Started By
Message
re: Alabama Recruiting
Posted on 6/19/24 at 10:54 am to geauxbrown
Posted on 6/19/24 at 10:54 am to geauxbrown
Dude it is mid-June.
1
Posted on 6/19/24 at 11:04 am to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
Not necessarily talking about you, but seems like a cart before the horse argument over five stars. This could all be moot in the next couple weeks with some of Alabama’s major targets making decisions.
All we can look at is what's there right now.
The problem with trying to project ahead is you have to do that for all teams. Yes, Bama might land Ty Haywood or Kaliq Lockett in the next couple of weeks. But LSU might land DJ Pickett or Jonah Williams, Georgia might land Elijah Griffin or Dijon Lee, Texas might land Michael Fasusi or Jaime French and Tennessee might land David Sanders or Caleb Cunningham.
It's pointless to project additions to one team and not others. It's far simpler to just wait for commits to happen.
All of this is fairly pointless until ESD. My only intent in posting in this thread is both to point to 247's composite if you want to look at rankings as it eliminates outliers in rankings and to caution those who are looking at rankings now to use the average player rating rather than the "points" based rating at this point in the recruiting cycle because points based ratings heavily favor teams with more recruits.
Rutgers is #9 right now with a bad per player rating. That's because they already have 27 commits. ND is also very overrated with 21 commits. Bama at 17 isn't horribly overrated, but they are a bit overrated as there are 5 other teams with better per-player ratings but fewer commits (like UGA, Oregon, Clemson and LSU) and a few others behind Bama in per player ratings but having fewer commits and a lot of interest from 5-stars (particularly TExas and A&M).
Posted on 6/19/24 at 11:17 am to CapstoneGrad06
quote:
You can’t even call it a transition signing class though. It was signed before he was even hired
Most of it was signed before he was hired. He was hired between ESD and NSD. Bama did sign players for NSD (or I assume they did) so he did have SOME impact on the class. But much less that other coaches. He got a huge benefit in that Saban signed the class and then retired as opposed to retiring before ESD. Many coaches coming in now have less than a month before ESD to work on that class. Saban took care of that for Deboer and it was EXTREMELY helpful.
quote:
And with a December signing period being the signing period, official visits primarily in June now, and a host of other changes it is absolutely different than it was in 2008.
He was hired in January. There's a lot of time between January and June. Saban and other elite recruiters already had their schedules pushed earlier even in the mid-2000's. Poor recruiters didn't, but getting things set up early with recruits is what made those guys elite to begin with. Everyone else was playing catch up. Getting hired in January doesn't cause a significant road block in recruiting for an ESD of the following December and a NSD over a year away in February... either now or back in 2008.
You look at guys like Brian Kelly or Sarkisian or Lincoln Riley moving to USC and they had no real issue with their recruiting after their transition year. There's no reason to give Deboer a pass for 2025 either.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 11:42 am to Draco Malfoy
quote:
Oh wow! In the Pac 12 at Washington???
Well, he was 100% better than you gave him credit for. Nice crawfish from “he only had one good season” to “it was 2 but in the Pac 12”
Posted on 6/19/24 at 11:43 am to DawginSC
247 is old shite. On3 is where to go. 247 used to have a bunch of good people. They left. Guess where they went?
Posted on 6/19/24 at 11:47 am to Crimsonians
There is no doubt DeBoer is a good coach. Whether he can recruit or win at a blue blood is a different story. Maybe, maybe not, we'll get to see over the next few years. If Bama recruiting does go down a few spots, that's not the end of the world because of the transfer portal. Alabama just won't get the Saban discount on players anymore, I'm sure they'll adjust just fine to that.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 11:51 am to ColoradoElkHerd
quote:
Dude it is mid-June
Would be interesting to see how the commitments looked in June under Saban.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 11:57 am to geauxbrown
quote:
Would be interesting to see how the commitments looked in June under Saban.
Much worse.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 12:09 pm to Crimsonians
quote:
247 is old shite. On3 is where to go. 247 used to have a bunch of good people. They left. Guess where they went?
All of them have shitty formulas.
On3 is basically the same shitty formula as 247.
This post was edited on 6/19/24 at 12:10 pm
Posted on 6/19/24 at 12:23 pm to 3down10
quote:
All of them have shitty formulas.
On3 is basically the same shitty formula as 247.
The 247 composite is good simply because it's a composite. It softens the impact of an outlier ranking by averaging most of the top recruiting service's individual rankings.
All of the formulas have flaws, but when you average them all together you at least have something that works like a "consensus" ranking number.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 12:27 pm to geauxbrown
quote:
Would be interesting to see how the commitments looked in June under Saban.
It would take digging into each recruit's page and looking at the commit date to get something close to that (though it wouldn't show you guys who were committed but then left later in the process.
But... from my memory of following recruiting I always remember Bama under Saban having a high average player rating. Some years at this time they'd have high numbers and some years they'd have low numbers, but they'd pretty much always be in the top 3 of average player rating (usually #1) even if they only had 7-10 recruits.
Some years of course they'd be like OSU is now, with a good number of recruits AND the #1 average player rating. But the number committed at this point varied a lot from year to year.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 12:29 pm to PerrillouxToTexas
quote:
yes, and they don't have any 4 stars signed either
Even crazier, we dont have ANY players signed for the 2025 class.
Even worse, Alabama has not won a single game in 2025
The downfall is real
This post was edited on 6/19/24 at 12:31 pm
Posted on 6/19/24 at 12:35 pm to DawginSC
So rivals has the commit date showing for previous years on the team recruiting page.
For last year's class, Bama had 6 commits as of June 1st of 2024 (not including guys who were committed who later went elsewhere).
2 5-stars, 4 4-stars (using rivals ranking). Average player rating of 5.93.
