How accurate are recruiting rankings?

[Volmania]

The Big 10 has three teams out of the top 6 in both the major polls to end the season and yet, as I look back over the recruiting rankings for the past 5 years I don't see many Big 10 teams having great recruiting seasons.

AP Poll (recruiting class rank '02,'03,'04,'05,06) - average rank
1. Ohio State (5,41,9,12,12) - 15.8
2. Florida (20,2,7,15,2) - 9.2
3. Michigan (16,17,5,6,13) - 11.4
4. LSU (15,1,2,22,7) - 9.4
6. Wisconsin (50,40,39,33,42) - 40.8
10. Auburn (6,11,21,13,10) - 12.2
12. Arkansas (26,29,22,24,26) 25.4
17. Tennessee (2,18,11,4,23) - 11.6
26. Georgia (3,6,6,10,4) - 5.8
30. Penn State (21,93,14,25,6) - 31.8

Except for Georgia

The teams within each conference finished roughly in the order that you might expect based on their recruiting rankings. But, when looking at the national picture there seems to be no correlation at all between Big 10 and SEC schools.

Wisconsin's recruiting was more similar to Kentucky's than to a top tier SEC school. Ohio State and Michigan look competitive with the better SEC schools but nowhere near as dominant as their records would indicate.

[tclowers23]

All the recruiting rankings can do is kind of calculate how much talent each team is getting every season. Now, what the teams do with this talent however, is a different matter.

[BigOrangeNation1]

I didnt realize that Georgia recruited that well. I would have figured Florida or LSU would have been ahead of them in terms of recruiting.

[tidwell]

Originally Posted by tclowers23

All the recruiting rankings can do is kind of calculate how much talent each team is getting every season. Now, what the teams do with this talent however, is a different matter.

Bingo... the recruiting ratings and rankings are nice, but they don't mean much after the recruits get on campus.

rexvol in 5, 4, 3, 2...

[rexvol]

1.....clowers is right on, you can sign top class after top class, but if you dont coach them it can only carry you so far. Talent alone will generally enable you to beat the teams you are supposed to beat, but when matched up with another top tier team...

[sjt18]

Wisconsin hasn't played but one decent team all year and lost to them. I'd be surprised if Arkansas doesn't pound them mercilessly.

The recruiting rankings aren't perfect but are a fairly decent predictor of who will be competitive at the elite level. Michigan and OSU have had solid if not spectacular recruiting.

Note that UT's classes have averaged somewhere around 10th over the past four years... and if they beat PSU they'll probably finish right around 10th.

[volinbham]

A few other factors to consider:

1) Team chemistry - coaches can help but can't completely control. Having taught college for 15 years, I can tell you that groups of students have different personalities (the group that is). I can impact it some but some is out of my control. The personality of the class definitely affects the outcome of the class.

2) Key players - UGA found out what losing the right player at the right position means. Without Greene/Shockley they struggled. Recruiting info tells you if a guy is fast, has a big arm, football IQ etc. but more big recruits end up being mediocre than become great.

3) Unknown factors - character, fit with university, injuries, etc.

Coaching is necessary but not sufficient to have recruiting rankings predict success.

[volinbham]

Originally Posted by tidwell

Bingo... the recruiting ratings and rankings are nice, but they don't mean much after the recruits get on campus.

rexvol in 5, 4, 3, 2...

Can you give me the powerball #'s?

[therickbol]

Originally Posted by sjt18

Wisconsin hasn't played but one decent team all year and lost to them. I'd be surprised if Arkansas doesn't pound them mercilessly.

The recruiting rankings aren't perfect but are a fairly decent predictor of who will be competitive at the elite level. Michigan and OSU have had solid if not spectacular recruiting.

Note that UT's classes have averaged somewhere around 10th over the past four years... and if they beat PSU they'll probably finish right around 10th.

I have watched Wisconsin play more than once this season. They are a great football team. Arkansas will not run away with that game. They might not even win the game. Wisconsin is for real. The played one "decent" team and lost? Was that the 2nd best team in the country you just called decent?

[rexvol]

I'll admit that I was very happy to play PSU rather than the Badgers, I want this season to end on a very positive note for us, I think we can put the hammer on Joe Pa

[sjt18]

Originally Posted by therickbol

I have watched Wisconsin play more than once this season. They are a great football team. Arkansas will not run away with that game. They might not even win the game. Wisconsin is for real. The played one "decent" team and lost? Was that the 2nd best team in the country you just called decent?

No. There is less objective proof pointing to Michigan being the 2nd best team than there is that Wisconsin is "for real". As one of the people quoted justifying voting UF over UM suggested, I don't think OSU or UM would have gone through the SEC this year with only one loss.

Michigan beat Wisconsin who as mentioned has played no one and ND whose only solid win came against GT.

[sjt18]

Originally Posted by rexvol

I'll admit that I was very happy to play PSU rather than the Badgers, I want this season to end on a very positive note for us, I think we can put the hammer on Joe Pa

How do you figure a win over an 8-4 team is more positive than a win over an 11-1 team?

FTR, there are no great teams in college football this year. There are some good teams and some decent teams. Does anyone think that any team this year could have competed with Texas or SC from last year?

[therickbol]

Originally Posted by sjt18

No. There is less objective proof pointing to Michigan being the 2nd best team than there is that Wisconsin is "for real". As one of the people quoted justifying voting UF over UM suggested, I don't think OSU or UM would have gone through the SEC this year with only one loss.

Michigan beat Wisconsin who as mentioned has played no one and ND whose only solid win came against GT.

The SEC is the best conference in the country. I am certainly not arguing with that. But, if this year's UF team can go through with only 1 loss then I guarantee you that it is possible that OSU or UM could have gone through the SEC undefeated. I did not say they "would" have because nobody knows and we are playing with 'ifs' and 'buts' and that is nowhere near an exact science. But, UM is very very good. They are better than any team in the SEC. They would beat UF. Unless OSU beats themselves, they will handle UF with a comfortable margin.

[sjt18]

What objective reason do you offer that UM or OSU would beat UF much less go undefeated in the SEC? I don't KNOW what will happen in the CG. I don't KNOW what they might have done.

My point is simply that neither has played a schedule that proves the assertion that they are the best two teams in the country. UM has actually played a little more competition than OSU as a matter of fact. Texas isn't even a shadow of themselves from last year and were even worse early in the season.

The simple, plain fact is that we don't know if UM is "very, very good". What we do know is that they've played a schedule that is uncharacteristically weak due to the Big 10 being in an overall down year.

[sjt18]

Let me put it this way. Please name the school that has as much athleticism as any of the top 6 SEC teams. OSU and UM are heads and shoulders above the Big 10but they would be pure vanilla in the SEC.