect Mangiro and Maryland prospect Smith.
No. 2: Nebraska Cornhuskers
11 of 12
Position Needs: RB, WR
Top Commitments
RB Aaron Green (5-Star), ATH Jamal Turner (4-Star), WR Taariq Allen (3-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 5 Grade Average: 3.4
Nebraska started its first offseason, as the twelfth Big Ten member, with a few prospects that will upgrade the inconsistent offensive production in the future. Green is the first five-star displayed in this slide show article and could arguably make one of the biggest impacts toward his team as anyone.
Turner and Allen will progress nicely while helping Taylor Martinez improve offensive production in 2011. Even though the recruit count seems small, the impact will be much more significant as Nebraska will fight for the Big Ten championship in its first season.
No. 1: Ohio State Buckeyes
12 of 12
Position Needs: WR. QB, DE
Top Commitments
DE Steve Miller (4-Star), QB Braxton Miller (4-Star), WR Evan Spencer (4-Star)
Total Commitments Based on Needs: 8 Grade Average: 3.5
There is a reason why the Buckeyes rank the highest on this list. The Buckeyes were able to grab eight recruits to fulfill three important positions. In addition, Jim Tressel and Ohio State acquired several high quality prospects, including both of the Millers, that are considered one of the best in their respective positions.
If the Buckeyes' 2011 class states anything, it is that Ohio State will most likely continue its success in the Big Ten under the guidance of Tressel and his coaching staff.
.jpg?w=480 "Ohio State Team Doctor")
