If you want to compare apples to apples, Chrysts first class was Rippy, Terrell Jackson, Bam Bradley, Gabe Roberts, JP Holtz, Ryan Lewis, and Caprara.
Holtz was the only guy producing by year 3.
Coach: You need to recruit better
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
If you want to compare apples to apples, Chrysts first class was Rippy, Terrell Jackson, Bam Bradley, Gabe Roberts, JP Holtz, Ryan Lewis, and Caprara.
Holtz was the only guy producing by year 3.
Interesting and good, but I would drop Nebraska down to a 3 star program now too. But Wisky is a 3 star program. The Big 10 West is an easy path to 10 wins.
Wisconsin doesn't run any type of gimmicky stuff. WVU does and has for a while, they run a 3-3-5 D which allows them to recruit a extra safety(lots of kids in that size range) rather than a DE(much harder to get studs).
tcu 2017 41
2016 20
2015 34
2014 50
2013 30
So no they are not close to 20 on average. Their 5 year average is 35 and that is bumped by the ONE year they were at 20.
Stanford has consistently been around 20.
Point is Wisconsin, WVU, TCU and OK ST have all outperformed their recruiting rankings for a pretty long period. Lots of teams have done it for short periods MI ST, Baylor, VT around Vick period they didn't recruit as well as they did on the field(which is probably why Pitt and wvu had a good deal of success against them. Clemson has also won big for 2 or 3 years without top classes 15 to 25 most years its changed lately as they have done better.
Look if you are talking about winning NC or ACC titles then no its highly unlikely recruiting classes ranked 29th and 38th are going to be good enough. But I don't think most really expect that from Pitt more than the lightning in the bottle type of season once a decade. Most would be happy with 8 to 9 wins most years, I would especially if it includes a tough OOC like the last few years.
The biggest difference is they have a top notched QB. Without that, you are LSU... Great talent but no QB.
Very good post and very true. A really good QB can make a 40th talented team to a 20th best record/ranking. A bad QB can do the opposite. The only time Purdue has been good was under tiller with Brees and they had another QB just after him who lead them to some good years(that QB made the NFL but I can't remember his name)I said after PC left Pitt should hire a young HC from the G5 schools who is a proven QB guru. Thats how you win at Pitt add a DC where the university steps up and pays him top DC money and you got a solution to winning at a place like Pitt.
I just did an extensive analysis of ACC and B1G recruiting in particular that I will post tonight or tomorrow. I chose them because a) duh, we are in the ACC and b) our current and last coach are from the Big 10 and PSU, tOSU and Michigan are chief recruiting foes.
Still waiting on this-
Please list the recruits that onlyhad MAC offers under HCPN.
Or simply admit you have no idea what you are talking about.
Please list the recruits that onlyhad MAC offers under HCPN.
Or simply admit you have no idea what you are talking about.
But, what people are trying to impress, with the level of recruiting we are doing and the competition we face (much harder than B12 or B1G West) 8-9 wins is the ceiling and we have essentially 0 shot at ever winning the ACC, unless we unbelievably lucky and pull 4+ upsets. That isn't really feasible. It is feasible to pull 2 upsets, like we did last year.
Is the B12 really that much worse than the ACC division we are in? Its not like NC, VT and Miami have been unbeatable. I don't think any of those 3 are as good as TX and OK. They might come in a bit above OK ST or they might not, but TCU has won the b12(or were co champs). The point I am making is that no Pitt will not compete for division titles every year recruiting the way we have the last few years but once every 4 or 5 years we could have a shot if we get good QB play. Its very unlikely they have a shot at the ACC title those years but its essentially one game which a upset could happen. In that scenario Pitt could win the division 2 times a decade and maybe one ACC championship. Thats likely the best Pitt can do without cheating or hitting the lottery on a coach and even if they hit the lottery most likely the coach isn't staying forever anyhow. Pitt has had one coach in the last 20 years that recruited any better(on paper) than what PN did the last 2 seasons. That was DW. Unless they are willing to start paying players to come, something I suspect is happening even more now than it used to, its unlikely that its going to happen.
