Is Kiffin Failing? The Follow-Up

#27
#27
goooooovols said:
Couldn't you have saved time on all that research.....I mean it's pretty obvious, if you have good players...you're gonna win and the greater the players, the better the football.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Click to expand...

No, it is not at all obvious at what point the players are differentiating in talent to the degree that they automatically turn into wins. It seems that routine top 3classes are needed to compete for MNCs and routine top 5-6 classes will allow you to finish in the top 20 every year.

You wouldn't believe the number of people that would argue with this. For example, Florida fans are currently rationalizing away Kiffin's recruiting success by saying he is Ron Zook 2.0. Well, Ron Zook never had the talent to work with that Lane Kiffin is aspiring to.

I do work in Houston. But I am not a rocket scientist.
 
#28
#28
Houston Vol said:
Using the classes of 1992-2009, I can look at on-field results for 1995-2009. In that 15 year period, I find 50 teams that meet my criteria for differentiating talent. This typically means everybody on campus was part of a top 5 class. Of these 50 teams,
- 49/50 finished the year in the top 20
- 21/50 finished the year in the top 5

The only team with top talent that has ever not been one of the top 20 teams in the country is the 2006 Miami Hurricanes. This was the infamous Miami team that brawled on field with Florida International and got Larry Coker fired.
Click to expand...

Wait, everybody on campus is part of a top 5 class? That means a school had to have 5 consecutive years of top 5 classes (since people red shirt). How could that possibly happen 50 times in 15 years? Looking at rivals.com there isn't a single team that finished in the top 5 the last 3 years, let alone 4-5 straight years.

USC came close. They've had a top 5 class 4 of the last 5 years, but guess what? They're not in the top 20 right now!

Note: Texas and Florida are the only schools that had 3 top 5 classes, so you got that going for you.
 
Last edited:
#30
#30
Problem is if you use just a plain average without adjustments the numbers will be skewed. If Team A signs 27 players with 2 - 5stars and 10 - 4stars... the average would be lower than Team B that signs only 15 players with 2- 5stars and 10 - 4stars.
 
#33
#33
VOLinFL_ said:
Math doesn't lie. Follow the numbers, and good post.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. It is an objective way of displaying what we should already know: bringing in top talent is a huge part of college coaching.

Using only the star rankings removes one flaw from recruiting analysis in that it ranks an 18 player 4.5* class over a 28 player 3.5* class, which results show it should. The flaw that remains, of course, is that it doesn't take into account rankings that, once a player is in his Jr. and Sr. seasons, prove to be incorrect, whether it is a 5* bust or a 3* superstar.

I hope our coaches are able to better evaluate talent than the services, as I don't know if we will ever be able to consistently out-star programs in recruiting hotbeds.
 
#34
#34
hohenfelsvol said:
Zook also asked for a phone he could use in the shower. What's your point?
Click to expand...

Point is that its more than just recruiting well. My feeling is that your first recruiting class as a coach usually won't be that great because you have to pull it together in a month or so.

The first full season as a coach you can recruit based on promises of things to come. Year 2 you better win like 10 or 11 games, because the buzz from a new coach fades quickly.
 
#35
#35
Houston Vol said:
Following UT's last disheartening loss (Auburn), I posted a series of threads entitled "Is Kiffin Failing? - How to Tell," in which I proposed:

1) Kiffin was hired not as a short term fix, but to build a foundation for success at the highest level.
2) That foundation is completely based on recruiting.
3) Average the star ratings (not the class rankings) from Rivals and Scout by year and you will note that, for the last 6-7 years, 3 schools consistently rank among or above the top tier in average recruit star rating. These schools are USC, Florida and Texas.
4) The Kiffin/Orgeron plan is to recruit to the level achieved by these programs.
5) Looking at the on-field success of these 3 schools, I concluded that if you have differentiating talent (talent notably better than everybody but USC/Tex/Fla) then other factors such as coaching and player development fall out of the equation. You win big regardless because talent will carry the day. NOTE: If you have that level of talent you probably are a good enough program to hire good coaches too, so probably a moot point.
6) So the bottom line was - Check to see if we are recruiting to the level of these schools. If we are, start talking trash and booking tickets to BCS bowl games.

I finished by noting that tentative 2010 numbers showed Tennessee's class was not yet up to par. Updated numbers below show little change since the Auburn game:
USC 3.90
Texas 3.90
Florida 3.81
UT 3.57

Our recruiting gurus would rightly point out that this is still subject to change as UT has lots of 4-star prospects on the line.

Some readers enjoyed this somewhat simplistic analysis, while others could not accept ignoring gameday coaching and player development. I thought my argument was strengthened by recalling those Florida St and Miami teams of the past that were so stocked with talent.

