-
Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
- Thread starter Smudger
- Start date
bukIpower
Head Coach
I want the best players No Doubt. However I think this approach is smart.
1. He does not have the same pull as Urban.
2. There are plenty of Fringe Ohio players that we have missed on that ended up being awesome.
3. Allows us to take away from the Big Ten which is betters our odds.
Upvote
0
mendensa
Legend
Agreed. I don't think anyone expects 12-15 guys from Ohio and 60-70% of the overall class like in Tressel's years. (numbers edited to reflect LordJeff's numbers below..... I pulled a McMurphy.......lol)
Day still needs to go after the best nationally. But u can't strike out on the best of the best and not have a few Ohio kids ranked 11-20 targeted as options in your back pocket. You can always recruit those types of kids hard early and then back off late. Doesn't work the other way.
Jax, if you are only going by stars and rankings, there were plenty of Ohio kids that weren't recruited by OSU that were equally ranked or higher ranked than 5 of the 6 lowest rated out-of-state guys they ended up with in the '19 class. So much for not settling for less talent.....lol. There are plenty of good football players in ohio outside the top 5-10 every year. I don't think it would be a reach to bring a few of them in each year.
Day still needs to go after the best nationally. But u can't strike out on the best of the best and not have a few Ohio kids ranked 11-20 targeted as options in your back pocket. You can always recruit those types of kids hard early and then back off late. Doesn't work the other way.
Jax, if you are only going by stars and rankings, there were plenty of Ohio kids that weren't recruited by OSU that were equally ranked or higher ranked than 5 of the 6 lowest rated out-of-state guys they ended up with in the '19 class. So much for not settling for less talent.....lol. There are plenty of good football players in ohio outside the top 5-10 every year. I don't think it would be a reach to bring a few of them in each year.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Lots of tangential discussion of recruiting Ohio versus recruiting out of state. I'll keep going off on that tangent, but I'll provide some facts. I have analyzed each recruiting class from 2001 to 2019, showing Ohio recruits / OOS recruits, with (percentage) in parentheses, followed by the in-state ranking of each Ohio signee (according to Rivals):
Here's the breakdown of the recruits in the following categories: #1-#5; #6-#10; #11-#20; #21-#30; #31-#40; #41-#50; #51 and higher; and further broken down by head coach, with Tressel getting credit for the 2001-2011 classes, and Meyer for the 2012-2019 classes:
Conclusions: Ohio State, regardless of head coach, clearly targets "top 10" Ohio talent, as 83 of 176 (47.2%) signees were in that category. Only 39 of 176 (22.2%) of Ohio signees were in the remainder of the "top 20", while 54 of 176 (30.7%) were outside of the "top 20".
While Urban Meyer recruited Ohio to a far less extent than Jim Tressel - 37.8% of Meyer's recruits were Ohioans compared to 59.1% for Tressel - both coaches were willing to take kids outside of the "top 10" or even the "top 20", sometimes quite a bit outside of those "blue chip" recruits. In fact, Meyer actually had a higher percentage of recruits in the #11-#20; #31-#40; and #51+ categories than did Tressel; and some of Meyer's best Ohio recruits were outside of the top 20: Darron Lee (#33 in 2013); Gareon Conley (#37 in 2013); Sam Hubbard (#30 in 2014); and Denzel Ward (#33 in 2015).
