Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Recent UW Recruiting vs. Conference in historical context
AIRWOLF
Member Posts: 1,840
Despite not landing Martin, the 2018 class was a big time step up for the Huskies.
Landing another class similar to 2018 (or even 2017) would put us(?) on a competitive footing vs. conference opponents that has seldom, if ever, been seen before. Yes, we all have bigger ambitions than that, but gaining a meaningful on paper talent advantage vs. everybody in the conference besides USC, UCLA and maybe Stanford would be a very good place to start. Petersen's superior evaluation and development should do the rest. Especially now that we don't have the expectation that Smith will hobble the offense. Yes, Browning is still the QB, but for only one more season. In other words, 2019 looks like it could be special.
Anyway, I compiled the data (using Rivals rankings) for the past decade or so and looked at individual classes and the rolling 4 year average in terms of average stars per recruit and blue chip (4 & 5 stars) percentage. I also adjusted the average recruiting stars to the conference average, in order to see relative advantage/disadvantage. CU and Utah joined in 2014, but I retroactively included them in the averages to make sure there wasn't an unwarranted bump in the conference comparisons (since they were both recruiting worse than the Pac-12 average at the time they entered the conference--and still are).
Landing another class similar to 2018 (or even 2017) would put us(?) on a competitive footing vs. conference opponents that has seldom, if ever, been seen before. Yes, we all have bigger ambitions than that, but gaining a meaningful on paper talent advantage vs. everybody in the conference besides USC, UCLA and maybe Stanford would be a very good place to start. Petersen's superior evaluation and development should do the rest. Especially now that we don't have the expectation that Smith will hobble the offense. Yes, Browning is still the QB, but for only one more season. In other words, 2019 looks like it could be special.
Anyway, I compiled the data (using Rivals rankings) for the past decade or so and looked at individual classes and the rolling 4 year average in terms of average stars per recruit and blue chip (4 & 5 stars) percentage. I also adjusted the average recruiting stars to the conference average, in order to see relative advantage/disadvantage. CU and Utah joined in 2014, but I retroactively included them in the averages to make sure there wasn't an unwarranted bump in the conference comparisons (since they were both recruiting worse than the Pac-12 average at the time they entered the conference--and still are).
Comments
-
Just for reference, here is the same output for USC.
Southern Cal: Doing less with more since 2009 (and also from 1980-2001).
-
I found some errors in your data. You mistakenly hit "2" when I'm pretty sure you mean to hit "1" for USC's rank.AIRWOLF said:Just for reference, here is the same output for USC.
Southern Cal: Doing less with more since 2009 (and also from 1980-2001). -
Loving the trendline. Since we are all already looking ahead to our 2019 big board I will say I think the trend continues and we land a top 10 class with something like 22 signees and a 3.66 average.
That likely jumps us to #2 in the rolling four year average which is where we should be aiming.
(cue CP stars? gif) -
Sark was the coach in 2013 you fucking doofus.
-
Fuck Kiffin swung the lumber in 2013
-
"the house that sark built"
-
Dennis_DeYoung said:
9 win** Sark was the coach in 2013 you fucking doofus.
-
New coaching changes might actually elevate our recruiting further for 2019 and ahead.
-
Over the time frame of this study, the Huskies had 40 "Blue Chip" recruits, while USC had 30 recruits that were only ranked as 3 stars.
