The Art of Talent Evaluation

#26
#26
There is a reason behind Rivals releasing their 250 so late... It's to see who has offered and to partner with actual sports guys when they conduct their camps...

There are quite a few VN posters who could get the rivals 100 right with virtually unlimited resources like rivals has...

Also, if these guys were really that good, things like "we haven't evaluated his film" (Vonn Bell) wouldn't happen.

There are 2* and 3* guys that get drafted every year... When is the last time that rivals stuck their neck out on a guy and gave him a 4* or 5* that didn't have quality offers? how about never
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#27
#27
Count - this has been some of your best work. 5* posts IMO. Obviously I also fully agree with everything you have said. No sense repeating. I will add that recruiting services are businesses that have to figure out how to make a profit to exist. They sell a service that may or may not add value to a coaching staff or fans. In so doing they will bend their evaluations to achieve the ends. Hence the "bump" in player and team rankings. Let's not deceive ourselves that everything is strictly ethical.
 
#29
#29
I also think it's important what kind of talent they are playing against.
 
#31
#31
fade route said:
To some degree I agree with you Count. On the other hand, go look at the top 10 recruiting classes year in and year out as ranked by these recruiting services, and a vast majority of them are winning their conferences or more and putting up double digit wins. It does matter. But, I agree that it shouldn't be the only tool a coach uses.
Click to expand...

You're not taking into account that Saban has brought in those unheard of 3* and 2* guys every once in a while (because he evaluated them in person). They were in those recruiting classes. You just never hear about them.

It shouldn't be a bad thing if CDD is doing it, too, since everyone uses Saban as the rule.
 
#32
#32
fade route said:
I'll concede that point, but I wouldn't call it a flaw in my argument since I didn't address that issue in my post. The problem is, Dooley hasn't proven anything, and when he offers a 2* or even a 3*, peeps get suspicious, and justifiably so.
Click to expand...

I think the reason that we don't see the retroactive grades when Dooley offers at this point is because of the lack of success on the field. If his talent begins to perform, expect the recruiting services to start giving him the same treatment as other coaches are given.
 
#33
#33
The Breakerboy said:
Mine are with offensive play-calling and game management. If Dooley is as organized as he say he is certain stuff shouldn't happen. I do have a couple with recruiting though.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of all the plays called. However, my criticisms of Dooley are on a administrative level. His desire for complete control on things gets him tangled up in stupid, and trivial issues.
Grounds keepers don't like him, I can tell you that.
 
#34
#34
if the rivals,espnn,and others are so good,then Texass coachees must be sucking some large ,oranges with their recruits compared to their record the last few years.
 
#35
#35
In order to be a great talent evaluator You have to e a member of vol nation and hang out with breakerboy
 
#36
#36
Great OP. I like that the title of the thread is 'art'.

I think it's fair to say that recruiting services rely more on objective data (stats, combine measureables, team success, etc.). There needs to be balance of objective an subjective. Everyone can see the objective, but its up to the coaches to ensure all the subjective 'art' is put together properly in a given recruit/recruiting class. That the part we have difficulty seeing.

.... And gosh darn I sure do miss the big orange pumpkin. He gets a lot of hate, but he's a true Tennessean and a true VFL. I certainly didn't enjoy watching those last years, but still nothing but love for Phil.
 
#37
#37
CountVolcula said:
As long as I have been on this earth, I have seen a change in coaches ability to evaluate talent

When many of us older guys started playing and watching football, there were no Scout, Rivals, 247, and many of the "pay for my opinion" sites

Before them, coaches had to receive film or watch a kid play live. Those coaches knew what kinds of kids they wanted and the benefits that they would add to a team. They would put in relentless hours going from HS game to HS game or hours and hours of watching film, trying to find what they needed. They would only trust talent if they had seen it in person.

Fulmer, in his early career, was great at player evaluation. He would find the guys before other coaches and would pull them in. Later on, Fulmer began to rely too heavily on the talent evaluations of scouting services. Thats when Fulmer began his decline. He began having more and more recruiting classes flop. Players getting arrested, dropping out, etc.. This is because recruiting services only look at physical features. They also only look at what THEY consider to be talent.
What they consider talent may not always be best for a particular team.

Fulmer, himself, admitted that he probably relied too heavily on the recruiting services, instead of evaluating the players himself

Only a few coaches possess the knack to evaluate talent now, Saban being the best. Saban relies more on what he sees than what he hears or reads. Its his team, not Scouts or Rivals. There is a reason other coaches wait until Saban offers before they begin to pursue a kid.

