Recruiting rankings don't matter
- Thread starter AIRWOLF
- Start date
GrundleStiltzkin
New Fish
AIRWOLF
New Fish
They don't matter to Petersen, that's true.
If you look at the number of future NFL players that were on those 2009 and 2010 Boise teams and compare them to their recruiting rankings and then reference the above chart, you'll come to some interesting conclusions.
Also, if you look at the 2013 recruiting class that had an average rating of 87.22, that would imply that 13% of those 22 recruits should have made the NFL. That's just under 3 NFL players. Where are we right now? Seven, with a chance to get to nine or ten, depending on whether some of the free agents stick?
And yes, I know it was shtick. I am just in focused nerd mode right now. Sorry.
Last edited:
That really does fuck up the R value and data skew doesn't it?
Outside of the pure numbers though, it does make the case that there's a niche to be carved out of recruiting of players that might go unnoticed by the rankings.
Minus that lone outlier, you do have a pretty obvious correlation between stars and NFL talent. I wonder what kind of R value you get for NFL talent = program success. You've gotta have at least a couple of schools fucking that all up like UCLA with lots of draft picks that do nothing in college.
AIRWOLF
New Fish
Unrated recruits are interesting. Of the 5,100 of them in the database, over two thirds of those observations came in 2000 and 2001, before ratings coverage was as broad as it is now. But I ran the numbers from 2002-2013 and the percentage that made the NFL was almost unchanged. The fact unranked guys make the NFL at a rate that is greater than the weighted average of all those with rankings is pretty weird though. And the disparity isn't small, it is slightly over 11% vs. slightly over 9%.
AIRWOLF
New Fish
Solved this. Since I was only using FBS recruits, I was ignoring the 7,000 or so FCS scholarships that were given out over the same period. If you lump those in, it evens things out quite a bit, I think. I haven't done the math yet, but...well, I probably won't do all of the math.
Ice_Holmvik
New Fish
They don't matter to Petersen, that's true.
If you look at the number of future NFL players that were on those 2009 and 2010 Boise teams and compare them to their recruiting rankings and then reference the above chart, you'll come to some interesting conclusions.
Also, if you look at the 2013 recruiting class that had an average rating of 87.22, that would imply that 13% of those 22 recruits should have made the NFL. That's just under 3 NFL players. Where are we right now? Seven, with a chance to get to nine or ten, depending on whether some of the free agents stick?
And yes, I know it was shtick. I am just in focused nerd mode right now. Sorry.
That was a Petersen class when he didnt have the pressure and access to all 4-5 star kids. That class was littered with nfl players. I sometimes wonder if Petersen wishes he could recruit his old way and rely on his eye for talent and the staffs development.
FremontTroll
New Fish
They don't matter to Petersen, that's true.
If you look at the number of future NFL players that were on those 2009 and 2010 Boise teams and compare them to their recruiting rankings and then reference the above chart, you'll come to some interesting conclusions.
Also, if you look at the 2013 recruiting class that had an average rating of 87.22, that would imply that 13% of those 22 recruits should have made the NFL. That's just under 3 NFL players. Where are we right now? Seven, with a chance to get to nine or ten, depending on whether some of the free agents stick?
And yes, I know it was shtick. I am just in focused nerd mode right now. Sorry.
That was a Petersen class when he didnt have the pressure and access to all 4-5 star kids. That class was littered with nfl players. I sometimes wonder if Petersen wishes he could recruit his old way and rely on his eye for talent and the staffs development.
I think you're referring to 2014 not 2013 but your premise lies on the faulty assumption that the 2014 results are repeatable. And you're also assuming that the 2017 and 2018 classes won't be as successful despite being better on paper- that is yet to be determined.
Ice_Holmvik
New Fish
They don't matter to Petersen, that's true.
If you look at the number of future NFL players that were on those 2009 and 2010 Boise teams and compare them to their recruiting rankings and then reference the above chart, you'll come to some interesting conclusions.
Also, if you look at the 2013 recruiting class that had an average rating of 87.22, that would imply that 13% of those 22 recruits should have made the NFL. That's just under 3 NFL players. Where are we right now? Seven, with a chance to get to nine or ten, depending on whether some of the free agents stick?
And yes, I know it was shtick. I am just in focused nerd mode right now. Sorry.
That was a Petersen class when he didnt have the pressure and access to all 4-5 star kids. That class was littered with nfl players. I sometimes wonder if Petersen wishes he could recruit his old way and rely on his eye for talent and the staffs development.
I think you're referring to 2014 not 2013 but your premise lies on the faulty assumption that the 2014 results are repeatable. And you're also assuming that the 2017 and 2018 classes won't be as successful despite being better on paper- that is yet to be determined.
Yeah but still........