ADVERTISEMENT

Recruiting gurus...

ru4nu2win

All-American
May 2, 2006
4,016
1,128
113
rivals, 247, scout, how do these guys miss on sooooo many prospects? It’s easy to spot a 5 star but how many friggin 4 stars are duds? Just at NU alone at the top of my head: Guy Thomas, Mikale Wilbon, Adam Taylor, all the Calabass kids, Jalin Barnett, Avery Anderson, Eric Lee, Raridon, Lindsey, McQuity etc just to name a few. How tough is it? I think some of these “scouts” need to start attending more high school games in person instead of basing their ratings on the ones that come to their camps. Nearly all of Iowa’s entire team consists of 3 and 2 star players. You see teams like Boise, Wash St., Utah, etc that are never in the top tier of recruiting and consistently compete. Are we being sold a false bill of goods by these services?
 
And yet, teams with consistent top 5/10 recruiting classes are the ones who win or are playing for national titles. When you are talking 3000-4000 kids in a recruiting database, there are going to be misses. For the most part, they get it pretty much right when you are talking about recruiting as a whole.
 
And yet, teams with consistent top 5/10 recruiting classes are the ones who win or are playing for national titles. When you are talking 3000-4000 kids in a recruiting database, there are going to be misses. For the most part, they get it pretty much right when you are talking about recruiting as a whole.
I'd trade Nebraska's last four classes with Alabama's any day.;)
 
How often does Iowa win a conference championship? How often do Wash St. or Utah, win conference championships? Boise does because the play in a poor conference. Recruiting matters. Just look at the Power 5 conference champions for the past however many years. If you want to play with the big boys, you have to recruit the big boys.
 
And yet, teams with consistent top 5/10 recruiting classes I are the ones who win or are playing for national titles. When you are talking 3000-4000 kids in a recruiting database, there are going to be misses. For the most part, they get it pretty much right when you are talking about recruiting as a whole.
As I said above, it’s easy to spot 5 star talent, and them are the teams that are winning and finishing in the top ten in recruiting, I could do that from my couch.
 
And yet, teams with consistent top 5/10 recruiting classes are the ones who win or are playing for national titles. When you are talking 3000-4000 kids in a recruiting database, there are going to be misses. For the most part, they get it pretty much right when you are talking about recruiting as a whole.

do they get it right or do they just follow the crowd? I could rate Saban's classes 4 and 5 stars without attending a game and have a pretty high hit rate.
 
do they get it right or do they just follow the crowd? I could rate Saban's classes 4 and 5 stars without attending a game and have a pretty high hit rate.

I think when you're Alabama or Clemson, the 5 stars come to you. And even if they don't, they are at the point that they can come in late and get pretty much whomever they want. But, to be able to build the powerhouses, you have to be able to recognize the talent. Saban and Dabo didn't exactly inherit powerhouses.
 
rivals, 247, scout, how do these guys miss on sooooo many prospects? It’s easy to spot a 5 star but how many friggin 4 stars are duds? Just at NU alone at the top of my head: Guy Thomas, Mikale Wilbon, Adam Taylor, all the Calabass kids, Jalin Barnett, Avery Anderson, Eric Lee, Raridon, Lindsey, McQuity etc just to name a few. How tough is it? I think some of these “scouts” need to start attending more high school games in person instead of basing their ratings on the ones that come to their camps. Nearly all of Iowa’s entire team consists of 3 and 2 star players. You see teams like Boise, Wash St., Utah, etc that are never in the top tier of recruiting and consistently compete. Are we being sold a false bill of goods by these services?
Some teams are real good at developing a system and if things stay consistent with coaching staffs, it makes a big difference for a 2 or 3 star to develop in that system.

Most of this 4 star recruiting stuff, is a mixture of guys peaking in high school, against lesser talent, evaluated by guys who have no clue what they are looking at. Kids that don't know what they want to do. There is a huge mix of things going on, and that makes it a crapshoot.
 
I think it’s hard to evaluate work ethic and desire. A lot of these kids have talent. But very few can succeed in a major way at the college level based on talent alone. Again, this isn’t a video game. Preparation, work ethic, understanding assignments/scheme, and perseverance all have a huge role in these kids turning into good players.
 
Most of this 4 star recruiting stuff, is a mixture of guys peaking in high school, against lesser talent, evaluated by guys who have no clue what they are looking at.

I'm trying to remember where I read it, might have been a post on here back in the day, but there was in interesting breakdown of what typically separated a 5* prospect from a 4*. Paraphrasing, it went something like this...

5* player has elite skills and elite/ideal measurables.

4* players fall into 2 groups: Elite skills with one or more measurables less than ideal (can include grade concerns) OR Elite measurables while raw in the skill department.

