Does Winning Your State's Recruiting Really Matter?

Tyler is off this week so I'll be picking up the slack on the recruiting front for now.  I wanted to do something interesting and something that really shows the importance of recruiting on the football field.  I've already seen some posts analyzing Michigan vs Ohio State in terms of recruiting, so I wanted to take a look at how Michigan and MSU have compared.  Along with this, how has their recruiting timed up with performance on the field.

MSU has won the last four games against Michigan and next year is a big game, but how much of that can be linked to recruiting?  Since there are thousands of recruits in the country, I thought the best way to look at this is through a comparison of recruiting performance within the borders of Michigan.  A lot has been made of Lloyd Carr's "empty" closet and Rich Rodriguez's "failure" to recruit locally.  First, did these things actually exist and did they impact Michigan's in-state recruiting?  If they did, there's no doubt that it probably helped Mark Dantonio and MSU in their four game win streak.

Mark Dantonio's first game in the Michigan - MSU rivalry came in 2007 in East Lansing.  To me, this is as good of a point as any to begin our analysis.  It was Lloyd Carr's last game in the rivalry and we can really assess some of the arguments for the "empty" closet, especially at the in-state level.  What I've done is breakdown the number of players on each roster that were ranked in the top 10 in the state of Michigan:

2007 Season	Michigan	MSU
2003 Top 10 In-State	1	0
2004 Top 10 In-State	4	2
2005 Top 10 In-State	4	3
2006 Top 10 In-State	2	3
2007 Top 10 In-State	1	1
Total Top 10 In-State	12	9

* All rankings are from Rivals

Michigan clearly had the in-state recruiting advantage for 2007.  Not only did Michigan have three more players on their roster that were ranked in the top 10 in the state of Michigan than MSU, but they also had a clear advantage in the 2003-2005 recruiting classes where they led with a ratio of 9:5 over MSU.  The reason this is so important is because these are the older and experienced players on the team.  

Having players that are bigger and more experienced can clearly make a difference during the season and during intense rivalry games.  This is probably the major reason Michigan beat MSU in 2007 and to use a more recent example, why Michigan beat Ohio State in 2011.  So, in Lloyd Carr's final season, he had a clear in-state recruiting advantage over MSU, but if some of the "empty" closet theories are true, we should definitely see the advantage disappear as we enter Rich Rod's first season with Michigan:

2008 Season	Michigan	MSU
2004 Top 10 In-State	3	1
2005 Top 10 In-State	2	3
2006 Top 10 In-State	1	2
2007 Top 10 In-State	1	1
2008 Top 10 In-State	4	2
Total Top 10 In-State	11	9

* All rankings are from Rivals 

Michigan's in-state recruiting advantage may have decreased from 2007, but not even close to some would have you believe.  Michigan still held a +2 over MSU in total top 10 in-state recruits and also had a 5:4 ratio in the 2004 and 2005 classes.  You can see that some of Carr's later years are starting to catch up with Michigan, but Rich Rod's first recruiting class still got two more in-state top 10 kids than MSU, so I can't say that any trend started for Rich Rod in 2008.

The one thing that should be pointed out is the fact that Michigan's 2008 team was awful.  To me, this leaves a major question mark in the theory that the school that wins in-state recruiting will also win on the field.  Without a doubt, the coaching transition and lack of experience factored into this and 2008 is probably more of an anomaly than anything, but 2008 should leave some question marks about the potential impact for in-state recruiting.  It may help, but it definitely isn't the most important factor for a team.

2009 Season	Michigan	MSU
2005 Top 10 In-State	1	2
2006 Top 10 In-State	1	2
2007 Top 10 In-State	1	1
2008 Top 10 In-State	4	2
2009 Top 10 In-State	2	7
Total Top 10 In-State	9	14

* All rankings are from Rivals 

This is the first year that MSU takes the advantage.  The teams actually finished very close in 2009, which poses more question marks for the impact of in-state recruiting, but there should be little doubt that MSU had an advantage with their in-state recruiting in 2009.  Yes, the vast majority of their top 10 in-state kids came in the 2009 recruiting class and were true freshmen, but they also had a 4:2 ratio over Michigan in the 2005-2006 recruiting classes, the oldest classes in the group.

I can't say that true freshmen or two extra older players made a massive difference for MSU, as we saw on the field, but to me this does symbolize the change in the rivalry.  Mark Dantonio and MSU were rolling (at least by MSU terms) and Rich Rod was still suffering from a brutal 3-9 start at Michigan, which really left the ball in Dantonio's court.  Like I said, the 2009 recruiting classes probably didn't massively impact the 2009 season, but it did leave Michigan behind MSU in terms of in-state recruiting and really left MSU with some fantastic players to work with over the next few years.

2010 Season	Michigan	MSU
2006 Top 10 In-State	0	2
2007 Top 10 In-State	1	1
2008 Top 10 In-State	2	2
2009 Top 10 In-State	2	7
2010 Top 10 In-State	1	4
Total Top 10 In-State	6	16

* All rankings are from Rivals

This to me is the year that broke the camel's back.  Not only did MSU have more than double the number of top 10 in-state recruits as Michigan, but they also had a 3:1 ratio of the 2006-2007 recruiting classes.  Along with this, MSU had clearly won both the 2009 and 2010 in-state classes by a ratio of 11:3.  Michigan was still getting some great recruits, but the difference was that MSU was bringing in fantastic talent that seemed to be left over by Rich Rod and Michigan and converted that talent into great players.

