A Look at Big 10 Recruiting: 2008-2011

AndyDufresne · May 12, 2010

Out of curiousity, I decided to take a closer look at how the teams in what may be our new conference have recruited during the Pelini era. For reference sake, I've included Nebraska in the rankings so that you can see how they compare. Just like the Big XII, it appears that on paper, Nebraska would be the 4th best recruiting team in the Big 10. Unlike the Big XII, the bottom of the Big 10 is much worse. Here are the numbers:

Rivals Average Team Ranking: 2008-2010

1. Ohio State - 10.7

2. Michigan - 12.7

3. Penn State - 26.3

4. Nebraska - 26.7

5. Michigan State - 31.3

6. Minnesota - 35.7

7. Illinois - 42.7

8. Iowa - 52.7

9. Wisconsin - 57

10. Purdue - 63.7

11. Northwestern - 69.3

12. Indiana - 76.3

Rivals Average Stars: 2008-2010

1. Ohio State - 3.66

2. Michigan - 3.47

3. Penn State - 3.16

4. Nebraska - 3.13

5. Michigan State - 3.03

6. Minnesota - 3.00

7. Wisconsin - 2.90

8. Illinois - 2.82

9. Iowa - 2.67

10. Northwestern - 2.62

11. Purdue - 2.50

12. Indiana - 2.42

Number of Rivals Top 250 Players: 2008-2010

1. Ohio State - 31

2. Michigan - 28

3. Penn State - 16

4. Michigan State - 8

5. Illinois - 7

6. Nebraska - 6

7. Iowa - 4

7. Minnesota - 4

7. Wisconsin - 4

10. Northwestern - 1

11. Indiana - 0

11. Purdue - 0

Note: Looking at the Scout 300 for 2008-2011, Nebraska is firmly in 4th place

Trends: Ohio State is definitely the 1,000 lb. gorilla in the Big 10 when it comes to recruiting. They have been consistently in the top 10, though Nebraska actually ranked higher in the team rankings for 2010 while only taking two more commits. Penn State is a lot like Oregon in that they can completely underwhelm with a class ranked in the 30's or 40's one year and follow it up with a top 10 class the next. Michigan is trending downward as the Rodriguez experiment may be coming to an end, while Michigan State has reaped the rewards of Michigan's downfall by signing some top notch instate talent that they probably wouldn't have picked up while Carr was still at Michigan. Minnesota had some recruiting momentum shortly after the Brewster hire, but they seem to be losing it. Illinois' terrible onfield performance has negated Zook's ability as a recruiter. Iowa and Wisconsin are usually solid, though far from impressive; and the rest of the Big 10 makes Iowa State look good.

Location of Big 10 recruits: 2008 - 2011

I looked at where each recruit that signed with a Big 10 team from 2008-2011 were from. Here are the top 10 states:

1. Ohio - 143 - 18.43%

2. Florida - 96 - 12.37%

3. Michigan - 80 - 10.31%

4. Illinois - 77 - 9.92%

5. Pennsylvania - 52 - 6.70%

6. Texas - 42 - 5.41%

7. Indiana - 40 - 5.15%

8. Wisconsin - 33 - 4.25%

9. Minnesota - 21 - 2.71%

10. Iowa - 20 - 2.58%

All in all, over 60% of the total commits were from the Big 10 states. The Big 10 doesn't recruit much in non-Big 10 states west of the Mississippi (besides Texas). Some states that have been good to Nebraska in recent years have gone relative untapped, like California (2.19%), Louisiana (1.16%), and Arizona (.52%). I think that Nebraska could still have success in these areas. As for Texas, it looks like the lack of Big 10 recruiting in Texas has been a bit overexaggerated. Teams like Minnesota and Purdue that have made an effort in Texas have been able to pull players out of Texas. Minnesota has been able to pull some good players from Texas as well, like:

Keanon Cooper - 5.8-4* - Offered by Oklahoma

Eric Lair - 5.6-3* - Offered by Nebraska and Oklahoma State

Kerry Lewis - 5.7-3* - Offered by Oklahoma State

Hasan Lipscomb - 5.8-4* - Offered by Nebraska and Texas A&M

Summary: From a recruiting standpoint, the Big 10 is not as strong as the Big 12. Both Oklahoma and Texas pulled in a better average class from 2008-2010 than any team in the Big 10. Conversely, the worst team in the Big 12 was still better than the two worst teams in the Big 10. The Big 12's average 3 year team ranking was 34.97. The Big 10's was 43.48.