Dooley knows this. Thats why he will offer kids that nobody else has yet. Plus, he wont offer most those kids until he has seen them in person. Hes not just throwing out offers to anybody that will say yes.

You dont want a coach that just offers kids because they are a 4* on Scout.

Some of you guys need to realize that the recruiting services are just a tool. One of a many that a coach has.

The best tools are his own eyes


:hi:
Click to expand...

Wasting your time... You may as well talk to a brick wall instead of injecting reason/logic in here.
 
#38
#38
you said:
Great OP. I like that the title of the thread is 'art'.

I think it's fair to say that recruiting services rely more on objective data (stats, combine measureables, team success, etc.). There needs to be balance of objective an subjective. Everyone can see the objective, but its up to the coaches to ensure all the subjective 'art' is put together properly in a given recruit/recruiting class. That the part we have difficulty seeing.

.... And gosh darn I sure do miss the big orange pumpkin. He gets a lot of hate, but he's a true Tennessean and a true VFL. I certainly didn't enjoy watching those last years, but still nothing but love for Phil.
Click to expand...

The one thing they rely on the most IMO is the coaches at the school. How many times do we see a kid not rated or really low start picking up offers and the next thing you the kid gets a bump in the new rankings update.

People call it a Saban bump for when a UA target or commit gets a bump but fail to remember Saban gets paid several millions to evaluate talent where the guys at these services get what maybe 40k a year, not to mention he may be one of the best in the game right now for finding that talent. Their best resources are the staffs that continue to recruit the best talent and it shows on the field. It is not just Saban, coaches like Kiffin, Meyer, Carroll, and few others seem to always find the talent.

I would wager everytime CDD recruits some kid low on the ranking side the services go back and look and reevaluate the recruit. CDD for what little time he has been at UT and with what he has done with the talent he has brought in has probably got the services watching who he offers.

Again it is an art and college staffs miss more than they get lucky with. Some recruit they get that becomes a bust. But in my opinion the staffs at each school are probably their best resource, especially like schools in the SEC who probably have 100 times the budget to evaluate a player that any service does. Again JMO.
 
#39
#39
Good post. Also, go back and look at Boise States historical recruiting service rankings, then watch a replay of them whipping Georgia last year. Highly rated recruits matter, but not as much as we sometimes think. Heck, Florida and FSU are prime examples If highly rated recruits were all that mattered, those two would be competing for championships every year. They should never have down years, but they do. High rankings increase the odds of success, but are by no means guarantees of success.
 
#40
#40
TideWarrior said:
The one thing they rely on the most IMO is the coaches at the school. How many times do we see a kid not rated or really low start picking up offers and the next thing you the kid gets a bump in the new rankings update.

People call it a Saban bump for when a UA target or commit gets a bump but fail to remember Saban gets paid several millions to evaluate talent where the guys at these services get what maybe 40k a year, not to mention he may be one of the best in the game right now for finding that talent. Their best resources are the staffs that continue to recruit the best talent and it shows on the field. It is not just Saban, coaches like Kiffin, Meyer, Carroll, and few others seem to always find the talent.

I would wager everytime CDD recruits some kid low on the ranking side the services go back and look and reevaluate the recruit. CDD for what little time he has been at UT and with what he has done with the talent he has brought in has probably got the services watching who he offers.

Again it is an art and college staffs miss more than they get lucky with. Some recruit they get that becomes a bust. But in my opinion the staffs at each school are probably their best resource, especially like schools in the SEC who probably have 100 times the budget to evaluate a player that any service does. Again JMO.
Click to expand...

Good Post Tide

Saban knows what he's doing

Just wish he would move on
 
#41
#41
TideWarrior said:
The one thing they rely on the most IMO is the coaches at the school. How many times do we see a kid not rated or really low start picking up offers and the next thing you the kid gets a bump in the new rankings update.

People call it a Saban bump for when a UA target or commit gets a bump but fail to remember Saban gets paid several millions to evaluate talent where the guys at these services get what maybe 40k a year, not to mention he may be one of the best in the game right now for finding that talent. Their best resources are the staffs that continue to recruit the best talent and it shows on the field. It is not just Saban, coaches like Kiffin, Meyer, Carroll, and few others seem to always find the talent.