So being my analytical self, I armed myself with more data:
1) I went further back in time on the recruiting rankings. Rivals and Scout only go back to 2002, but I found Superprep and Lemming class ratings from 1992-2001.
2) Instead of limiting myself to the recent Texas/USC/Florida recruiting dominance, I looked through the entire 1992-2008 period for teams that landed ~ top 5 classes.
3) I used 4 trusted computer rankings (averaged) to compare these classes to subsequent on-field results.
4) The method I used was to compare the SO/JR/SR classes to the final ranking in the computer polls. I threw out the frosh since they don't typically have a major impact and the redshirt seniors are fewer in numbers these days and your best players never make it that far. So, for example, the 2008 on-field results are compared to the 2005, 2006, and 2007 classes.

RESULTS:

Using the classes of 1992-2009, I can look at on-field results for 1995-2009. In that 15 year period, I find 50 teams that meet my criteria for differentiating talent. This typically means everybody on campus was part of a top 5 class. Of these 50 teams,
- 49/50 finished the year in the top 20
- 21/50 finished the year in the top 5

The only team with top talent that has ever not been one of the top 20 teams in the country is the 2006 Miami Hurricanes. This was the infamous Miami team that brawled onfield with Florida International and got Larry Coker fired.

I had to broaden the aperature a bit to do this analysis. Not many teams have had a run of recruiting success like USC, Florida and Texas have had over the last few years. But the results are clear.

Coaching smoaching. You recruit like crazy and you win. Just watch out for Florida International. :mega_shok:
Click to expand...

your a loser!!!!!:crazy:
 
#36
#36
goooooovols said:
Couldn't you have saved time on all that research.....I mean it's pretty obvious, if you have good players...you're gonna win and the greater the players, the better the football.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Click to expand...

Does seem rather painfully obvious. Conversely look at Tennessee's recruiting two of the last 4 years of Fullmer's regime. Two years ago we only had three 4 star athletes in the entire class, I believe it may have been ranked 35th. That might allow you to succeed if you were not playing every weekend in the SEC where half of the teams you play ended up ranked in the top ten every year in recruiting. Then you have too much of a talent gap to overcome.

Your star logic still has flaws, examples of which are Georgia this year, ND and others. Southern Cal, Texas, Florida in addition to great recruiting classes have excellent coaches.

This years recruiting, if matched with similar recruiting in the next 2 years, even if we finish 6th in the country in recruiting will result in BCS bowl appearances in my opinion because of things like superior on field coaching, and improvements in player development. As long as our talent is close to as good or comparable we will be able to play with anyone. Our coaching is that good.

We will never have the top recruiting class in the country every year nor will anyone else. If we finish in the top ten in the country in recruiting every year, count us blessed and we will be where we need to be. This isn't Texas, Florida, or Southern Cali where 5 star athletes grow on trees. If it were this staff would have the number 1 recruiting class in the country. Again, they are that good.
 
#37
#37
Consider this possibility: good coaching leads to better recruiting. This equation does not factor in the talented players wanting to play for coaches with, say, NFL coaching experience. So while you can say coaching means nothing in comparison to recruiting based on your numbers, perhaps the recruiting stats are good thanks to good coaching in the first place.
 
#38
#38
kracker said:
WOW!! How long did it take you to compile all that info...:detective::rtfm:
Click to expand...

I must admit I have a bit of work invested here.

I have a lot of time to kill since my employer refuses to give me any work to do.

Dilbert is so funny only because it is true. :hmm:
 
#39
#39
Neyland Law Vol said:
Interesting. Thanks for the post.

What about ND under Weis - Consistently high recruting = poor on the field results?
Click to expand...

Notre Dame has recruited well the last few years but I don't think they meet the threshold of my definition of differentiating. When I get to my spreadsheet at work tomorrow, I will give you the ND details.
 
#40
#40
LWSVOL said:
Untitled Document
Click to expand...

I like the way you math.

Different analysis of similar data = same conclusion

Any reason you prefer Rivals over Scout. Or do you know how the classic Rivals vs. Scout argument breaks down? I just know that they each have their own diehard adherents, and that nobody respects ESPN.
 
#41
#41
Is Kiffin failing?

Over time, this will tell the tale -

Can he beat Florida? If and/or when he does this, he will be seen as a success. And if he cannot beat Florida, then his tenure as coach at UT may be seen as a failure, kinda like the old days of Ferocious Phil and the Philbots.
 
#43
#43
nbakerld said:
Wait, everybody on campus is part of a top 5 class? That means a school had to have 5 consecutive years of top 5 classes (since people red shirt). How could that possibly happen 50 times in 15 years? Looking at rivals.com there isn't a single team that finished in the top 5 the last 3 years, let alone 4-5 straight years.

USC came close. They've had a top 5 class 4 of the last 5 years, but guess what? They're not in the top 20 right now!

Note: Texas and Florida are the only schools that had 3 top 5 classes, so you got that going for you.
Click to expand...

Read the whole post more carefully.