| Class | Recruits | Percent | Rankings |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | 10 / 18 | 55.6 % | no data available |
| 2002 | 18 / 25 | 72.0 % | no data available |
| 2003 | 13 / 16 | 81.3 % | #2, #3, #5, #6, #7, #10, #11, #12, #13, #15, #16, #24, #46 |
| 2004 | 15 / 24 | 62.5 % | #1, #3, #6, #7, #8, #10, #11, #13, #14, #15, #24, NR, NR, NR, NR |
| 2005 | 11 / 18 | 61.1 % | #1, #2, #4, #7, #8, #9, #10, #12, #18, #22, #24 |
| 2006 | 10 / 20 | 50.0 % | #1, #2, #3, #5, #6, #8, #10, #12, #14, #26 |
| 2007 | 10 / 15 | 66.7 % | #2, #3, #5, #7, #8, #10, #11, #13, #26, #40 |
| 2008 | 9 / 20 | 45.0 % | #1, #3, #7, #11, #29, #35, #38, #40, #46 |
| 2009 | 14 / 25 | 56.0 % | #2, #3, #4, #5, #7, #9, #10, #11, #17, #19, #20, #24, #34, #47 |
| 2010 | 9 / 19 | 47.4 % | #5, #7, #19, #22, #30, #35, #40, NR, NR |
| 2011 | 14 / 24 | 58.3 % | #1, #2, #4, #6, #8, #9, #10, #17, #21, #24, #26, #34, #44, #45 |
| 2012 | 15 / 25 | 60.0 % | #2, #3, #6, #7, #10, #12, #14, #16, #18, #25, #31, #33, #50, NR, NR |
| 2013 | 10 / 24 | 41.7 % | #1, #2, #3, #9, #11, #29, #32, #33, #37, #51 |
| 2014 | 9 / 23 | 39.1 % | #1, #2, #3, #6, #11, #12, #14, #30, #31 |
| 2015 | 12 / 27 | 44.4 % | #1, #2, #5, #6, #7, #17, #22, #28, #29, #33, #42, NR |
| 2016 | 9 / 25 | 36.0 % | #2, #3, #4, #9, #12, #13, #17, #23, #63 |
| 2017 | 6 / 21 | 28.6 % | #1, #2, #8, #10, #16, #24 |
| 2018 | 5 / 26 | 19.2 % | #2, #3, #4, #11, #17 |
| 2019 | 5 / 17 | 29.4 % | #1, #3, #6, #14, #19 |
| Head Coach | #1 - #5 | #6 - #10 | #11 - #20 | #21 - #30 | #31 - #40 | #41 - #50 | #51 + |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jim Tressel | 25/105 (23.8%) | 26/105 (24.8%) | 22/105 (21.0%) | 12/105 (11.4%) | 6/105 (5.7%) | 8/105 (7.6%) | 6/105 (5.7%) |
| Urban Meyer | 21/71 (29.6%) | 11/71 (15.5%) | 17/71 (23.9%) | 8/71 (11.3%) | 7/71 (9.9%) | 2/71 (2.8%) | 5/71 (7.0%) |
| Combined | 46/176 (26.1%) | 37/176 (21.0%) | 39/176 (22.2%) | 20/176 (11.4%) | 13/176 (7.4%) | 10/176 (5.7%) | 11/176 (6.3%) |
While Urban Meyer recruited Ohio to a far less extent than Jim Tressel - 37.8% of Meyer's recruits were Ohioans compared to 59.1% for Tressel - both coaches were willing to take kids outside of the "top 10" or even the "top 20", sometimes quite a bit outside of those "blue chip" recruits. In fact, Meyer actually had a higher percentage of recruits in the #11-#20; #31-#40; and #51+ categories than did Tressel; and some of Meyer's best Ohio recruits were outside of the top 20: Darron Lee (#33 in 2013); Gareon Conley (#37 in 2013); Sam Hubbard (#30 in 2014); and Denzel Ward (#33 in 2015).
Last edited:
Upvote
0
mendensa
Legend
great analysis, LordJeffBuck. Thanks for taking the time to put that graphic together.
My biggest take away from those numbers is in the bottom half of the the 1st graph. It's my opinion that Urban targeted the proper amount (and landed) a fair amount of the top 10-12 recruits in Ohio '13-'16 and went after and landed a fair amount (9-12 overall recruits each of those years) of Ohio kids outside the top 10 in-state. A lot of good talent left Ohio in '17-'19 without a lot of OSU interest (only landed an ave. of 5 recruits each yr from Ohio in Urban's final 3 years).
Those numbers also prove that Urban and Tress both found plenty of talented football players outside the top 10 in-state each year. Far too much to not even consider some of them as the numbers have dropped drastically in the past 3 years.
And although '19 is an outlier as far as class rankings are concerned, and skew the numbers a bit, OSU had a higher average class ranking in '13-16 (#4) recruiting more Ohio kids (10 per yr) than they did '17-19 (#6), landing 5.4 Ohio kids per year.
Just my observation from LordJeffBuck's numbers. Thanks again.
My biggest take away from those numbers is in the bottom half of the the 1st graph. It's my opinion that Urban targeted the proper amount (and landed) a fair amount of the top 10-12 recruits in Ohio '13-'16 and went after and landed a fair amount (9-12 overall recruits each of those years) of Ohio kids outside the top 10 in-state. A lot of good talent left Ohio in '17-'19 without a lot of OSU interest (only landed an ave. of 5 recruits each yr from Ohio in Urban's final 3 years).
Those numbers also prove that Urban and Tress both found plenty of talented football players outside the top 10 in-state each year. Far too much to not even consider some of them as the numbers have dropped drastically in the past 3 years.
