ADVERTISEMENT

I thought recruiting rankings dont matter

S

Sean Miller Fan

Lair Hall of Famer
Oct 30, 2001
65,360
21,061
113
  • Like
Reactions: 9nationalchampionships, HailToPitt725 and TheWerewolfFromTwilight
teams that get the elite players, win. we get it, it's been that way since Pre WW2.

Captain Obvious Im Captain Obvious GIF - Captain Obvious Im Captain Obvious And Im Here To Read The Comments GIFs
 
  • Like
Reactions: Harlo4PITT, Millerton24, ONGB and 4 others
Sean Miller Fan said:
Bad coaching can derail a team but it really takes a lot of work to mess up that type of talent that Miami and Texas screw up. Its like 80% talent, 20% coaching.
Click to expand...
I think your ratios may be a bit skewed. You need talent but coaching is a bit more important than that. Obviously.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FireballZ
Its hard to through darts at Miami based on their history against pitt. It feels like they typically have superior athletes against us. I don't know how they lose as many games as they do because I don't watch many of their games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Millerton24
Dointhatrag said:
Its hard to through darts at Miami based on their history against pitt. It feels like they typically have superior athletes against us. I don't know how they lose as many games as they do because I don't watch many of their games.
Click to expand...
Not throwing darts at Miami simply stating that they’re pounding their chest on recruiting rankings but they can’t win games on the field. Sounds like dairy u up north
 
  • Like
Reactions: columbus mike
Sean Miller Fan said:
247sports.com

Miami Has A Chance: The Hurricanes a 'Blue-Chip Ratio' team going into 2022

According to a formula, Miami has enough talent to compete for a championship in 2022.
247sports.com 247sports.com

This guy made a formula for a team's potential success based on what the players on their team were ranked out of HS. Strangely, the best teams have the best recruits.
Click to expand...
Doesn't Miami have the most talent according to recruiting rankings in the Coastal every year? How many Coastal titles have they won?
 
I mean on a macro level, thanks Captain Obvious. But it goes a whole lot more deep than this, doesn't it?? PSU, USC, Texas, Oregon, A&M, Florida. This is just a quick glance of teams regularly at the top of recruiting rankings over the past 6-7 years.

So it is more than just recruiting. Sure, Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia, LSU, Clemson and Oklahoma are there too......

It is just not a 1:1 correlation as many people would think. I mean r (correlation coefficient) is probably around 0.5-0.55 which indicates there is definitely some correlation, but it is probably not as high as people think.
 
Only defect with the blue chip ratio is it doesn’t take account the rating of your 4* guys or how many 5* guys.

I’d rather have a recruiting class at say 50% if those were made up of high 4* and 5* guys, compared to a class of 100% 4* guys but they are all like 89 rated.
 
recruitsreadtheseboards said:
I mean on a macro level, thanks Captain Obvious. But it goes a whole lot more deep than this, doesn't it?? PSU, USC, Texas, Oregon, A&M, Florida. This is just a quick glance of teams regularly at the top of recruiting rankings over the past 6-7 years.

So it is more than just recruiting. Sure, Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia, LSU, Clemson and Oklahoma are there too......

It is just not a 1:1 correlation as many people would think. I mean r (correlation coefficient) is probably around 0.5-0.55 which indicates there is definitely some correlation, but it is probably not as high as people think.
Click to expand...

Elliot doesn’t really argue otherwise. His point is always, “I cannot tell you who will win the national championship based on the blue chip ratio. But I can tell you who cant.”

Being on this list is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient condition. Things like coaching is needed as well.
 
recruitsreadtheseboards said:
I mean on a macro level, thanks Captain Obvious. But it goes a whole lot more deep than this, doesn't it?? PSU, USC, Texas, Oregon, A&M, Florida. This is just a quick glance of teams regularly at the top of recruiting rankings over the past 6-7 years.

So it is more than just recruiting. Sure, Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia, LSU, Clemson and Oklahoma are there too......

It is just not a 1:1 correlation as many people would think. I mean r (correlation coefficient) is probably around 0.5-0.55 which indicates there is definitely some correlation, but it is probably not as high as people think.
Click to expand...

Well divisions have an influence on the correlation. Michigan, Penn State, and Michigan State all recruit pretty well. But they're all in a division with each other and Ohio State. So somebody has to finish 2nd, 3rd, 4th...

On the other side, Wisconsin and Iowa may not recruit all that highly, but neither does anyone else in that division kill it in recruiting. So someone has to finish 1st and 2nd.

Then Tennessee and Florida recruit well, but they're in a division with each other and Georgia (and Kentucky, who actually recruits pretty well). Same with A&M, LSU, and Auburn - in with each other plus Bama, plus Ole Miss. They can't all finish in 1st place (or 2nd or 3rd or 4th) in the division.