I'm looking at the 247 numbers, which are composite-based. For TCU:
2018 21
2017 28
2016 21
2015 39
2012 29
Not bad for them. I didn't mean 20 on average, I meant 20's on average. Most teams in the ACC would be happy with that.
But at any rate, in order to have a highly successful season even with classes in the 20's, you need to strike gold, and have a bunch of 3-stars turn out to be as good as the good 4-stars. You need your occasional 4-star to not wash out. You need some 4th and 5th year players that are actually good, and not just window dressing. And you need a really good QB.
It can be done, but it takes a bunch of luck.
Yes, I've already posted the recruiting study in this thread showing that it is (at least based on a 2014 recruiting tier study). The Big XII would only have two teams that recruit in a tier above Pitt. The ACC has 5, and Pitt has to play three of them every year in the Coastal.
Just look at the example of teams that aren't "unbeatable." They have had horrible coaches (Coker, Shannon, Golden, the corpse of Frank Beamer, Bunting). They've had subpar recruiting class rankings (did Beamer even try to recruit has last 3 or 4 years? And look at where Richt currently has Miami's class relative to where Golden had them). And yet, with all of that, what is Pitt's combined record against those teams during this era where they tied one hand behind their back?
It's extremely difficult to punch above your recruiting weight class.
Yes. The data and the schedule has been presented for you.
For Pitt to win the ACC or 10+ games, they have to pull at least 3 upsets and sometimes 5. For OkState they need to pull 0 or 1. This assumes winning all (maybe 1 loss) your games against equal or lesser talent competition. Most years, Ok State was able to pull 2 upsets and win their even/lesser games and win the Big 12 and be 12-0 before the bowl. Of course, they never did that. For Pitt to do it, we'd have to pull 5 upsets and beat all the equal/lesser games to be 13-0. That is near impossible.
Here ya go.....this is long, but it is comprehensive and not based on opinion.
I decided to look at the last 4 years of recruiting based on Rivals rankings and included this year, which admittedly is not yet complete. So that is a 5 year sample covering everyone that should be on the roster plus who is coming down the pike. I have done this for all ACC teams and Big Ten teams. Why those two? Well duh, we are in the ACC, so it is our direct competition and our last and our current coaches come from the Big 10, and it is most geographically relevant with PSU, tOSU, Maryland and Michigan all being less than 300 miles from Pitt's campus. Also have decided to include WVU for obvious reasons.
So the recruiting classes are from 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and current (2018). What I have done is take the Rivals rankings (Team) and averaged them out, and also counted the number of 4-5 star kids as part of each class. While we know that is not the definitive metric, but the evidence for the success rate of 5 stars who go to the NFL and then 4 stars are just overwhelmingly higher than all other classes. So it is an indication of talent going through the program. So average of the class rank, understanding that in some schools case maybe a coaching transition plus small class (for example Michigan's 2015 class was rated 50th! and a true outlier which does skew their end result) the whole of this analysis I feel paints pretty accurate pictures for the most part. But you can see in some cases, the year a coaching change happens or a small class can arbitrarily cause a lower than usual ranked class. And again, I find the number of 4-5 stars indicative of any potential difference makers. For example, Ohio State had 79 of them during this time period, Syracuse.....1. Just one 4/5 star in 5 years.
Anyways Here is the breakdown:
ACC:
1) FSU. Class avg 4.5. 73 4/5 star recruits. Trend..Flat. (Which for FSU is good, they are a perennial top 5 class. A recruiting machine. Though I can't say they outperform their recruiting.
2) Clemson Class avg 14. 48 4/5 star recruits. Trend believe it or not, down. Clemson had two top 10 classes (6) and (4) in 2015-2016. Their FR class was only ranked 22, but it was a small. This year is is only 26, but so far a small class. Clemson is probably exceeding recruiting.
3) Miami Class avg 15 49 4/5 star recruits. Trend.. Way up. Last year's class was 11, this year's at this moment, 2. You have to say overall they have not produced relative to their recruiting.
4) Va Tech Class avg 29 26 4/5 star recruits. Trend up. Solid 25-30 classes had a down year when they switched coaches. Basically performs as they recruit.
5) UNC Class Avg 30. 18 4/5 stars. Trend flat. Again, pretty consistent classes. On field performance it could be argued is actually below what they recruit at.