I know it's more complicated than that in the grand scheme, but I've found it to be pretty accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: baseball31ne
And yet, teams with consistent top 5/10 recruiting classes are the ones who win or are playing for national titles. When you are talking 3000-4000 kids in a recruiting database, there are going to be misses. For the most part, they get it pretty much right when you are talking about recruiting as a whole.
Which leads to the question, can a team win a NC without consistently getting recruiting rankings in the top 5 or 10 now days? If the answer is no, can NEB consistently get those top classes?
 
Which leads to the question, can a team win a NC without consistently getting recruiting rankings in the top 5 or 10 now days? If the answer is no, can NEB consistently get those top classes?

It's an interesting debate. There seems to be quite a gulf between the classes in the top 5 of the country and those that are in the 20-35 range. If you don't have the classes in the top 5-10 of the country, then you need things to come together (have guys overperform, stay in school, favorable schedule, etc.).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bold Words
I'm trying to remember where I read it, might have been a post on here back in the day, but there was in interesting breakdown of what typically separated a 5* prospect from a 4*. Paraphrasing, it went something like this...

5* player has elite skills and elite/ideal measurables.

4* players fall into 2 groups: Elite skills with one or more measurables less than ideal (can include grade concerns) OR Elite measurables while raw in the skill department.

I know it's more complicated than that in the grand scheme, but I've found it to be pretty accurate.
That could be one formula, but measurables are either changing all the time or being lied about. How tall is a player and how much does he weigh is still in flux, and while they do get some timed #'s at school and camps.. those numbers change as well. I'm not sure any measurables are that reliable when it comes to recruits still in HS.
 
The people that argue against stars being important are probably the same type of folks who don't believe in evolution, still think the earth is flat, or still think climate change is a myth.


.. or don’t understand basic weather causes and blame ominous man made forces and truly believe we are monkey’s uncles...and apparently have figured out how to make sentient life from inanimate material.
 
Which leads to the question, can a team win a NC without consistently getting recruiting rankings in the top 5 or 10 now days? If the answer is no, can NEB consistently get those top classes?
I posted a thread last winter with the 5 class recruiting rankings of the last 10(or so) of the national champions and i think every one had at least 1 class in the top 5 and some had multiple classes. I will see if I can find it.
 
I posted a thread last winter with the 5 class recruiting rankings of the last 10(or so) of the national champions and i think every one had at least 1 class in the top 5 and some had multiple classes. I will see if I can find it.

that can just as easily be interpreted to mean that traditional powers, recruiting in the best HS talent areas with a history of winning get the players they want and win a lot of games.

Do recruiting gurus find the players or figure out who Alabama and others are recruiting?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GILL T
Some teams are real good at developing a system and if things stay consistent with coaching staffs, it makes a big difference for a 2 or 3 star to develop in that system.

Most of this 4 star recruiting stuff, is a mixture of guys peaking in high school, against lesser talent, evaluated by guys who have no clue what they are looking at. Kids that don't know what they want to do. There is a huge mix of things going on, and that makes it a crapshoot.

I tend to agree with you and the bolded is where I think Texas got in trouble. There was a time when they had the pick of who they wanted in the state and had their classes finished up early. I don't wonder if a lot of those kids had peaked early and pretty much maxed out their talent dueto the fact of what football has become in Texas and they train year around. They get to Texas and don't get any better because they had reached their ceiling. Maybe I am wrong, but that's the way it seemed to me.
 
that can just as easily be interpreted to mean that traditional powers, recruiting in the best HS talent areas with a history of winning get the players they want and win a lot of games.

Do recruiting gurus find the players or figure out who Alabama and others are recruiting?
Yes and no. Clemson is a good example of a team who had fairly mediocre recruiting results, but then started having consistent top 5/10 classes the last few years and then win a natty as a result. Look, I'm sure who players have comfortable offers from does factor in to an extent, but as someone else said, those top schools(Bama, OSU, Clemson, etc) didn't always recruit this way. It could easily be said, do top recruits go to those schools because they want to play with other top recruits?
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheBeav815
Here is what I posted last winter, from around the national championship game. Obviously, you need coaching too, but I found these numbers interesting.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I was interested to see what type of recruiting classes that it takes to win a national title today, so I went back and looked at the last 10 national champions. I took rivals rankings and used their last 5 recruiting classes.

2016 Clemson(6,4,13,14,14) Avg: 10.2
2015 Alabama(2,1,1,1,1) Avg: 1.2
2014 Ohio State(3,2,4,11,25) Avg: 9
2013 Florida State(10,6,2,10,7) Avg: 7
2012 Alabama(1,1,5,1,1) Avg: 1.8
2011 Alabama(1,5,1,1,10) Avg: 3.6
2010 Auburn(4,19,20,7,10) Avg: 12
2009 Alabama(1,1,10,11,18) Avg: 8.2
2008 Florida(3,1,2,15,7) Avg: 5.6
2007 LSU(4,7,22,2,1) Avg: 7.2
Average ranking of Nat'l Champs: 6.58

The average class ranking of the last 10 is 6.58.There are multiple number 1 classes with Alabama having most of them. Each team had at least 1 top 5 class and at least 2 top ten classes.