There are also just straight outliers (USC, Texas, etc.). Usually that comes down to quarterbacks and offensive linemen. For instance, a big complaint from USC fans is that Stanford gets all the offensive linemen out there because that tends to be the smartest positional group and they really value the free Stanford education. That probably makes sense when you see how many linemen and tight ends Stanford and Notre Dame typically put into the NFL.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cashisking884
cashisking884 said:
Elliot doesn’t really argue otherwise. His point is always, “I cannot tell you who will win the national championship based on the blue chip ratio. But I can tell you who cant.”

Being on this list is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient condition. Things like coaching is needed as well.
Click to expand...
Yes. And having a dynamic QB and a playmaker can elevate a team as we saw last year.
 
CJsE said:
2 times in the last 5 years?

I don't remember how 2020 worked, but they had the best conference record in the Coastal.
Click to expand...
lol, what? Miami has only one the coastal once, in 2017. in 2020, they went away from divisions and clemson and ND played since they had the two best records.

I'd love to hear how you got that miami won it twice in the last 5 years. Are we just making sh*t up now? I mean, just saying what we want with zero regards to facts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pittisit4me and TheSpecialSauce
Zeldas Open Roof said:
lol, what? Miami has only one the coastal once, in 2017. in 2020, they went away from divisions and clemson and ND played.

I'd love to hear how you got that miami won it twice in the last 5 years.
Click to expand...

I think he's saying they had the best record of any traditional Coastal team (Notre Dame and Clemson were ahead of them, but they're not Coastal teams).
 
TheWerewolfFromTwilight said:
I think he's saying they had the best record of any traditional Coastal team (Notre Dame and Clemson were ahead of them, but they're not Coastal teams).
Click to expand...
lol, so the year where there werent divisions and the two best teams were taken, he is claiming a coastal title for that year?

I cant believe i spend time conversing with you guys sometimes. i dont know if you guys need to stop doing drugs or start doing more..
 
  • Like
Reactions: USN_Panther
Zeldas Open Roof said:
lol, so the year where there werent divisions and the two best teams were taken, he is claiming a coastal title for that year?

I cant believe i spend time conversing with you guys sometimes. i dont know if you guys need to stop doing drugs or start doing more..
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm just being the interpreter. And I can assure you that less drugs is definitely the ideal route for myself. I can't speak for the others, though.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Zeldas Open Roof
recruitsreadtheseboards said:
Well then Pitt also has had this twice in the last 5 years of the Coastal. So......
Click to expand...

Yeah, no doubt. As much as anything, culture matters. Upperclassmen are highly valued by coaches. It's why guys like Nakia Griffin-Stewart get phone calls from Alabama when they enter the portal. 22,23,24-year-olds going against 19 and 20-year-olds is another equalizer. Look at the years we won the Coastal: We had starters that included Herndon, Dintino, Millin, Shane Roy (I think), Houy, Drexel, Petrishen, etc. Those dudes weren't exactly studs, but they can hold their own against guys who are a few years younger than them. Good culture + less tumultuous handling of the program (e.g. firing your coach every 3-5 years and turning the roster completely over) is undeniably a good formula for success.

It's still not one that will allow you to compete with the absolute freaks Alabama and Ohio State are bringing in (which speaks to CashisKing's comments above), but it can certainly allow you to compete with the Miamis of the world. Hell, look at the Tennessee game last year. Hot day in Knoxville, and we had like 20 more guys dressed than they did. No way that didn't help.

Culture, quarterback, o-line, coaching... a lot goes into it. But I still content that recruiting matters a lot. More than anything else, probably. Ed Oregon wasn't a mad genius all of a sudden when they won a national championship. They were a loaded roster that finally found a quarterback.
 
recruitsreadtheseboards said:
I mean on a macro level, thanks Captain Obvious. But it goes a whole lot more deep than this, doesn't it?? PSU, USC, Texas, Oregon, A&M, Florida. This is just a quick glance of teams regularly at the top of recruiting rankings over the past 6-7 years.

So it is more than just recruiting. Sure, Alabama, Ohio State, Georgia, LSU, Clemson and Oklahoma are there too......

It is just not a 1:1 correlation as many people would think. I mean r (correlation coefficient) is probably around 0.5-0.55 which indicates there is definitely some correlation, but it is probably not as high as people think.
Click to expand...
Who are those teams losing to though?

Coaching matters, just not a great deal. Give me Alabama's players and let Saban coach Pitt and I will win.
 
Sean Miller Fan said:
Who are those teams losing to though?

Coaching matters, just not a great deal. Give me Alabama's players and let Saban coach Pitt and I will win.
Click to expand...

