What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Recruiting All A Numbers Game

HawaiiBUFF

Club Member
Club Member
I wanted to post this for quite some time. I absolutely have fallen in love and been addicted to recruiting for about 10 years. When you look at the trend between school and highly rated recruits, you began to see a direct correlation. Schools like Alabama, Notre Dame, USC, Florida, LSU etc continue to be dominant year in and year out because of their recruiting. This may seem like such an obvious statement and of course for those critics, there are outliers...Texas for the past few years. But for the most part it seems to be a steady and true trend.

Judge me or not, I love to go to Ourlands.com and compare depth charts from schools to their recruits from the past few years. Usually, I will go back to the year a Senior would have committed. That way I can get a complete look at a roster. The most recent was Texas A&M. As we all know, Texas A&M has been dominant for the past few years. They even made a smooth transition from the BIG12 to SEC. Okay, so to my point. Their 2013 class has a pretty interesting story.

Screen Shot 2016-06-27 at 10.49.50 PM.png

I took a screen shot of the top of their class. As I was comparing, I started to see that most of their "TOP" recruits were nowhere on the depth chart. So, I went and googled each of their names. It was very interesting to see what happened.

*Players remaining on roster in BOLD

1. Ricky Seals-Jones: Still with the team and considered a great NFL prospect.
2. Sebastian LaRue: Transfered to Washington State, and after never playing a down was dismissed from the team.
3. Justin Manning: Had to retire due to health issues.
4. Kohl Stewart: Drafted by the Twins and plays in the minor leagues.
5. LaQuvionte Gonzalez: Transfered to Kansas.
6. Jordan Mastrogiovanni: Quit the team after his Sophomore year to focus on school at Texas A&M. Returning this year as a walk-on.
7. Noel Ellis: Back-up Nickelback.
8. Joas Aguilar: Retired early due to back issues.
9. Isaiah Golden: 10 Years for armed robbery.
10. Kameron Miles: Dismissed from team, transferred to JUCO.
11. Ja'Quay Williams: Transfered to Louisville.

In conclusion, here is a perfect outlier. It's crazy to see a Top-10 class turn out this way.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2016-06-27 at 10.49.50 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2016-06-27 at 10.49.50 PM.png
    586.5 KB · Views: 5
Definitely interesting to see that many kids wash out. Dan Hawkins-esque.
 
Missing your point here. Is this presented as an isolated case study or to make an argument for recruiting character/"football players" vs highly ranked/4* recruits? Interesting class nonetheless. Certainly seeing such large junior and senior classes at CU this season is a testament to MM and his dedication to his 4F's but we sure did not start with such elite rated athletes either. No kids mulling their MLB options on our roster!
 
With aTm and Sumlin, my thought is that if you can't win the SEC West when Johnny Manziel is having a season for the ages then you're never going to win it. That type of college QB season comes along once in a lifetime at a program.
 
You may be in love and addicted to recruiting, but you clearly don't feel the same way about watching the actual games...

Texas A&M 2013 - 4-4 in SEC play... 4-0 in OOC play with "dominant" wins over Rice, Sam Houston State, SMU and UTEP
Texas A&M 2014 - 3-5 in SEC play (wiki page above is incorrect)... 4-0 in OOC play with "dominant" wins over Lamar, Rice, SMU and ULM
Texas A&M 2015 - 4-4 in SEC play... 4-0 in OOC play with "dominant" wins over Arizona State, Ball State, Nevada and Western Carolina

Moral of the story? A&M has been mediocre, at best, in recent years and would be well below that if they didn't have 4 cupcake OOC games (with the lone exception of ASU) every year. With all this said, I am still confused as to what your original point is supposed to be.
 
I think the point was simply that the programs that consistently recruit at the top also consistently have good teams, with some notable exceptions like aTm which can be attributed to horrible player retention from its highly-ranked classes.
 
Do you think stars or offers are more important?
195651d1441750136t-i-ve-ordered-my-moto-x-style-order-shipping-discussion-we-re-waiting-meme.jpg


With the revisit of the CSU-CU series debate, this seems completely appropriate.
 
You can't really say stars matter at all. Between half the sites id say ruff guess 50% of them have different amount of stars. There is no set concrete way to rate a player. So that being said I would say offers. Many times you will see a 2 or 3 star player that has tons of offers and should be rated a 4 or 5 star player.

Maybe a new ranking system where schools are assigned points. If you get a offer from that school you get said number of points. Then ranges will say your star strength. So a offer from Idaho will get you 1 point but a offer from Ohio gets you 5 points. Take the avg and get your ranking or something of that nature? Oh and of course CSU and the crapbaska gets you -10 points.
 
You can't really say stars matter at all. Between half the sites id say ruff guess 50% of them have different amount of stars. There is no set concrete way to rate a player. So that being said I would say offers. Many times you will see a 2 or 3 star player that has tons of offers and should be rated a 4 or 5 star player.

Maybe a new ranking system where schools are assigned points. If you get a offer from that school you get said number of points. Then ranges will say your star strength. So a offer from Idaho will get you 1 point but a offer from Ohio gets you 5 points. Take the avg and get your ranking or something of that nature? Oh and of course CSU and the crapbaska gets you -10 points.

Ranking by offers doesn't work because a good number of the ones reported are bull****. To the point where site publishers are always talking about how they ask a coach about a kid with an offer in the area a coach recruits... and the coach hasn't even heard of the kid. Happens all the time. Someone tried to do a recruiting site based on offer lists and it didn't work.

Besides, the star system does take into account who offered that they can confirm. And class ranks correlate pretty strongly with on-field success, especially if we look at where the program was ranked relative to other members of its conference.

Edit: I can't believe I got sucked into a "do stars mattter?" thread. Long offseason is long.
 
Ranking by offers doesn't work because a good number of the ones reported are bull****. To the point where site publishers are always talking about how they ask a coach about a kid with an offer in the area a coach recruits... and the coach hasn't even heard of the kid. Happens all the time. Someone tried to do a recruiting site based on offer lists and it didn't work.

Besides, the star system does take into account who offered that they can confirm. And class ranks correlate pretty strongly with on-field success, especially if we look at where the program was ranked relative to other members of its conference.

Edit: I can't believe I got sucked into a "do stars mattter?" thread. Long offseason is long.
laughing-and-pointing.jpg
 
Back
Top