Our Class Ranking?

Big Ten Champions and their recruiting classes: Year - National Recruiting Ranking - Big Ten Recruiting Ranking

2013 Michigan State

2013 - 40 - 5

2012 - 41 - 5

2011 - 31 - 5

2010 - 30 - 4

2009 - 17 - 3

2012 Wisconsin Badgers

2012 - 57 - 8

2011 - 40 - 7

2010 - 88 - 10

2009 - 43 - 7

2008 - 41 - 5

2011 Wisconsin Badgers

2011 - 40 - 7

2010 - 88 - 10

2009 - 43 - 7

2008 - 41 - 5

2007 - 34 - 6

2010 Wisconsin Badgers

2010 - 88 - 10

2009 - 43 - 7

2008 - 41 - 5

2007 - 34 - 6

2006 - 40 - 7

and Nebraska this coming year

2014 - 42 - 7

2013 - 17 - 3

2012 - 25 - 3

2011 - 15 - 2

2010 - 22 - 3 (Big XII)

On a different note I wouldn't buy too much into the "it doesn't matter how many kids we recruit, it's that they all are rated highly" argument. I agree that part of that is true but recruiting is in many ways a game of numbers, pull in as many kids as you can because some aren't going to pan out. This isn't always true, especially of the teams that develop players especially well like Iowa, but take USC for example: 2013 - Average of 4.42 stars - 12 commits. 2012 - Average of 4.07 stars - 15 commits. On the surface those averages look amazing but those teams are going to be hurting in the future because all 27 of those kids aren't going to meet expectations. Ideally you want to be like Alabama or Ohio State and pull in around 25 guys and hover just below a 4 star average...that way you have depth if someone doesn't develop.

...and then of course there is the argument that stars can be ignored completely and coaches should just go after kids who fit the system and that has some merit. Recruit rankings can be inflated and manipulated - just watch what happens to a kid's stars when he's in a recruiting battle between Alabama and another school and then commits to one or the other...and there are obvious flaws in accessing talent and development and what not.

I guess my point of this entire post is to not get too alarmed about anything going on in recruiting, there are just so many things going on with it that make it difficult for a layman to judge. It isn't simply high recruiting ranking = championships...at least that's my approach.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Our coaches must be getting better
default_wink.png


 
MinnwiscowaSker said:
Just for clarification, your recruiting number for 2009, would be an average of the five recruiting years leading up to 2009 (2005-09), correct?
Click to expand...
Yep.

Mavric said:
- You looked at one team that happened to correlate the recruiting rankings to team rankings. That is an incredibly small sample size. If you can run 30+ teams and find the same thing, then it would be interesting. In particular, try running Tennessee, Kentucky, Texas, USC, Mississippi, Michigan and Miami over the same time frame and see how that works out.
Click to expand...
It would be the same story, although the degree of accuracy would vary. It's not a coincidence that the last few recruiting top 5's have been made up of Alabama, Florida State, Ohio St., etc and the bottom 5's are made up of Massechussets, Buffalo, Eastern Michigan, etc. A pretty strong correlation exists, there's really no debating that.

 
Our rankings will go up cause Bo gets in on guys that he and the staff discover. However, the best recruiting schools will close in on signing day with 4 and 5 star guys so it always seems to balance out our gains ... at least if you are looking at stars. We just don't reel in any big fisn usually on signing day.

