it still shocks me Saban wasn't fired after the 2018 recruiting rankings were released. how did he let the team fall so far so quickly. good thing he bounced back.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
The rich get richer
- Thread starter Discoverer27
- Start date
it still shocks me Saban wasn't fired after the 2018 recruiting rankings were released. how did he let the team fall so far so quickly. good thing he bounced back.
I call this 'hype synergy' between the top schools and the recruiting boards. They feed off each other and the kids bite on it without seeing this little game they play.
I've always believed that recruiting rankings aren't everything, but they aren't nothing either. They do tend to correlate with success so they have plenty of merit, but the ranking system has biases that deflate their perfection in prediction. Evaluating talent and prospective ability will always be an inexact science, but there is still some validity to the rankings overall statistically.
I.e. very few metrics, especially those involving humans, will be perfect. It is still data, part qualitative and quantitative. There will be outliers, but there is certainly a strong correlation with recruiting rankings and team success. Look at Bama, Clemson, Georgia, etc. the past several years compared to the lowest ranked teams. Yes some teams over perform and some under perform relative to rankings, but overall, there is predictive validity to recruiting rankings. Lots of other variables involved of course.
I.e. very few metrics, especially those involving humans, will be perfect. It is still data, part qualitative and quantitative. There will be outliers, but there is certainly a strong correlation with recruiting rankings and team success. Look at Bama, Clemson, Georgia, etc. the past several years compared to the lowest ranked teams. Yes some teams over perform and some under perform relative to rankings, but overall, there is predictive validity to recruiting rankings. Lots of other variables involved of course.
Last edited:
Nobody said it is imperfect. The best coaches will be able to identify great potential. The question is after about the top 100 -300. Is the real difference talent or who ultimately coaches them. The success rate of 100-300 is pretty evenly split whether 101 or 299.
This year's Clemson class is a little different. It's bigger and not quite as high of an average player rating. But their recent classes tend to be a little smaller but with exceptionally high average player grades. Usually right on par with the very best. They don't wash kids out of their program at the same rate as Alabama does. Point being, despite not having any top five classes, the quality of their roster is as good as anyone's, obviously.
Personal opinion. Dabo is much like some of the better coaches NU has had in the present and past. Tom, Scott and Coach Devaney( although not as much as the two aforementioned). Clemson is a smaller school and they have had some success in the past, they are not considered a perennial power, this is fast changing. His non assuming personality, football acumen, and the ability to work with kids and his staff make for, what I consider, to be the excellent coaching personality.
According to a "top 10 left" article i read, Bama was still in on 4-5 of the best recruits still uncommitted. That got me wondering how many spots they had to fill.
Checking 247, are listed as having 14 early enrollees and 10 signed commits, plus 4 hard commits. I don't think any of the hard commits were listed in the article about the top 10 left.
So, if Bama were to land even two from that list, they would be signing 30 players this year to a program that is well established and not in transition like NU. In 2018 they had 21 enrollees, so maybe some count back, but in 2017 they had 29 so probably not too many spots for that.
I know we talk about this every year, but until this inequity is fixed, there is an uneven playing field in the game.....and, probably makes Saban's accomplishments and accolades at least asterisk worthy.
Checking 247, are listed as having 14 early enrollees and 10 signed commits, plus 4 hard commits. I don't think any of the hard commits were listed in the article about the top 10 left.
So, if Bama were to land even two from that list, they would be signing 30 players this year to a program that is well established and not in transition like NU. In 2018 they had 21 enrollees, so maybe some count back, but in 2017 they had 29 so probably not too many spots for that.
I know we talk about this every year, but until this inequity is fixed, there is an uneven playing field in the game.....and, probably makes Saban's accomplishments and accolades at least asterisk worthy.
