"How to win in recruiting"

GrundleStiltzkin

https://twitter.com/PickSixPreviews/status/961652631637757952

Shows how much that barber knows

Swaye

Bama at 19?

HuskyJW

tvoie

I think these rankings are actually really telling. UW at 23. That seems about how recruits see UW. It’s why having a strategy that correlates to a branding of your team is so important. Curious to see, like DDY/Coke/Teq alluded to in the podcast, how this changes for the perceptions held by some in-state kids. Also, really like Coker’s idea of bringing in all the in state kids UW really likes for an underclassmen day in the next couple of weeks. I think Jimmy Lake could also do some things on social media to highlight the home grown theme as well.

AUBURNTROJAN

Flagged for Oregon over USC.

No fucking way.

AIRWOLF

This is interesting, but without a rigorous random sampling methodology the results are highly suspect.

tvoie

AIRWOLF said:

This is interesting, but without a rigorous random sampling methodology the results are highly suspect.

Without question, but I think it brings to light how well teams are doing in getting their message across to recruits on a small scale that probably is not drastically different then what the reality is.

WilburHooksHands

This survey is bullshit.

AIRWOLF

tvoie said:

AIRWOLF said:

This is interesting, but without a rigorous random sampling methodology the results are highly suspect.

Without question, but I think it brings to light how well teams are doing in getting their message across to recruits on a small scale that probably is not drastically different then what the reality is.

I don't think there is any way to know that. And there is reason to be suspicious that it simply isn't very accurate (see the rankings of Alabama and Texas, for instance).

dnc

AIRWOLF said:

tvoie said:

AIRWOLF said:

This is interesting, but without a rigorous random sampling methodology the results are highly suspect.

Without question, but I think it brings to light how well teams are doing in getting their message across to recruits on a small scale that probably is not drastically different then what the reality is.

I don't think there is any way to know that. And there is reason to be suspicious that it simply isn't very accurate (see the rankings of Alabama and Texas, for instance).

YRYK

The idea that any sample of football players at any age at any level is ranking UCLA 7 spots ahead of BAMA is refuckingtarded.

AZDuck

AUBURNTROJAN said:

Flagged for Oregon over USC.

No fucking way.

tied but whatever.

I read the article that went with this. They asked 224 D-1 recroots what schools they would consider going to if they were the Number One recruit in the land.

However, a middle-aged man probably has a different, more favorable perception of a once-gloried program than a young teenager who never witnessed a winning season.

tvoie

AIRWOLF said:

tvoie said:

AIRWOLF said:

This is interesting, but without a rigorous random sampling methodology the results are highly suspect.

Without question, but I think it brings to light how well teams are doing in getting their message across to recruits on a small scale that probably is not drastically different then what the reality is.

I don't think there is any way to know that. And there is reason to be suspicious that it simply isn't very accurate (see the rankings of Alabama and Texas, for instance).

Perhaps that’s fair, but I personally believe this article is on to something. I think this is data that could be useful in trying to gauge how well the brand of your program is reaching recruits. It may not be the only data point you use, but I think it’s useful nonetheless.

Bread

224 no name recruits? I could do a better survey in a day without ever leaving maltby.

AUBURNTROJAN

AZDuck said:

AUBURNTROJAN said:

Flagged for Oregon over USC.

No fucking way.

tied but whatever.

I read the article that went with this. They asked 224 D-1 recroots what schools they would consider going to if they were the Number One recruit in the land.

However, a middle-aged man probably has a different, more favorable perception of a once-gloried program than a young teenager who never witnessed a winning season.

whoosh

RaceBannon

@Dardanus needs to put this in a better graph

As for Bama at 19 the Bear retired in 1982 and Saban was hired in 2007. One natty and more than one losing season in between. Saban's first team lost to La Tech.

Saban is the Bama brand. When he goes there is no guarantee they are still Bama

USC is similar. Neither one generally lacks for talent but can put up some bad seasons.

Besides this is about 18 year olds. Clemson has been cool for the last several years. That's all that counts

Mad_Son

Kids like having their dicks touched but I didn't know how much.

Gladstone

Clickbait.

GrundleStiltzkin

Gladstone said:

Clickbait.

Looks like it worked. #Winning

EwaDawg

37 ?



Cal is still WAAAAAAAAY TOOOOOOO HIGH.

Dardanus

RaceBannon said:

@Dardanus needs to put this in a better graph
..

AIRWOLF

tvoie said:

AIRWOLF said:

tvoie said:

AIRWOLF said:

This is interesting, but without a rigorous random sampling methodology the results are highly suspect.

Without question, but I think it brings to light how well teams are doing in getting their message across to recruits on a small scale that probably is not drastically different then what the reality is.

I don't think there is any way to know that. And there is reason to be suspicious that it simply isn't very accurate (see the rankings of Alabama and Texas, for instance).

Perhaps that’s fair, but I personally believe this article is on to something. I think this is data that could be useful in trying to gauge how well the brand of your program is reaching recruits. It may not be the only data point you use, but I think it’s useful nonetheless.

It is a very interesting idea, but an interesting idea that relies on garbage data is still garbage.