A Few Stats on the Recruiting Class
Comments
-
@Dennis_DeYoung - You are absolutely right. The TBS crowd getting boners over 7-on-7 competitions is worthless. Demand for a kid (offers) is a much better way to do it. The problem is that "offers" are reported by the kids, not by the schools, and some of them are likely bogus.
At the end of the day, anyone with a bit of intelligence who is interested in TBS looks at:
#1 - Offers
#2 - Video
#3 - TBS site rankings
.....in that order.
-
Stars mean very little in the grand scheme of things ...
The one thing that amuses me is the cookie cutter process that every player fits every system the same.
It all comes down to building the best class possible with guys that fit what you are trying to do. It's easiest to get in-state guys but they shouldn't be had at the expense of superior talent. -
The thing is, sure, some people report bogus offers, but that is equally distributed across all levels of players. So, for instance, guys that are West Coast guys (ASU, UCLA, UW) sometimes lie about having top 'national' (ND, TEX, FLA) offers. Guys that are regional guys (UW, WSU, OSU) sometimes lie about having 'West Coast' offers...HuskyInAZ said:@Dennis_DeYoung - You are absolutely right. The TBS crowd getting boners over 7-on-7 competitions is worthless. Demand for a kid (offers) is a much better way to do it. The problem is that "offers" are reported by the kids, not by the schools, and some of them are likely bogus.
At the end of the day, anyone with a bit of intelligence who is interested in TBS looks at:
#1 - Offers
#2 - Video
#3 - TBS site rankings
.....in that order.
But you could easily do a weighting system to counter that. You could also easily enter a term for glaring absences of offers (like us not offering Lemieux) and weight offers from staffs that have a better eval record with more importance in some senses.
It's not like this level of math has never been achieved. It's basically stuff any grad student could do. Sure, the average person can't do it, but if they are running a gigantic business off the idea they rank recruits... it might behoove them to actually provide quality content that the average person cannot deliver. Instead they've got fat, bald dudes trying to be Scouts sniffing each others' chodes, wafting the smell in the air and clapping when the aroma pleases the crowd.
What it would force these dingleberries to do is actually be reporters and see who has really offered (uh, fact check, maychance?) instead of 'would-be' scouts. I say that as a person who is a committed and enthusiastic would-be scout.
It's just that I would never RANK kids on my evals.
7-on-7s are so worthless it hurts, though. I used to get in fights with Huffman (who is a GOB STOPPING moron, by the way) about the importance of 7-on-7s. Them thinking they can tell a 'true 5-star' from a 'high 4-star' is a complete and mind-meltingly diabolical level of hubris.
It would take a team of 10 good grad students a month to do they and they'd probably have to pay each of them like a grand. Maybe less if it's publishable. -
For what it's worth, our class rankings when sorted by average star per recruit:
-- Petersen
2015: #25 national (#5 Pac)
2014: 36 (7)
-- Sarkisian
2013: 20 (4)
2012: 31 (6)
2011: 22 (5)
2010: 20 (5)
2009: 51 (9)
-- Willingham
2008: 21 (5)
2007: 37 (8)
...
-
By that the class is the 3rd best since Neuheisel era.The_Undertaker said:For what it's worth, our class rankings when sorted by average star per recruit:
-- Petersen
2015: #25 national (#5 Pac)
2014: 36 (7)
-- Sarkisian
2013: 20 (4)
2012: 31 (6)
2011: 22 (5)
2010: 20 (5)
2009: 51 (9)
-- Willingham
2008: 21 (5)
2007: 37 (8)
...
The recent rankings are inflated a bit because they've given out more 3* but not more 4* and 5*. -
As far as avg. ranking goes, we get hurt by the fact that we have a long snapper (they only get 2 stars) and a probable greyshirt (Rice) who was hurt for most of the year and was not evaluated. They pull our average down. Sterk committing will further pull it down. Every 2 star you grab averages one of your 4 stars into a 3 star.The_Undertaker said:For what it's worth, our class rankings when sorted by average star per recruit:
-- Petersen
2015: #25 national (#5 Pac)
2014: 36 (7)
-- Sarkisian
2013: 20 (4)
2012: 31 (6)
2011: 22 (5)
2010: 20 (5)
2009: 51 (9)
-- Willingham
2008: 21 (5)
2007: 37 (8)
... -
Ranking 1000s of players across the entire country is a fools errand, especially for football.
I think Scout does a fairly good job. Better than ESPN, who uses rankings to placate their SEC investments and has zero west coast presence. Ditto Rivals although to a lesser extent. I think it's a bit naieve to assume rankings and offers aren't inter-related. They influence each other to some extent.
There is a correlation between rankings and on-field results by college teams, the rankings aren't gospel but overall I think they paint a good picture of a teams overall raw talent level. -
So it's a fool's errand that does well in its intended purpose?BallSacked said:Ranking 1000s of players across the entire country is a fools errand, especially for football.
I think Scout does a fairly good job. Better than ESPN, who uses rankings to placate their SEC investments and has zero west coast presence. Ditto Rivals although to a lesser extent. I think it's a bit naieve to assume rankings and offers aren't inter-related. They influence each other to some extent.
There is a correlation between rankings and on-field results by college teams, the rankings aren't gospel but overall I think they paint a good picture of a teams overall raw talent level.
Great poont.
Derek, close the gates!!! -
Thank you math superiority guy.bananasnblondes said:
As far as avg. ranking goes, we get hurt by the fact that we have a long snapper (they only get 2 stars) and a probable greyshirt (Rice) who was hurt for most of the year and was not evaluated. They pull our average down. Sterk committing will further pull it down. Every 2 star you grab averages one of your 4 stars into a 3 star.The_Undertaker said:For what it's worth, our class rankings when sorted by average star per recruit:
-- Petersen
2015: #25 national (#5 Pac)
2014: 36 (7)
-- Sarkisian
2013: 20 (4)
2012: 31 (6)
2011: 22 (5)
2010: 20 (5)
2009: 51 (9)
-- Willingham
2008: 21 (5)
2007: 37 (8)
... -
