Skip to main content

A little over a week ago we compiled a list of Michigan's top 25 players heading into the 2020 season. Obviously our lists were different from one another and in some cases, very different. We took a look at how we voted as a staff on Michigan's Top 25 Players and now we're trying to figure out who ranks drastically too low compared to our own individual lists and who ranks too high?

Brandon Brown

The first big discrepancy I noticed when comparing my own list to the composite is with Zach Charbonnet. The sophomore running back came in at No. 9 on the composite and No. 21 on my list. I think Charbonnet is a fine running back, but I think he lacks burst. He definitely has good vision and a nose for the end zone, but he was essentially passed up by Hassan Haskins last year and will have to compete for snaps with Chris Evans this year. I'm not sure he'll lead Michigan in any rushing categories in 2020.

I also don't have either quarterback expected to battle for the starting position on the list at all. In the composite, Dylan McCaffrey checked in at No. 14, while Joe Milton finished at No. 20. I have very high hopes for both players, but since they've barely played, I don't know how they can be listed in the top 25 right now. That will certainly change by the end of the season, but right now I just can't justify putting them in the top 25. 

Kailen McKay

If I had to choose someone from the list that ranked too high it'd be Quinn Nordin. He didn't even make my list. I know he has a rocket for a leg, but he's been entirely too inaccurate during his tenure as kicker at Michigan. To make my list you have to be consistent, and I don't believe Nordin has been. 

A player that is ranked too low is Joe Milton. On my list he was No. 8 instead of No. 20. The kid is a phenomenal athlete with insane arm strength and impressive speed. I think he's a better athlete than he gets credit for. Rumor has it he's one of the top-five fastest players on the team. He definitely deserves to be ranked higher among the team in my book.

Justin Roh

My list was not too far off from the composite list, with a couple exceptions. Brad Hawkins landed at 10 in the composite list, while I had him at 20. Yes, Hawkins will be the veteran leader of the secondary for Don Brown, but I don’t believe he has near the talent of others in that position group. His experience will be important, but I don’t see him making enough great plays to crack the top ten of this list.

The other exception was having Giles Jackson below Chris Evans. The running back and slot receiver positions are deep, which is where Evans would find himself playing. With him being absent from the program all of last year, I could see it being difficult for him to get playing time at either of these positions. With that being said, I believe Jackson will get plenty of playing time at the slot receiver position and even some in the backfield. 

Eric Rutter

Upon looking at the list, I noticed there was not a lot of variance from my top 15 and what was the final result for the top 15. A couple players were off here and there, but most of my assertions were validated. Once the rankings went into the 15+ territory, that's where I saw a lot of surprise names. I actually voted for multiple special teamers, such as Jake Moody and Will Hart, and that unit of U-M football was adequately represented as well. 

Jack Scheel

Looking at the top 25 list I see two things that I would either change or that concern me. 

First, I think Cam McGrone is Michigan's most talented player and he is listed at No. 4 on the composite list. I have him as Michigan's No. 1 returner for 2020. 

Second, and this concerns me — neither of the potential starting quarterbacks are listed in the top 13 (McCaffrey No. 14, Milton No. 20). If Michigan is expected to be an elite team, the QB needs to be among the top players. My list places them both in the top 10 — Milton at No. 5 and McCaffrey right behind him at No. 6. Am I delusional in thinking that this is the year Michigan fields an elite quarterback? Possibly.