I threw out the freshman and redshirt senior classes, so you need only three consecutive classes to qualify. Also, I said "typically," implying "not always true." Maybe I should have used the word "approximately" instead because I did have to use teams that had say 2,7,2 classes if they were among the best of that era. Thus the widening the aperature comment at the bottom of the post.

USC is in the top 20 right now according to the computer polls that I referenced. Again read carefully. But USC is a good point, more losses and they would be they first team without a brawl to violate my theory.

Sometimes you have to read between the lines a little bit and give the OP the benefit of the doubt. If I posted every detail of the analysis, the post would be about three pages long.
 
#44
#44
allvol said:
Problem is if you use just a plain average without adjustments the numbers will be skewed. If Team A signs 27 players with 2 - 5stars and 10 - 4stars... the average would be lower than Team B that signs only 15 players with 2- 5stars and 10 - 4stars.
Click to expand...

Oh, there's lots of things wrong with this analysis. It is a good enough approximation for me. I think that the results, while flawed, are telling.

Further data parsing and analysis? Thanks, but, I already have one PhD.
 
#45
#45
kcusslov said:
Ron Zook pulled in two top 5 classes in his time in Gainesville.
Click to expand...

Not as I have extensively defined it during my original post. Spurrier also did not leave him enough talent to qualify. Should I invite you to the reading comprehension class?
 
#46
#46
m1al said:
uhhhh... it means, recruit top talent and you will win championships..
Click to expand...

In the words of Lee Corso, "Not so fast my friend....." See Ron Zook. Recruits great talent, yet doesn't produce and equate to winning, and championships.

Go SEC!!
 
#47
#47
Fullfillmer said:
Does seem rather painfully obvious.

Your star logic still has flaws, examples of which are Georgia this year, ND and others. Southern Cal, Texas, Florida in addition to great recruiting classes have excellent coaches.

This years recruiting, if matched with similar recruiting in the next 2 years, even if we finish 6th in the country in recruiting will result in BCS bowl appearances in my opinion because of things like superior on field coaching, and improvements in player development. As long as our talent is close to as good or comparable we will be able to play with anyone. Our coaching is that good.

We will never have the top recruiting class in the country every year nor will anyone else. If we finish in the top ten in the country in recruiting every year, count us blessed and we will be where we need to be. This isn't Texas, Florida, or Southern Cali where 5 star athletes grow on trees. If it were this staff would have the number 1 recruiting class in the country. Again, they are that good.
Click to expand...

I find myself having the same discussions that I had in the original thread. I blame myself. Obviously, I am not explaining myself well.

It is beyond obvious that the better talent you have, the better your chances of winning. :crazy:

This has nothing to do with my point. I am attempting to address the arguments that come up around the relative merits of coaching vs. player development vs. natural talent. It would be fantastic if you could have all three. I think that with Fulmer, we clearly sacrificed the first two to capture the third. But which of the three wins out? I have heard this discussed on ESPN, Rivals Radio and the talking heads always say that good coaching wins out. Then they inevitably point to Boise St. or someone like that as an example. I was intriuged by this question because as soon as it became evident that Kiffin and co. were going to be very successful at recruiting, our rivals started saying "doesn't matter, he can't coach." Florida trolls called him Zook 2.0 and Bama
fans called him Shula 2.0 (not Don). My thought was, but Kiffin is trying to get USC talent. If he is successful, at some point, won't it not make any difference how good or bad a coach he is?

Is there a talent threshold above which most teams are simply incapable of competing with you, regardless of other variables? That is the question. And I have provided you with the answer.

This analysis certainly has flaws, mainly in that it is too simplistic. However, the logic is flawless. Your examples (e.g. Georgia this year) are poor, you can check them for yourself. They do not meet my criteria.

You clearly underestimate what Kiffin and Ogeron are attempting to achieve with our recruiting program.
 
#48
#48
I would think the fact that USC, Texas and Florida have established coaches that have been managing their programs for several years would have somnething to do with Kiffins inability to automatically hit the numbers of the top three. Regardless of how on board all the TN faithful are, the fact remains he is still an unproven entitiy. Maybe after a year or two with impressive win/loss records we can join the big boys.

Also Mark Twain said it best; "There are 3 kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics".
 
#49
#49
gator4life said:
In the words of Lee Corso, "Not so fast my friend....." See Ron Zook. Recruits great talent, yet doesn't produce and equate to winning, and championships.

Go SEC!!
Click to expand...

My reading comprehension class is filling up fast!

Only three spots left! Hurry so you don't miss out!
 
#50
#50
TNshadetree said:
I would think the fact that USC, Texas and Florida have established coaches that have been managing their programs for several years would have somnething to do with Kiffins inability to automatically hit the numbers of the top three. Regardless of how on board all the TN faithful are, the fact remains he is still an unproven entitiy. Maybe after a year or two with impressive win/loss records we can join the big boys.

Also Mark Twain said it best; "There are 3 kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics".
Click to expand...

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him literate - Mark Twain.

ok, I made that up
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top