I would wager everytime CDD recruits some kid low on the ranking side the services go back and look and reevaluate the recruit. CDD for what little time he has been at UT and with what he has done with the talent he has brought in has probably got the services watching who he offers.

Again it is an art and college staffs miss more than they get lucky with. Some recruit they get that becomes a bust. But in my opinion the staffs at each school are probably their best resource, especially like schools in the SEC who probably have 100 times the budget to evaluate a player that any service does. Again JMO.
Click to expand...

I'm throwing the "BS FLAG" on that one TW..Saban hasn't had to "beat the bushes below radar" since winning NC in 2nd season.. His only eval is where is the biggest position of need ? And do I think this 4* or 5* is better ? His staff hasn't had to go look for NR talent in years.
I think CDD is going after some kids in this 4th class that he believes can RS and develop (which he hasn't been able to do since he's been there). The 12 class coming in will again be one that unfortunately will be "thrown to the fire" to give us depth much needed. So they'll probably have to burn a lot of RS by playing them. The 13 class will have more room for RS'ing if the 12 class is successful.
 
#43
#43
CountVolcula said:
As long as I have been on this earth, I have seen a change in coaches ability to evaluate talent

When many of us older guys started playing and watching football, there were no Scout, Rivals, 247, and many of the "pay for my opinion" sites

Before them, coaches had to receive film or watch a kid play live. Those coaches knew what kinds of kids they wanted and the benefits that they would add to a team. They would put in relentless hours going from HS game to HS game or hours and hours of watching film, trying to find what they needed. They would only trust talent if they had seen it in person.

Fulmer, in his early career, was great at player evaluation. He would find the guys before other coaches and would pull them in. Later on, Fulmer began to rely too heavily on the talent evaluations of scouting services. Thats when Fulmer began his decline. He began having more and more recruiting classes flop. Players getting arrested, dropping out, etc.. This is because recruiting services only look at physical features. They also only look at what THEY consider to be talent.
What they consider talent may not always be best for a particular team.

Fulmer, himself, admitted that he probably relied too heavily on the recruiting services, instead of evaluating the players himself

Only a few coaches possess the knack to evaluate talent now, Saban being the best. Saban relies more on what he sees than what he hears or reads. Its his team, not Scouts or Rivals. There is a reason other coaches wait until Saban offers before they begin to pursue a kid.

Dooley knows this. Thats why he will offer kids that nobody else has yet. Plus, he wont offer most those kids until he has seen them in person. Hes not just throwing out offers to anybody that will say yes.

You dont want a coach that just offers kids because they are a 4* on Scout.

Some of you guys need to realize that the recruiting services are just a tool. One of a many that a coach has.

The best tools are his own eyes


:hi:
Click to expand...

I've thought the same thing and I think the reason was it is incredibly demanding to log the travel required to recruit nationally the way Fulmer did early. He used the services to lighten the travel burden and that approach failed. This was also in combination in becoming more slack in managing the overall program including coaching and player development.

It's a tough, hard grind. Can't blaim him for looking for short cuts and reducing the load, but he should have been honest when that approach failed and left instead of hanging on and driving the program into the ground.
 
#44
#44
Vowr88 said:
I'm throwing the "BS FLAG" on that one TW..Saban hasn't had to "beat the bushes below radar" since winning NC in 2nd season.. His only eval is where is the biggest position of need ? And do I think this 4* or 5* is better ? His staff hasn't had to go look for NR talent in years.
I think CDD is going after some kids in this 4th class that he believes can RS and develop (which he hasn't been able to do since he's been there). The 12 class coming in will again be one that unfortunately will be "thrown to the fire" to give us depth much needed. So they'll probably have to burn a lot of RS by playing them. The 13 class will have more room for RS'ing if the 12 class is successful.
Click to expand...

Since UA won the 09 BCS Saban has signed over 1/3 rd of his class with 3 stars and below. Yes we get our share of 4 and a few 5. But alot of our 3 stars or lower were 2 star or NR when we offered.

Example I am not even sure B Ivory from TN was rated, but I remember when he commited and the new rankings came out he got the Bama bump and was a 3 star.

The one thing Saban does better than most staffs and this is true for coaches that worked under him recruiting like Dolley, Muschamp and the others, is they are great a finding the 2 or 3 star recruit that no one was looking at and getting on them early. They may end up a 4 star but I will bet money that if I pulled old recruiting articles alot of UAs 4 stars were 3 star when we offered.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top