• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Recruiting vs Onfield Success (Chart)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
plum diamonds buckeye planet
Sort by date Sort by votes
jwinslow

jwinslow

A MAN OF BETRAYED JUSTICE
Staff member
Tourney Pick'em Champ
Sign On San Diego
Evaluating college football talent has grown into a big business for certain Web sites, but how accurate are those ratings? Sometimes, not very.

Analysis by Brent Schrotenboer
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER February 5, 2007
Joey Superstar from Bluechip High School is expected to sign with your favorite college football team Wednesday, possibly boosting your team's chances of winning the national championship four years from now. But let the buyer beware. While all the hype surrounding him is making at least two Web sites rich, top recruits don't live up to their billings on those sites about 40 percent of the time, according to analyses by The San Diego Union-Tribune and a national recruiting expert.
?It's predicting the future, so you're never going to get it all right,? said Scott Kennedy, director of online programming for Scout.com, a Web site that sells updates and rankings of college sports recruits. ?Even in the NFL, many first-round draft picks go bust.?
Graphic:


...Continued
Click to expand...
 
That's some good info. So to summarize, of the 25 highest recruiting class rankings (avg 02-06), only five (20%) finished higher in the 06 AP poll than in the avg. recruiting rank:

Ohio State
Florida
Auburn
LSU
Cal
 
Upvote 0
I think the complete whiffs (OKlahoma, Georgia, FSU, thugU, Tenn, TAMU, PSU, South Carolina, Virginia) are more notable than the ones who just happened to be ranked higher in a single AP poll vs. several years of recruiting. It'd be a much better analysis if they took the AP poll ratings over at least 2 years.
 
Upvote 0
23Skidoo;743809; said:
I think the complete whiffs (OKlahoma, Georgia, FSU, thugU, Tenn, TAMU, PSU, South Carolina, Virginia) are more notable than the ones who just happened to be ranked higher in a single AP poll vs. several years of recruiting. It'd be a much better analysis if they took the AP poll ratings over at least 2 years.
Click to expand...
I agree - those are more striking.

FSU, Miami (to name just two).
The one thing the article does not dwell on is the disparity is often created by that high class count phenomenon. Lots of players with stars equals a high ranking - never mind that you cannot keep them all, likely will not want to.
 
Upvote 0
sandgk;743827; said:
I agree - those are more striking.

FSU, Miami (to name just two).
The one thing the article does not dwell on is the disparity is often created by that high class count phenomenon. Lots of players with stars equals a high ranking - never mind that you cannot keep them all, likely will not want to.
Click to expand...
Didn't read the whole article, (basically just wanted a better look at the graphic), but there is also the JUCO phenomenon to consider as well.
 
Upvote 0
1. I agree with 23Skid that it should be over two years.
2. Doesn't this chart just show that no matter what people say, the # of blue chippers has a positive effect on how well the team does? It's not perfect, but the Z^2 value is pretty high...
 
Upvote 0
Oneshot;743887; said:
1. I agree with 23Skid that it should be over two years.
2. Doesn't this chart just show that no matter what people say, the # of blue chippers has a positive effect on how well the team does? It's not perfect, but the Z^2 value is pretty high...
Click to expand...

Agreed, but at the end of the day it still requires the coaches utilizing the talent most effectively, a dash of good chemistry as well as a few fortunate bounces when the games are played.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top