At this point Michigan was probably hauling in better recruiting classes than MSU, but the gap had closed a lot, which showed on the field.  MSU won 4 more games than Michigan in 2010 and won convinced over Michigan in the Big House to give MSU three wins in a row in the series.  I'm not going to say that this advantage is the thing that made MSU so good, the reason Michigan was bad, or the reason Rich Rod was fired, but I certainly do find it interesting that from 2008-2010, Rich Rod and Michigan went from 11 to 6 top 10 in-state recruits and Mark Dantonio and MSU increased from 9 to 16.  This can't be used as the sole measurement in the rivalry, but I definitely see a strong correlation between this and MSU's rise.

2011 Season	Michigan	MSU
2007 Top 10 In-State	1	0
2008 Top 10 In-State	2	1
2009 Top 10 In-State	2	7
2010 Top 10 In-State	1	4
2011 Top 10 In-State	4	3
Total Top 10 In-State	10	15

* All rankings are from Rivals

Enter Brady Hoke.  Michigan jumps from a 7-6 record to 11-2 and a Sugar Bowl victory.  Michigan may not have beaten MSU in 2011, but there is no doubt that the two teams were very close in 2011 and that the in-state tide had started to turn in Michigan's favor.  Michigan had gone from 6 to 10 top 10 in-state recruits in just one year, taken a 3:1 ratio in the 2007-2008 classes over MSU, and MSU's total number had decreased.  MSU only went down one top 10 in-state recruit from 2010 to 2011, but a gain is a gain.

What was probably even more impressive in terms of in-state recruiting was that Hoke's first class in 2011 had at least double the number of top 10 in-state recruits as any Michigan recruiting class from 2005-2010.  It was also higher than the 2004 recruiting class (3 top 10 in-state recruits for 2004).  This was not only good because it got Michigan back on track with securing top in-state talent, but 2011 was also the first recruiting class for Michigan that got more in-state top 10 recruits than MSU's class since 2008, before Rich Rod's first season.  Once again, these factors alone can't be credited solely for Michigan's 2011 turnaround, but Hoke did appear to have closed the gap with MSU in the state of Michigan, at least on the recruiting front.

2012 Season	Michigan	MSU
2008 Top 10 In-State	1	0
2009 Top 10 In-State	2	6
2010 Top 10 In-State	1	4
2011 Top 10 In-State	4	3
2012 Top 10 In-State	7	2
Total Top 10 In-State	15	15

* All rankings are from Rivals

And we've finally arrived at the present.  Michigan enters next season with a lot of expectations, but one of the largest is to beat MSU and break the losing streak.  Obviously, with a four game losing streak to MSU and MSU returning from an 11 win season, defeating them will be tough.  One thing that Brady Hoke has done to help Michigan's chances is recruit at an insane level.  Not only did Michigan haul in one of the elite recruiting classes in the nation for 2012, but they also dominated the state of Michigan.

As I said earlier, Michigan's 2011 recruiting was a step forward in the state of Michigan because it at least doubled every recruiting class from 2005-2010.  Well, Michigan's 2012 class nearly doubled the 2011 numbers.  Along with this, MSU was reduced to just two players who were ranked in the top 10 of the state and had gotten at least one top 10 in-state player fewer for three consecutive years.  That's a big feat for a coach that had increased his numbers from 9 to 16 in 2008-2010.  MSU will enter with the same total number as the season before, but there's no doubt that they lost significant ground in the 2012 recruiting class.

Despite these great accomplishments for Brady Hoke, the greatest might be that Michigan finally had at least as many in-state top 10 recruits as MSU for the first time since the 2008 season.  MSU's 15 players are undoubtedly more experienced, with nearly half of Michigan's coming in the 2012 class alone, but it's still progress, especially if you believe in the importance of in-state recruiting.  I can't say this spells a win for either team, but Michigan's chances for victory over MSU probably haven't been great for a while, especially on the in-state recruiting front.

So, what have we learned?  In-state recruiting certainly has trends that seem to be linked to success on the field, but there are also massive aberrations like the 2008 season that just don't fit into this mold.    To me, the bottom-line is that in-state recruiting is important, but the most important thing is just bringing in solid talent, developing it, and having experienced players.  In-state recruiting may be a bigger factor for states like Texas, California, and Florida, but for Michigan, I don't think it's anything more than a minor factor for the most part.

Some of the theories that surrounded Michigan's in-state recruiting over the last few years like Lloyd Carr's "empty" closet and Rich Rod's "weak" in-state recruiting seem to have a little logic, but I think they ignore a lot of factors such as Michigan's 2008 team and MSU's rise.  Rich Rod had talented in-state recruits in 2008, they just didn't have experience, which is hard to demand from a previous coaching staff.  Along with this, when your team and program are getting beaten by an in-state rival, I think it's safe to assume you will take a hit with in-state recruiting, which Michigan did.  I won't say either of the two are blameless, but we need to be real and make sure we look at some of the facts surrounding the scenarios.  In-state recruiting is important, but beyond making fun of the rival fanbase, it probably isn't as critical to team success as some assume.