6) L'ville Class Avg 31. 18 4/5 stars. Trend up. Getting better. Has outperformed recruiting for the most part.
7) NC State. Class Avg 39. 14 4/5 stars. Trend down. Was a 30-35 type program is now 45-50. Basically performs as recruits.
8) Pitt Class Avg 46 14 4/5 stars. Trend....flat. Probably most effected by coaching changes, has a low class of 65, high class of 28. Pitt is about the 7th or 8th best team in the ACC, so performs as it recruits.
9) Duke. Class Avg 47 9 4/5 Stars. Trend up. Was previously a 60+ program, now around the 40's and basically performs as recruits.
10) GT Class Avg 50. 8 4/5 stars. Trend flat. This program is weird, but their style is unique it skews how effective it recruits. Performs better than recruiting avg.
11) UVA Class Avg 51 6 4/5 star recruits. Trend...dropping. We will see the Mendenhall effect, but they recruited in the low 40's under London. Definitely has underperformed.
12T) BC Class Avg 56. 5 4/5 stars recruits. Trend, has dropped. 2016 class was ranked 83rd. Performs as it recruits.
12T) Cuse Class Avg 56 1 4/5 star. Trend. Flat. Most consistent. Will be between 50 and 60 with no 4-5 stars. Performs as it recruits.
13) Wake Class Avg 62. 2 4/5 star. Trend, dropping. Not good when you are last and your recruiting is not getting better. Performs as it recruits usually.
BIG TEN
1) tO$U. Class Avg 3.6 79 4/5 star recruits. Trend..same. Right now #1 class, always in top 10, usually top 5. Performs usually to their recruiting class as they are perennial CFB playoff participants
2) PSU. Class Avg 15 51 4/5 star recruits. Trend. Way Up! Currently #3 class. Another recruiting monster despite sanctions and coaching change. Performing as they recruit it seems
3) Michigan Class Avg 22. 55 4/5 star recruits. Trend up. Skewed badly by the transition year when hired Harbaugh and class finished 50th. 2015 and 2016 classes were ranked #4 each. Given their overall ranking, has to say performing as they recruit.
4) MSU. Class Avg 27. 42 4/5 star recruits. Trend down. For those who say "Michigan State" doesn't recruit well, they had 3 straight years around #20. They recruited well. But they also performed well on the field.
5) Nebraska Class Avg 32 25 4/5 star recruits. Trend flat. I guess you can say that they perform as they recruit, but this current class is low and likely there will be changes.
6) Wisconsin. Class Avg 34. 17 4/5 star recruits. Trend flat. No team is more consistent. Here are their rankings, 33, 37, 35, 35 and current class 31. Definitely perform much above their recruiting.
7) Maryland. Class Avg 35 25 4/5 stars. Trend way up. Surprised? Last year's class was ranked 17th, this class so far is ranked 14th. Fertile area. Under performed.
8) Minn. Class Avg 44. 3 4/5 stars. Trend real flat. Pitt West is what it is, isn't it?
9) Iowa Class Avg 52. 6 4/5 stars. Trend flat. Wisconsinlite. Consistent, never higher than 40th, but definitely well outperforms their recruiting.
10) Indiana Class Avg 52. 2 4/5 stars Trend down. They are who we thought they are.
11) Rutgers Class Avg 53. 4 4/5 stars Trend flat. No more choppin wood here.
12) NW Class Avg 54. 6 4/5 stars Trend very flat. They are who they are, smart kids overachieving and beating Pitt in bowl games.
13) Illinois Class Avg 59. 4 4/5 stars. Trend it doesn't matter. Bad is as bad does.
14) Purdue Class Avg 64. 2 4/5 stars Trend, livin' in the 60's like a Ken Burns documentary.
Bonus WVU Class Avg 40. 10 4/5 stars. Trend flat. WVU does what it does, transfers, JuCos and they always outperform their recruiting rankings.
There ya go. What is amazing is most schools on the whole, within their groups perform as expected, how they recruit. Miami has been a serious underachiever, Wisky a serious over achiever. I can tell you this, at least in my lifetime, Pitt has never been on the over achiever side. So Pitt needs to start recruiting better if we are going to expect better success and results.