If we're talking specifically about x's and o's, coaching matters infinitely more in basketball than football. Recruiting is still the most important aspect in both sports, but then implementing a culture is way more important than x's and o's in football.
 
TheWerewolfFromTwilight said:
Culture, quarterback, o-line, coaching... a lot goes into it. But I still content that recruiting matters a lot. More than anything else, probably. Ed Oregon wasn't a mad genius all of a sudden when they won a national championship. They were a loaded roster that finally found a quarterback.
Click to expand...

Yep.
If you look at national title winners over the last 20 or so years. It’s almost the same coaches over and over again. Saban, Meyer, Dabo, etc.

The only oddballs are like Larry Coker and Gene Chizikn and a couple like that. And none of them “coached” their way to that national championship. All were so bad they ended up fired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheWerewolfFromTwilight
cashisking884 said:
Elliot doesn’t really argue otherwise. His point is always, “I cannot tell you who will win the national championship based on the blue chip ratio. But I can tell you who cant.”

Being on this list is a necessary condition, but not a sufficient condition. Things like coaching is needed as well.
Click to expand...

Basically, Alabama, Clemson and Georgia can will a national championship in the current construction.

Everyone else play the lucky 4th fiddle season to make the playoffs.
 
Not discrediting the concept. A higher ratio of blue chip athletes who come into your program will definitely increase your "hit rate" for filling a position with a playmaker.

A more interesting analysis of data might be a breakdown by position group with some factor for time in the program using a running average. Like QB's, offensive skill guys, and OL but factor average time on the roster over the previous five year span. Would be interesting to see if one position group mattered more and how fast kids are moving through one program or another. I would think both of those things have to matter.
 
joeydavid said:
Basically, Alabama, Clemson and Georgia can will a national championship in the current construction.

Everyone else play the lucky 4th fiddle season to make the playoffs.
Click to expand...
Ohio State also. And I'm not sure Clemson can any longer unless they can get another 1st Rounder at QB
 
joeydavid said:
Basically, Alabama, Clemson and Georgia can will a national championship in the current construction.

Everyone else play the lucky 4th fiddle season to make the playoffs.
Click to expand...

Hey, don't forget Ohio State.

#Parity

I think NIL could add a few more players (Tennessee, A&M, USC, and maybe one or two more). And then there are probably a few teams who can win one and just haven't put it all together (Texas, maybe Oklahoma, and LSU did win one so they have to be on the list).

But there are teams that recruit well and are still lightyears away from being a true threat to win a national championship (Notre Dame, Michigan, Penn State, Florida, etc.), which is depressing. But (assuming the current format remains in tact, which I don't believe will happen) the pendulum has to swing at some point, you would think. Not to a point where there is parity, per se, but at least to a point where there are a handful of different players on top.
 
TheWerewolfFromTwilight said:
Hey, don't forget Ohio State.

#Parity

I think NIL could add a few more players (Tennessee, A&M, USC, and maybe one or two more). And then there are probably a few teams who can win one and just haven't put it all together (Texas, maybe Oklahoma, and LSU did win one so they have to be on the list).

But there are teams that recruit well and are still lightyears away from being a true threat to win a national championship (Notre Dame, Michigan, Penn State, Florida, etc.), which is depressing. But (assuming the current format remains in tact, which I don't believe will happen) the pendulum has to swing at some point, you would think. Not to a point where there is parity, per se, but at least to a point where there are a handful of different players on top.
Click to expand...

tO$U are not in the same league as the other 3. They are among the next tier who usually gets embarrassed when they make the playoffs.
 
joeydavid said:
By winning it this year and not being embarrassed by the others in the past.

LSU is another in that 2nd tier.
Click to expand...


Since the CFP began, Georgia has only been in it twice. Won the championship once, lost in the championship once.

Ohio State has been in it 4 times, and I believe they were on probation once or it would have been 5. Won the championship once, lost in the championship once.

Georgia is very likely to pass them due to talent concentration. But I wouldn't say they have yet.

Edit: Ohio State's probation was actually when they were 12-0 in 2012.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski11585
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S

Oregon State fans are scared Scott Barnes is going to leave

Replies
13
Views
1K
Football Board
Sean Miller Fan
S
ChiefJusticeMarshall

With all of the bubble teams this year, they should have eschewed all these metrics

Replies
2
Views
395
Center Court at the Pete
Chomp_Panther66
C
P

Transfer Portal Recruiting

Replies
77
Views
3K
Football Board
Pitt79
Pitt79
1

The Conversation

Replies
10
Views
906
Center Court at the Pete
Chomp_Panther66
C
W

Pitt vs Duke Friday Night @Duke

Replies
8
Views
892
The Field House
thom67
T
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back