 
KJ. said:
Giving Bo a pass on his first year (which works to his advantage in this post), he has fielded 5 teams with an average rivals recruiting ranking of 21.76. Those same 5 teams have finished their seasons with an average AP ranking of 21.80. It's crazy how well 'manipulated bullsh#t' does at predicting results!
Click to expand...
KJ. said:
It would be the same story, although the degree of accuracy would vary. It's not a coincidence that the last few recruiting top 5's have been made up of Alabama, Florida State, Ohio St., etc and the bottom 5's are made up of Massechussets, Buffalo, Eastern Michigan, etc. A pretty strong correlation exists, there's really no debating that.
Click to expand...
It would not be the "same story" unless you consider varying by 30-40 spots within a "degree of accuracy". There is a correlation to some extent. But the last few top 5s have also included Texas, USC, Florida and Michigan. I haven't seen those teams finishing in the Top 5 recently. Struggling to get in the Top 25.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mavric said:
KJ. said:
Giving Bo a pass on his first year (which works to his advantage in this post), he has fielded 5 teams with an average rivals recruiting ranking of 21.76. Those same 5 teams have finished their seasons with an average AP ranking of 21.80. It's crazy how well 'manipulated bullsh#t' does at predicting results!
Click to expand...
KJ. said:
It would be the same story, although the degree of accuracy would vary. It's not a coincidence that the last few recruiting top 5's have been made up of Alabama, Florida State, Ohio St., etc and the bottom 5's are made up of Massechussets, Buffalo, Eastern Michigan, etc. A pretty strong correlation exists, there's really no debating that.
Click to expand...
It would not be the "same story" unless you consider varying by 30-40 spots within a "degree of accuracy". There is a correlation to some extent. But the last few top 5s have also included Texas, USC, Florida and Michigan. I haven't seen those teams finishing in the Top 5 recently. Struggling to get in the Top 25.
Click to expand...
Its not a coincidence that two of those four just changed coaches, and the other two are on a very hot seat for next season. Mich or Florida underperform again, and its new coaches for 2015.

Also keep in mind that only Oregon has played in a title game in the last decade without having a five year average of top 10 classes.

 
Mavric said:
KJ. said:
Giving Bo a pass on his first year (which works to his advantage in this post), he has fielded 5 teams with an average rivals recruiting ranking of 21.76. Those same 5 teams have finished their seasons with an average AP ranking of 21.80. It's crazy how well 'manipulated bullsh#t' does at predicting results!
Click to expand...
KJ. said:
It would be the same story, although the degree of accuracy would vary. It's not a coincidence that the last few recruiting top 5's have been made up of Alabama, Florida State, Ohio St., etc and the bottom 5's are made up of Massechussets, Buffalo, Eastern Michigan, etc. A pretty strong correlation exists, there's really no debating that.
Click to expand...
It would not be the "same story" unless you consider varying by 30-40 spots within a "degree of accuracy". There is a correlation to some extent. But the last few top 5s have also included Texas, USC, Florida and Michigan. I haven't seen those teams finishing in the Top 5 recently. Struggling to get in the Top 25.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure you know how this works.

 
What good would that do when it's the ability to understand the results that you're lacking?

 
looking at the data in this thread re: where numerically NU has finished the season in the rankings vs. the recruiting rankings one can only give a loose assessment --- nothing overly detailed can be concluded. The loose assessment is this... of late (past 6 years or so) generally NU recruits outside the nations top 20 and generally NU finishes the season ranked below #20 as well. NU is not a top 20 program any longer --- if say a 10 year window of assessment is in view. Of course, historically NU is a top 5 program (if the window of assessment extends to the last 50 years). But currently, NU is outside the top 20 looking in --- both in recruiting and in on-field performance.

 
Nebraska was not historically a top five recruiting team either, so that throws a pretty good size wrench in that argument.

 
robsker said:
looking at the data in this thread re: where numerically NU has finished the season in the rankings vs. the recruiting rankings one can only give a loose assessment --- nothing overly detailed can be concluded. The loose assessment is this... of late (past 6 years or so) generally NU recruits outside the nations top 20 and generally NU finishes the season ranked below #20 as well. NU is not a top 20 program any longer --- if say a 10 year window of assessment is in view. Of course, historically NU is a top 5 program (if the window of assessment extends to the last 50 years). But currently, NU is outside the top 20 looking in --- both in recruiting and in on-field performance.
Click to expand...
You need to show that the correlation holds when NU is in the top 20. As in NU has top 20 recruiting classes when NU is ranked in the top 20 and vice versa. Otherwise you're not making a point but just pointing out stuff.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top