re: Which programs are stepping up and which are slipping?

Do you have the mean/median recruit ranking for schools over this time span handy?

Starting this year, most classes will be reasonably normalized for the hard cap of 25 (I doubt many top schools will go significantly under 25 each year)... but obviously in years prior, you had schools taking significantly more in. The avg. player rating has been a pretty good barometer for incoming talent level respective of those differences.


Another way of looking at teams that are over/underperforming is looking at the Total Team talent page on 247: LINK

It won't be the be-all end-all, simply because it doesn't account for things like: lack of quality quarterback, thin depth at key positions, etc... but it does at least do a pretty good job of accounting for the caliber of athletes that have been retained.

If you want a good explanation as to why teams like UT and UF fired their coaches, look no further than this list. Even with the step back that UF has taken in recruiting, they're still a top 20 team on talent... of course this season, they played with like 10 of those guys unavailable... . Tennessee was a top 15 team, but clearly, Butch failed to have a QB ready post Dobbs (in addition to just not being a very good coach).

Florida State is interesting, given their placement on that list... even with the loss of Francois, you'd have thought they might have weathered the season a little better than they did. Going to be very interesting to see how things go with the new staff there... both on the recruiting trail and the field...

quote:

---

I understand where you wanted to go with this thread ... but the statement above is not really accurate.

---

Oh really?

Which teams have been competitive enough to give Bama a challenge during the last 5 years?

Auburn- Beat Bama in 2013 and 2017... Won the SEC Title in 2013... SEC West in 2017.... They're ranked #7 in recruiting for the past 5 seasons.

Georgia- Won the SEC in 2017... took Bama to OT in the MNC Game in 2017.... They're ranked #3 in recruiting for the past 5 seasons.

LSU- They are 0-5 against Bama and not won any type of championships... but they've managed to be competitive against Bama on the field for the majority of the game each time they've played. They took them to OT in 2014... lost by just 10 points in 2016... etc.... They're ranked #4 in recruiting for the past 5 seasons.

No other teams in the SEC have come close to truly challenging Bama. Sure Ole Miss beat them a couple of times, but they were cheating and those teams mostly fell apart by the end of the year.... they never did even win the West.

quote:

---

The recruiting services have gotten better over the years. But they still miss on a lot of players.

---

Absolutely. Some kids develop later. But most of the "under the radar" kids are from regions of the country where the recruiting services don't spend a lot of time.

quote:

---

That's not to say high rankings don't mean anything, because they do.

---

They absolutely do. Outside of Wisconsin, no other Power programs are finishing in the Top 10 without ever bringing in Top 10 classes.

You typed "competitive" not "compete with Bama."

Know the difference.

Very very few teams have been able to compete with Bama during this Saban-led run ... not even programs who have consistently fielded Top Ten recruiting classes.

Still, a program who consistently signs Top 15 classes can be very competitive across the spectrum if the players fit the system and they are being coached-up.

quote:

---

the way the services are set-up there is a cap on how many 4* and 5* players they award at any one position per state based on capita.

---

Where in the world did you hear this?

Highly doubt this is the case.

quote:

---

Who says a blue chipper can't be blue collar? They work just as hard to get to where they're at as any other star ranked kid.

---

No one is saying a blue-chipper is automatically not a hard worker, but they are classified differently.

Blue Chippers are typically catered-to at a very young age. They are usually far superior performers to everyone else around them in HS. They are usually not pushed as hard in HS because they are more naturally gifted.

Blue Collar players have to work for it harder every day. They have a different mindset, almost an underdog mindset, the moment they set foot on campus. Most of the time they are more driven from the onset because they realize their weaknesses and they are accustomed to working to overcome those weaknesses.

It's just a proven fact.

Sure, when you get that blue-chipper who is also an outstanding student, a hard worker, a dedicated team-player that's a huge plus ... but they are rare, few and far between. That's why the best teams have a healthy mix of both and that's what Saban has turned into an art form ... finding just the right mix.

One thing I've noticed about Saban recruited teams is that there are very few prima donnas. He finds players that fit his system and value his work ethic demands. I don't have the inclination to do it right now, but I'll guarantee you Bama's roster has plenty of high-3* players that Saban considers integral parts of his team.

Finding just the right mix that fits a system is the hard part.

I'd also contend that position matters. You can fit a blue collar OLineman or fullback or linebacker into a system and get a lot out of them in terms of chemistry.

Blue collar players who excel typically are better students of the game because they rely less on instinctual play and more on outwitting an opponent. That's why blue collar players typically make your best field generals.

This is not a good thing to rely on, it is easy to get many more when you get none to begin with, and it is hard to climb a lot when you already have most of anyone. Results in the end are the only things that matter. You can have all the 4 and 5 stars you can hold, but if you lose games cause they get hurt, never develop, or just never pan out, it means nothing. YES talent wins games, but only if they play to their potential and actually play in the games. Even the best can get tons of talent , but one bad season of injuries can drop them in the real world of wins.Or if they play bad , never develop or just do not fit the scheme of the team. Stars are just one measure of the players impact.

quote:

---

You can have all the 4 and 5 stars you can hold, but if you lose games cause they get hurt, never develop, or just never pan out, it means nothing.

---

Yes. That's why the programs that stockpile 4* and 5* kids end up winning the most on the field.... because for every kid that gets hurt, transfers, or doesn't develop, they have 2 more that did perform as expected.

quote:

---

Yes. That's why the programs that stockpile 4* and 5* kids end up winning the most on the field.... because for every kid that gets hurt, transfers, or doesn't develop, they have 2 more that did perform as expected.

---

Exactly.

Yea I would not say that Saban has a healthy mix of blue collar 3 stars. There are very few of them and they mostly ride the bench. Saban can do something even better than that which is pick and choose WHICH 4 and 5 star players he recruits. It's why his team still has a blue collar attitude and he can keep his stars on the field for the most part.

Compare that to a team like Auburn for example. They are not all that far behind Alabama in recruiting 4 star or better players. But if you look at their roster over the last 5 years, where they have struggled is in keeping those star players actually on the field. They tend to transfer, get in major trouble, or become locker room cancers (hence the wild inconsistencies for AU). AU has to take on a lot of risky players with talent that Saban has the luxury of avoiding.