I decided to look at the last 4 years of recruiting based on Rivals rankings and included this year, which admittedly is not yet complete. So that is a 5 year sample covering everyone that should be on the roster plus who is coming down the pike. I have done this for all ACC teams and Big Ten teams. Why those two? Well duh, we are in the ACC, so it is our direct competition and our last and our current coaches come from the Big 10, and it is most geographically relevant with PSU, tOSU, Maryland and Michigan all being less than 300 miles from Pitt's campus. Also have decided to include WVU for obvious reasons.
So the recruiting classes are from 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and current (2018). What I have done is take the Rivals rankings (Team) and averaged them out, and also counted the number of 4-5 star kids as part of each class. While we know that is not the definitive metric, but the evidence for the success rate of 5 stars who go to the NFL and then 4 stars are just overwhelmingly higher than all other classes. So it is an indication of talent going through the program. So average of the class rank, understanding that in some schools case maybe a coaching transition plus small class (for example Michigan's 2015 class was rated 50th! and a true outlier which does skew their end result) the whole of this analysis I feel paints pretty accurate pictures for the most part. But you can see in some cases, the year a coaching change happens or a small class can arbitrarily cause a lower than usual ranked class. And again, I find the number of 4-5 stars indicative of any potential difference makers. For example, Ohio State had 79 of them during this time period, Syracuse.....1. Just one 4/5 star in 5 years.
Anyways Here is the breakdown:
ACC:
1) FSU. Class avg 4.5. 73 4/5 star recruits. Trend..Flat. (Which for FSU is good, they are a perennial top 5 class. A recruiting machine. Though I can't say they outperform their recruiting.
2) Clemson Class avg 14. 48 4/5 star recruits. Trend believe it or not, down. Clemson had two top 10 classes (6) and (4) in 2015-2016. Their FR class was only ranked 22, but it was a small. This year is is only 26, but so far a small class. Clemson is probably exceeding recruiting.
3) Miami Class avg 15 49 4/5 star recruits. Trend.. Way up. Last year's class was 11, this year's at this moment, 2. You have to say overall they have not produced relative to their recruiting.
4) Va Tech Class avg 29 26 4/5 star recruits. Trend up. Solid 25-30 classes had a down year when they switched coaches. Basically performs as they recruit.
5) UNC Class Avg 30. 18 4/5 stars. Trend flat. Again, pretty consistent classes. On field performance it could be argued is actually below what they recruit at.
6) L'ville Class Avg 31. 18 4/5 stars. Trend up. Getting better. Has outperformed recruiting for the most part.
7) NC State. Class Avg 39. 14 4/5 stars. Trend down. Was a 30-35 type program is now 45-50. Basically performs as recruits.
8) Pitt Class Avg 46 14 4/5 stars. Trend....flat. Probably most effected by coaching changes, has a low class of 65, high class of 28. Pitt is about the 7th or 8th best team in the ACC, so performs as it recruits.
9) Duke. Class Avg 47 9 4/5 Stars. Trend up. Was previously a 60+ program, now around the 40's and basically performs as recruits.
10) GT Class Avg 50. 8 4/5 stars. Trend flat. This program is weird, but their style is unique it skews how effective it recruits. Performs better than recruiting avg.
11) UVA Class Avg 51 6 4/5 star recruits. Trend...dropping. We will see the Mendenhall effect, but they recruited in the low 40's under London. Definitely has underperformed.
12T) BC Class Avg 56. 5 4/5 stars recruits. Trend, has dropped. 2016 class was ranked 83rd. Performs as it recruits.
12T) Cuse Class Avg 56 1 4/5 star. Trend. Flat. Most consistent. Will be between 50 and 60 with no 4-5 stars. Performs as it recruits.
13) Wake Class Avg 62. 2 4/5 star. Trend, dropping. Not good when you are last and your recruiting is not getting better. Performs as it recruits usually.
