Started By
Message

Recruiting Rankings... Yes, They Matter Tremendously

Posted on 2/1/17 at 3:24 pm
Posted by Jack Ruby
Member since Apr 2014
22709 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 3:24 pm
LINK

quote:

So how have the national title teams recruited since 1996, here's the data (A reader provided me with the recruiting data prior to 2002 based on spreadsheets he kept. Gotta love the South. The rest of our rankings are based on the Rivals data to be consistent.):

1996 Florida (#6 in 1993, #2 in 1995)

1997 Nebraska/Michigan (Nebraska #5 in 1995 and number #9 in 1996 Michigan: #4 in 1994, #7 in 1995, #8 in 1996, #4 in 1997)

1998 Tennessee (#7 in 1998, #5 in 1997, #3 in 1996)

1999 Florida State (#5 in 1998, #1 in 1997, #5 in 1996)

2000 Oklahoma (#13 in 2000, and #25 in both 1997 and 1998 Rivals) *OU is the only program without a top ten class to win the title in Rivals history. But it did have 3 top 25 classes

2001 Miami (#2 in 2001, #9 in 2000, #8 in 1999)

2002 Ohio State (#7 in 2002, #4 in 2000, #2 in 1999)

2003 LSU/USC (LSU #1 class in 2003, #4 in 2001 USC #3 in 2003, #14 in 2000, #21 in 2001)

2004 USC (#3 class in 2003, #1 class in 2004)

2005 Texas (#1 class in 2002, #15 class in 2003 with only 18 recruits, which averaged the highest star rating in country, #18 class in 2004 -- only signed 15 players.) If Texas had signed 20 players in either of these classes, they would have ranked in the top five. The #1 class in 2002 was simply too large, with over 30 players).

2006 Florida (#2 in 2003, #10 in 2004, #2 in 2006)

2007 LSU (#1 in 2003, #1 in 2004, #7 in 2006, #4 in 2007)

2008 Florida (#2 in 2006, #1 in 2007, #3 in 2008)

2009 Alabama (#10 in 2007, #1 in 2008, #1 in 2009)

2010 Auburn (#10 in 2006, #7 in 2007, #4 in 2010) Auburn was #20 in 2008 and #19 in 2009

2011 Alabama (#1 in 2008, #1 in 2009, #5 in 2010, #1 in 2011)

2012 Alabama (#1 in 2009, #5 in 2010, #1 in 2011, #1 in 2012)

2013 Florida State (#7 in 2009, #10 in 2010, #2 in 2011, #6 in 2012, #10 in 2013)

2014 Ohio State (#11 in 2011, #4 in 2012, #2 in 2013, #3 in 2014)

2015 Alabama (#1 in 2012, #1 in 2013, #1 in 2014, #1 in 2015)

2016 Clemson (#14 in 2013, #13 in 2014, #4 in 2015, #6 in 2016)

Add all this up and the past 21 national champions have averaged 2.9 top ten classes in the four years before they won a title.

So now that the 2017 recruiting classes are complete, which teams have two or more top ten recruiting classes in the four years before the start of the 2016 season? The past twenty years of recruiting data suggests your national champion will be one of these 11 teams:

4 top ten classes: Alabama, Ohio State, Florida State, LSU

3 top ten classes: Auburn, Georgia, USC, Texas A&M

2 top ten classes: Tennessee, Michigan, Clemson
Posted by Woopigsooie20
Me Scusi
Member since Mar 2010
57350 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 3:29 pm to
As someone pointed out, this is the 1st time in history we've had 3 straight top 25 classes
Posted by russellvillehog
Member since Apr 2016
9711 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 3:32 pm to
The 2000 OU team means there is hope.

As I stated before. We now have gotten 3 straight top 25 classes.
This post was edited on 2/1/17 at 3:33 pm
Posted by BarkRuffalo
Boston, MA
Member since Feb 2014
1206 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 4:20 pm to
This is an odd melt
Posted by Hawgeye
tFlagship Brothel
Member since Jun 2009
30917 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 5:39 pm to
Clemson won the title last night with recruiting class ranked as follows since 2012 according to 247...

2012: 23rd(15th)(in case of 5th year RS seniors)
2013: 15th(15th)
2014: 24th(17th)
2015: 10th(9th)
2016: 8th(11th)

247 composite and then 247 only ranking in ( ). Sort of interesting to see a team win a national title after all these years without a top 7 national recruiting class and a 5 year average of a 17.4 recruiting ranking in the composite.

Proof that development does matter, and can overcome a ton of 5 star recruits. IMO



.....Thats from a thread I made after Clemson won. Basically, you need a game changer on offense, an okay defense that can hold up a few series, and coach that can keep kids out of trouble and develop players.
Posted by rockiee
Sugar Land, TX
Member since Jan 2015
28540 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 7:08 pm to
quote:

Recruiting Rankings... Yes, They Matter Tremendously


Really? Damn, you just figured out the secret to College Football.

Now we just need a coach would can get us in the top ten of recruiting. That shouldn't be too hard. It has happened throughout our history many times.
Posted by Hawgnsincebirth55
Gods country
Member since Sep 2016
16005 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 7:08 pm to
So basically our chance was in 06/07... frick HOUSTON NUT

Melt year 10
This post was edited on 2/1/17 at 7:10 pm
Posted by dbeck
Member since Nov 2014
29449 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 7:12 pm to
All of the schools in that list have at least one of the following:

High population state that produces a lot of talent
Beaches/coastal areas that draw in players from other states
Rich tradition of winning that draws players from other states

Arkansas is 0/3 when you consider those things. I personally think NWA is the most beautiful place to live west of the Appalachians and east of the Rockies. And it rivals a lot of the other states too.

But most 18-year-old athletes don't care about hiking trails, fishing, and hunting. They're more drawn to beaches and big cities with a huge night life. Or cases with a dozen national championship trophies inside. Or just staying close to their family and friends.
This post was edited on 2/1/17 at 7:14 pm
Posted by DaleDenton
Member since Jun 2010
42346 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 8:18 pm to
Why should championships be the bar?

Shouldn't just getting bowl games named after foods be good enough? They are for another program on campus...

Posted by hawgfaninc
https://youtu.be/torc9P4-k5A
Member since Nov 2011
46322 posts
Posted on 2/1/17 at 10:04 pm to
quote:

This is an odd melt
Posted by Hawgeye
tFlagship Brothel
Member since Jun 2009
30917 posts
Posted on 2/2/17 at 7:28 am to
quote:

Why should championships be the bar?

Shouldn't just getting bowl games named after foods be good enough? They are for another program on campus...


This is an even odder melt
Posted by ElDawgHawg
L.A. (lower Arkansas)
Member since Nov 2012
2972 posts
Posted on 2/2/17 at 8:12 am to
I just don't buy totally in to recruiting rankings mainly because they don't take team needs into consideration nor do they factor how a player fits into the scheme. Granted a team full of 4 and 5 stars will have a higher ceiling but I'm ok with motivated 3 stars that play with a chip on their shoulder..... we just need to make sure they play that way.
Posted by Columbia
Land of the Yuppies
Member since Mar 2016
3132 posts
Posted on 2/2/17 at 8:32 am to
For all the ranting about recruiting Texas, you have to give B props for pulling a few very talented guys out of Texas that could make a huge impact on the program.
This post was edited on 2/2/17 at 8:33 am
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter