Purdue recruiting

[Ellis Boyd Redding]

Brohm is a winner. He is winning with mostly Hazell's players. If he sticks around, and gets more of his own guys, like Moore, winning will become sustainable in West Lafayette.

A look at Purdue's recruiting per 247Sports Composite:

Class / Rank / Ave Star / Best Recruit / Coach / Season Record

2014 / 70 / 0.8245 / David Blough QB 0.8649 / Hazell / 3-9 (1-7 B1G)

2015 / 67 / 0.8175 / Elijah Sindelar 0.8565 / Hazell / 2-10 (1-7 B1G)

2016 / 80 / 0.8113 / Austin Larkin DE 0.8406 / Hazell/Parker / 3-9 (1-8 B1G)

2017 / 72 / 0.8188 / TJ Jallow CB 0.8582 / Brohm / 7-6 (4-5 B1G)

2018 / 51 / 0.8469 / Rondale Moore WR 0.9123 / Brohm / 4-3 (3-1 B1G)

2019 / 25 / 0.8605 / George Karlaftis DE 0.9623 / Brohm / TBD


You can see how Brohm started winning with Hazell's players, then recruiting picked up.



Edit: Sorry that the spacing didn't show up as it did when I typed it.

 

[Cisco]

Don't be surprised if he is at Louisville in the next couple of years if Petrino can't right the ship.

 

[Big Burruss]

Don't be surprised if he is at Louisville in the next couple of years if Petrino can't right the ship.

That doesn’t seem like a step up

 

[Big Burruss]

I don’t know much about Brohm’s background and what he looks for in a job, but it’s looking like USC will be open in December. Maybe Auburn too. Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised if Florida State decides that Willie Taggart was a big mistake. Brohm is probably the number one hire this year.

 

[Cisco]

That doesn’t seem like a step up

Brohm is from Louisville, played at Louisville, and has coached at Louisville.

 

[Bean]

Adding on to SETH's input:
https://www.cbssports.com/college-f...numbers-why-the-sites-get-the-rankings-right/
[Feb 2013]

"Assessing Individual Rankings. Take All-Americans, for example, the best measure we have for assessing individual success at the college level. Over the past five years (from 2008 to 2012), 316 players have been named to at least one major All-America team. Of that number, only 42 of them -- barely 13 percent -- arrived on campus as can't-miss, five-star prospects according to Rivals.com. Only 81 of them (around 25 percent) were ranked among Rivals' top 100 prospects in their respective recruiting class."

"By contrast, twice as many All-Americans in the same span (162, more than half of the total) were regarded as mere three-star prospects or worse. According to the gurus, the top dozen or so recruiting powers in the country should field more talented rosters than that by themselves, right? Only if your standard allows for zero margin for error, in which case you may as well stop reading."

"Odds of Becoming an All-American, by Recruiting Ranking
5–Star: 1 in 4.
Top 100: 1 in 6.
4–Star: 1 in 16.
3–Star: 1 in 56.
2–Star: 1 in 127.
All FBS Signees: 1 in 45.

On the final count, the higher-ranked team according to the recruiting rankings won almost exactly two-thirds of the time (66.4 percent of the time, to be exact), and every "class" as a whole had a winning record against every class ranked below it every single year.

So What? The evidence is overwhelming: Despite some obvious, anecdotal exceptions, on the whole recruiting rankings clearly are useful for creating a realistic baseline for expectations. But the narrower your focus, the less useful they will become.

The massively hyped, five-star recruit headlining your team's next recruiting class may be an irredeemable bust; he is also many times more likely than a scrappy three-star to pan out as an All-American and move on to the next level."