Right now Bama has 17 commits. According to rivals rankings they have 0 5-stars, 13 4-stars, 3 3-stars and 1 2-star. Average player rating of 5.76.
For last year's class, Bama had 6 commits as of June 1st of 2024 (not including guys who were committed who later went elsewhere).
2 5-stars, 4 4-stars (using rivals ranking). Average player rating of 5.93.
Right now Bama has 17 commits. According to rivals rankings they have 0 5-stars, 13 4-stars, 3 3-stars and 1 2-star. Average player rating of 5.76.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 12:41 pm to DawginSC
quote:
The 247 composite is good simply because it's a composite. It softens the impact of an outlier ranking by averaging most of the top recruiting service's individual rankings.
All of the formulas have flaws, but when you average them all together you at least have something that works like a "consensus" ranking number.
The composite isn't a good formula either. They are the best available for the reasons listed, but in the end they still have the same shitty formula for ranking the classes.
On the 24/7 composite, Notre Dame is #2. But their class is closer to #10.
Alabama is #4. But the class is closer to 6-8. Because the quantity is rated much higher than the quality. Having 5 3 star players is NOT worth more than a single 5 star player, but the rankings say the 5 3 star players are better.
Then you have punters and kickers. They should just be ignored, or the ratings should be based on position, rather than overall. Kickers are extremely undervalued considered they are often score more points than any other position. Punters as well, because a good punter helps keep points off the board for the other team.
They don't remotely address needs, or spread. You can have 6 5 star QBs on your roster and it will count as a great class, but it's actually a pretty shitty class. It doesn't happen for that reason, but the formulas themselves would say - oh that's great!
When it comes to the scouting scores, I don't have much to say about it. I'm certainly not qualified to critique their individual ratings. But what they do with those scores to create rankings isn't very good at all.
The biggest thing that helps the rankings is that by the time you get to full classes, the difference in quantity is minimal. But even then you still see teams with 30 recruits being extremely over-ranked.
This post was edited on 6/19/24 at 12:44 pm
Posted on 6/19/24 at 1:57 pm to 3down10
Hair away from 2nd..great punter should be a fo
Posted on 6/19/24 at 4:39 pm to DawginSC
Hey dummy we have a kicker committed who is a not rated so that is what threw our average off.
Before the kicker we were third rated
Before the kicker we were third rated
Posted on 6/19/24 at 4:53 pm to 3down10
quote:
The composite isn't a good formula either. They are the best available for the reasons listed, but in the end they still have the same shitty formula for ranking the classes.
On the 24/7 composite, Notre Dame is #2. But their class is closer to #10.
Alabama is #4. But the class is closer to 6-8. Because the quantity is rated much higher than the quality. Having 5 3 star players is NOT worth more than a single 5 star player, but the rankings say the 5 3 star players are better.
Then you have punters and kickers. They should just be ignored, or the ratings should be based on position, rather than overall. Kickers are extremely undervalued considered they are often score more points than any other position. Punters as well, because a good punter helps keep points off the board for the other team.
They don't remotely address needs, or spread. You can have 6 5 star QBs on your roster and it will count as a great class, but it's actually a pretty shitty class. It doesn't happen for that reason, but the formulas themselves would say - oh that's great!
When it comes to the scouting scores, I don't have much to say about it. I'm certainly not qualified to critique their individual ratings. But what they do with those scores to create rankings isn't very good at all.
The biggest thing that helps the rankings is that by the time you get to full classes, the difference in quantity is minimal. But even then you still see teams with 30 recruits being extremely over-ranked.
All of this is true, but much of it is "fixed" with the end of the year rankings.
Mid cycle rankings (like NOW) mean nothing because of different numbers of commits. But at the end of the cycle, the services either only look at the top X number of signings or decrease the weight of signings after a number (used to be around 20, now it's likely more like 25). This means the 2-star kicker doesn't count in the end results or counts very little. And teams stop getting a "quantity" boost over others because EVERYONE is usually at or above that number that count.
What tends to push the higher number teams up the list is they count their top guys, while a team with just 25 signings has to count everyone.
As for needs... that's less of a factor now. HS recruiting is all about "down the road" not the next season. Teams are lucky if they get 3-4 true freshman who have a significant impact on their team. Filling an immediate need with a true freshman is not the best thing you can do.
In today's game, that's what the transfer portal is for. UGA had a need for WR for this upcoming year. They didn't rely on HS recruiting for that, they hit the portal to bring in 3-5 pass catchers to hopefully fill the immediate need. The HS WR are about having the right numbers 2-3 years from now.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 5:04 pm to YStar
quote:
Hey dummy we have a kicker committed who is a not rated so that is what threw our average off.
Before the kicker we were third rated
The kicker is not included in Bama's average player rating because he is unrated. If you go to Bama's team and add up the 16 players with composite ratings and divide it by 16 (since the kicker isn't included) you get the 92.86 that Bama's average player rating is.
If you added the kicker with an 82 (his ranking for 247's solo ranking rather than their composite), Bama's average ranking would drop to 92.05. That wouldn't change their current "place" in average player rating at all. They'd still be 6th, they'd just be a lot closer to Michigan (who's 7th).
Sorry bud, it doesn't work the way you think it works.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 6:24 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:
Following recruiting is a fool's errand these days.
Kids these days are committing two or three times then transferring a time or two for good measure.
At this point, we even have true freshmen transferring before they've even suited up.
NIL negotiation process.
Posted on 6/19/24 at 6:28 pm to geauxbrown
I heard Alabama has no one committed to their 2033 class.
Husky Harsin is fricked. Them coonaases told yall he couldn't recruit the south!
Husky Harsin is fricked. Them coonaases told yall he couldn't recruit the south!
Page 5 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News