BIG TEN
1) tO$U. Class Avg 3.6 79 4/5 star recruits. Trend..same. Right now #1 class, always in top 10, usually top 5. Performs usually to their recruiting class as they are perennial CFB playoff participants
2) PSU. Class Avg 15 51 4/5 star recruits. Trend. Way Up! Currently #3 class. Another recruiting monster despite sanctions and coaching change. Performing as they recruit it seems
3) Michigan Class Avg 22. 55 4/5 star recruits. Trend up. Skewed badly by the transition year when hired Harbaugh and class finished 50th. 2015 and 2016 classes were ranked #4 each. Given their overall ranking, has to say performing as they recruit.
4) MSU. Class Avg 27. 42 4/5 star recruits. Trend down. For those who say "Michigan State" doesn't recruit well, they had 3 straight years around #20. They recruited well. But they also performed well on the field.
5) Nebraska Class Avg 32 25 4/5 star recruits. Trend flat. I guess you can say that they perform as they recruit, but this current class is low and likely there will be changes.
6) Wisconsin. Class Avg 34. 17 4/5 star recruits. Trend flat. No team is more consistent. Here are their rankings, 33, 37, 35, 35 and current class 31. Definitely perform much above their recruiting.
7) Maryland. Class Avg 35 25 4/5 stars. Trend way up. Surprised? Last year's class was ranked 17th, this class so far is ranked 14th. Fertile area. Under performed.
8) Minn. Class Avg 44. 3 4/5 stars. Trend real flat. Pitt West is what it is, isn't it?
9) Iowa Class Avg 52. 6 4/5 stars. Trend flat. Wisconsinlite. Consistent, never higher than 40th, but definitely well outperforms their recruiting.
10) Indiana Class Avg 52. 2 4/5 stars Trend down. They are who we thought they are.
11) Rutgers Class Avg 53. 4 4/5 stars Trend flat. No more choppin wood here.
12) NW Class Avg 54. 6 4/5 stars Trend very flat. They are who they are, smart kids overachieving and beating Pitt in bowl games.
13) Illinois Class Avg 59. 4 4/5 stars. Trend it doesn't matter. Bad is as bad does.
14) Purdue Class Avg 64. 2 4/5 stars Trend, livin' in the 60's like a Ken Burns documentary.
Bonus WVU Class Avg 40. 10 4/5 stars. Trend flat. WVU does what it does, transfers, JuCos and they always outperform their recruiting rankings.
There ya go. What is amazing is most schools on the whole, within their groups perform as expected, how they recruit. Miami has been a serious underachiever, Wisky a serious over achiever. I can tell you this, at least in my lifetime, Pitt has never been on the over achiever side. So Pitt needs to start recruiting better if we are going to expect better success and results.
Lot of good information @recruitsreadtheseboards but there is still far too much focus on being #34 or #35. That doesn't matter. A lot of the small difference is via numbers, retention, and scheme.
As has been pointed out, who is really in your tier/level of recruiting? Wisconsin doesn't out perform their recruiting in terms of beating more talented teams. They beat the teams they are even with or better than and then usually lose to the teams with more talent. In the B1G there are really only 3 teams with more talent and that is OSU, UM, and PSU (now). Otherwise Wisconsin is as good or better than everyone else.
The same was true for WVU when they were winning. We were the only team with more talent, when we were playing in the BE under DW.
The numbers are incredibly skewed by the SEC because almost all of their schools are in the top 25 in recruiting. Some of them have to beat the others and thus not finish highly in the W/L standings. In the SEC, if you don't have a top 10 National class, you are at least 1 tier/level below your competition and it is pretty unlikely you are going to play above that.
As has been pointed out, who is really in your tier/level of recruiting? Wisconsin doesn't out perform their recruiting in terms of beating more talented teams. They beat the teams they are even with or better than and then usually lose to the teams with more talent. In the B1G there are really only 3 teams with more talent and that is OSU, UM, and PSU (now). Otherwise Wisconsin is as good or better than everyone else.
The same was true for WVU when they were winning. We were the only team with more talent, when we were playing in the BE under DW.
The numbers are incredibly skewed by the SEC because almost all of their schools are in the top 25 in recruiting. Some of them have to beat the others and thus not finish highly in the W/L standings. In the SEC, if you don't have a top 10 National class, you are at least 1 tier/level below your competition and it is pretty unlikely you are going to play above that.