And although '19 is an outlier as far as class rankings are concerned, and skew the numbers a bit, OSU had a higher average class ranking in '13-16 (#4) recruiting more Ohio kids (10 per yr) than they did '17-19 (#6), landing 5.4 Ohio kids per year.
Just my observation from LordJeffBuck's numbers. Thanks again.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The trend away from Ohio recruits during Meyer's time is also unmistakable according to LJB's chart. That suggests to me a growing national brand. I've stayed out of this debate, but, for my part I think Ohio State must remain a national player in recruiting. The nation includes Ohio, of course, and consequently Ohio will not be ignored. Take Zach Harrison... Ohio State was recruiting regardless of whether Zach played his HS ball at Olentangey or Bishop Gorman. He was a top talent and his State of origin makes no difference. The top ... I don't know... say 5 to 10 Ohio kids are in the "national discussion" so.. they'll be recruited. I also think the idea that to compete in today's college football that you can rely on old ideas of building a wall around Ohio are no longer viable. In any given season Ohio talent may be down.. or up... There's no magic number of Ohio kids. If there are 5 kids in Ohio worthy of an Ohio State offer, then offer those 5. If there are 20? Offer 20. If there are 100? Offer 100.
I guess all this is just to say, this "Need more Ohio kids" thing, to me, is pretty ridiculous. If Ohio produces enough top tier D I talent, so be it. (and Ohio is a strong State for HS football, to be sure) But, the days of making your living by recruiting a team primarily composed of in state/in region guys with a smattering of out of state/national guys is a thing of the past. Ohio State can't, and won't, ignore Ohio. It's not because Ohio State sits in Ohio, though. It's because there are very talented players in Ohio. Now.. if the choice is between a 3 star from... say, Colorado and a 3 star from Ohio.. there's no harm in taking the Ohio kid at all. His having "grown up a Buckeye" might just be the motivation that sets him above the kid from the Colorado 3 star in this hypo.
I guess all this is just to say, this "Need more Ohio kids" thing, to me, is pretty ridiculous. If Ohio produces enough top tier D I talent, so be it. (and Ohio is a strong State for HS football, to be sure) But, the days of making your living by recruiting a team primarily composed of in state/in region guys with a smattering of out of state/national guys is a thing of the past. Ohio State can't, and won't, ignore Ohio. It's not because Ohio State sits in Ohio, though. It's because there are very talented players in Ohio. Now.. if the choice is between a 3 star from... say, Colorado and a 3 star from Ohio.. there's no harm in taking the Ohio kid at all. His having "grown up a Buckeye" might just be the motivation that sets him above the kid from the Colorado 3 star in this hypo.
Upvote
0
This is a continuing problem.
This is a guess, based on our fanbase's nostalgia for Tressel, and that emotion may overstate the point a bit.
This is not happening. They're not recruiting effectively locally or nationally on the OL, not in quantity or in the guys they prioritize.
When one class comes up short, like it did at DB in 2019 (with a 1 year rental DB coach and a defense and regime in turmoil), that's an aberration. When it happens consistently, it undercuts any national radar elitism.
It would be fine if they got Nester and another tackle or two they targeted early. They don't need magical powers, but whiffing on everyone but Miller is a problem.
Now I happen to place less stock in star rankings at the hardest position to recruit in all of football, but having 1 guy heading into signing day, and then losing the most coveted battle (by a long shot), is not great. They did a great job scrambling to find some guys with nice upside but neither are likely to help in the near future.
That said, assuming the mission can be workable, I'd rather have 3 guys than Miller & Nester, but neither class has the quantity and quality they wanted.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Is this a good time to start another debate about oversigning, medical scholarships, etc. ?
#offseason =/
Upvote
0
calibuck
Too soon old, too late smart
Free agency killed my interest in professional football, baseball, and basketball. Hope the 'transfer portal' aka 'free agency' at college level, doesn't kill my interest in college football as well. Guess it's good that there's only a one or two year window for most college players, given their finite shelf life.
Upvote
0
Buckeye86
I do not choose to discuss it
If your interest is diminished by players moving around too much, the interest in college football is a bit of a paradox in the first place considering the absolute max time a player can be with a team is 4-5 years, right?
And the average time a starter is with a college team is even less.
Just an interesting note. One of the things I like most about college is the excitement and potential of new stars breaking out each year.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
calibuck
Too soon old, too late smart
You have a great point 86. I like to see who's going to be a star as well. However, I like to see them earn it instead of walk into it. Enjoyed seeing Haskins earn his way on the field. Fields on the other hand, will pretty much walk into it from the git-go. Same as Joe Burrows, except he's a Buckeye. Go Bucks.
Upvote
0