Saunders Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Having a lot of talent in your state in great. Not having to fight other in-state schools is even better. Three states are considered college football's recruiting elites: California, Florida, and Texas. There's one problem: each has at least seven FBS programs. So which states have the most FBS talent per program? Let's divide each state's average annual number of 247Sports Composite three-star-and-up recruits by its number of FBS programs, all over the last five classes. For states without FBS programs, the number is the state's average of such recruits per year. http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2015/4/15/8143431/states-most-players-recruits 2 Quote Link to comment
Lyons in the Sea of Red. Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Basically we need to be poaching mizzou Quote Link to comment
BIG ERN Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I don't think one person would guess Ohio has the second most FBS schools (ahead of CA and FL). Also, #Rutgers Quote Link to comment
Mavric Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 I don't think one person would guess Ohio has the second most FBS schools (ahead of CA and FL). Also, #Rutgers Yeah, would be interesting to see the same numbers divided by Power 5 schools plus Notre Dame and BYU. Having to compete against Toledo, Ohio, Bowling Green, Kent State and Miami (OH) isn't the same as having to compete against USC, UCLA, Cal and Stanford. Or perhaps non-Power Five schools count as half. Quote Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 It's interesting but not surprising. I would venture to say that Nebraska is only ranked as high as it is because of the Huskers. Kids grow up loving Nebraska football and so they play it more in HS and dream of playing it in college. I would also venture to say that a vast majority of the kids from Nebraska included in this list are 3 star prospects and not 4-5. Without the Huskers here, we would be the same color as South and North Dakota. The number of recruits in Nebraska isn't the only thing that hurts us. It's the states around us also. Missouri is the only state that touches us with anything like what is found in the sunbelt states. Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Interesting way to look at it. Thanks for posting, saunders. +1. I think it would have been more accurate if they had looked at each school's in-state recruiting, and normalized the ratings based on each school's in-state 3* signings over the past three or four years. Look at Colorado, for example, as compared to Nebraska. Colorado as a state has 12 FBS 3*+ recruits, and yet is rated lower than Nebraska with our 4.8 3*+ recruits. But Colorado's three FBS programs certainly aren't on an equal footing when it comes to recruiting. Air Force is a special case, being a service academy and all. They recruit from a limited pool, and not all qualified recruits want to end up in the Air Force after graduation. And Colo State shouldn't be on an equal footing with CU either. Even though CU has pretty much sucked for the last several years, they should beat the Rams in head-on recruiting battles for a given recruit by virtue of CU being a better school in a better conference than CSU. That is, if a recruit gets an offer from CU and CSU, he's probly going to sign with CU about 90% of the time. (Wild guess %.) So CU really has a fairly large in-state recruiting advantage over NU. And this begs the question: Why in the wide world of sports do the Buffaloes suck so bad? It's just one of those mysteries of life, I guess. Quote Link to comment
Hedley Lamarr Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Interesting way to look at it. Thanks for posting, saunders. +1. I think it would have been more accurate if they had looked at each school's in-state recruiting, and normalized the ratings based on each school's in-state 3* signings over the past three or four years. Look at Colorado, for example, as compared to Nebraska. Colorado as a state has 12 FBS 3*+ recruits, and yet is rated lower than Nebraska with our 4.8 3*+ recruits. But Colorado's three FBS programs certainly aren't on an equal footing when it comes to recruiting. Air Force is a special case, being a service academy and all. They recruit from a limited pool, and not all qualified recruits want to end up in the Air Force after graduation. And Colo State shouldn't be on an equal footing with CU either. Even though CU has pretty much sucked for the last several years, they should beat the Rams in head-on recruiting battles for a given recruit by virtue of CU being a better school in a better conference than CSU. That is, if a recruit gets an offer from CU and CSU, he's probly going to sign with CU about 90% of the time. (Wild guess %.) So CU really has a fairly large in-state recruiting advantage over NU. And this begs the question: Why in the wide world of sports do the Buffaloes suck so bad? It's just one of those mysteries of life, I guess. That's the way God intended it to be Quote Link to comment
TonyStalloni Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 As was stated above, the advantage Ohio has over Fla, Calif and Texas is staggering. OSU gets it's pick of local recruits while the other states share their top kids between 4-7 other in state programs. Yes the state of Ohio has other FBS schools but none that compete for the upper echelon kids. urb is sucking the hind teat and he knows it. Quote Link to comment
NUance Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 Despite the #1 ranking for NJ, I've been saying for several years now that Georgia has the best in-state recruiting for the four FBS schools in Georgia. And look, the state of Georgia has over 150 three-star+ recruits. 150! The Dawgs literally have the pick of the litter when it comes to recruiting. Especially when you consider Georgia Tech is a remotely distant second in the state of Georgia, and Georia St and Georgia Southern are not even in the picture in competing with Univ. of Georgia. It seems to me that we should be recruiting the hell out of states like Georgia where the majority of three-star+ recruits are going to have to head out of state to catch on with a decent team. Quote Link to comment
cornographic Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 Basically we need to be poaching mizzou Seems like we have a pretty good tradition of regularly poaching some of the better/best players out of MO/KC--from Grant Wistrom to Malliek Collins.. I don't think the state produces much 4 or 5 star talent, though. Mostly 3*, and still, @ 104 total, that's a pretty low number. Quote Link to comment
jaws Posted April 19, 2015 Share Posted April 19, 2015 As was stated above, the advantage Ohio has over Fla, Calif and Texas is staggering. OSU gets it's pick of local recruits while the other states share their top kids between 4-7 other in state programs. Yes the state of Ohio has other FBS schools but none that compete for the upper echelon kids. urb is sucking the hind teat and he knows it. That is a very oversimplification of how Ohio football works. The state does produce some great talent but other schools have historically had great success in Ohio. Sure Toledo, Bowling Green, Akron...etc. are not going to get the top tier recruits but over the years Notre Dame, Michigan, and Michigan State have done very well getting kids out of Ohio. The Cincinnati area for example, which has some great football, has been a hard place for OSU to get recruits. Over the years Notre Dame has done well and there have been some very good 5* players from that area that went to the SEC. In the past Michigan has gotten some of its best players to ever play for them from the great state of Ohio (Examples: Charles Woodson and Desmond Howard) and I am sure they will once again try to break back into the state to steal players away. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.