Then, I wondered what it takes to be able to play in the CFB Playoff. We have now had the playoff for 4 years. Here is what I found out using the 5 prior class rankings:

2014(Average 8.6)
Oregon(26,22,16,9,13) Avg 17.2
Ohio St(3,2,4,11,25) Avg: 9
FSU(4,10,6,2,10) Avg: 6.4
Bama(1,1,1,1,5) Avg: 1.8

2015(Average ranking 14.2)
Clemson(4,13,14,14,8) Avg: 10.6
Bama(2,1,1,1,1) Avg: 1.2
OU(14,15,15,11,14) Avg: 13.8
Mich St(22,22,40,41,31) Avg 31.2

2016(Average Ranking 11)
Clemson(6,4,13,14,14) Avg: 10.2
Bama(1,2,1,1,1) Avg 1.2
Ohio St(3,9,3,2,4) Avg 4.2
Washington(37,30,36,18,21) Avg: 28.4

2017(Average Ranking 7.7)
OU(7,16,14,15,15) Avg: 10.4
Clemson(22,6,4,13,14) Avg: 11.8
Georgia(3,9,6,7,12) Avg: 7.4
Bama(1,1,2,1,1) Avg: 1.2

Obviously it is a little easier to make the playoff as the average recruiting classes are about 10. MSU and Washington showed that you can get there with "average" classes. The playoff definitely has made it harder to win National Titles today. Wisconsin is trying to buck that trend with their system. They do a pretty good job of recruiting to their system and committing to their system. They do have conference championships to show for it. As a Husker fan right now, I would love to have their level of success they have had recently. But, the trend is against them to win a natty if you look at the latest numbers.
 
Here is what I posted last winter, from around the national championship game. Obviously, you need coaching too, but I found these numbers interesting.
---------------------------------------------------------------
I was interested to see what type of recruiting classes that it takes to win a national title today, so I went back and looked at the last 10 national champions. I took rivals rankings and used their last 5 recruiting classes.

2016 Clemson(6,4,13,14,14) Avg: 10.2
2015 Alabama(2,1,1,1,1) Avg: 1.2
2014 Ohio State(3,2,4,11,25) Avg: 9
2013 Florida State(10,6,2,10,7) Avg: 7
2012 Alabama(1,1,5,1,1) Avg: 1.8
2011 Alabama(1,5,1,1,10) Avg: 3.6
2010 Auburn(4,19,20,7,10) Avg: 12
2009 Alabama(1,1,10,11,18) Avg: 8.2
2008 Florida(3,1,2,15,7) Avg: 5.6
2007 LSU(4,7,22,2,1) Avg: 7.2
Average ranking of Nat'l Champs: 6.58

The average class ranking of the last 10 is 6.58.There are multiple number 1 classes with Alabama having most of them. Each team had at least 1 top 5 class and at least 2 top ten classes.

Then, I wondered what it takes to be able to play in the CFB Playoff. We have now had the playoff for 4 years. Here is what I found out using the 5 prior class rankings:

2014(Average 8.6)
Oregon(26,22,16,9,13) Avg 17.2
Ohio St(3,2,4,11,25) Avg: 9
FSU(4,10,6,2,10) Avg: 6.4
Bama(1,1,1,1,5) Avg: 1.8

2015(Average ranking 14.2)
Clemson(4,13,14,14,8) Avg: 10.6
Bama(2,1,1,1,1) Avg: 1.2
OU(14,15,15,11,14) Avg: 13.8
Mich St(22,22,40,41,31) Avg 31.2

2016(Average Ranking 11)
Clemson(6,4,13,14,14) Avg: 10.2
Bama(1,2,1,1,1) Avg 1.2
Ohio St(3,9,3,2,4) Avg 4.2
Washington(37,30,36,18,21) Avg: 28.4

2017(Average Ranking 7.7)
OU(7,16,14,15,15) Avg: 10.4
Clemson(22,6,4,13,14) Avg: 11.8
Georgia(3,9,6,7,12) Avg: 7.4
Bama(1,1,2,1,1) Avg: 1.2

Obviously it is a little easier to make the playoff as the average recruiting classes are about 10. MSU and Washington showed that you can get there with "average" classes. The playoff definitely has made it harder to win National Titles today. Wisconsin is trying to buck that trend with their system. They do a pretty good job of recruiting to their system and committing to their system. They do have conference championships to show for it. As a Husker fan right now, I would love to have their level of success they have had recently. But, the trend is against them to win a natty if you look at the latest numbers.

a while back I compiled a list of teams who had won national titles without being in one of the big HS talent states or in an adjacent state. The list was tiny - Us, Colorado, Washington, BYU, and Minnesota pretty much. Washington cheated, Colorado was disputed, BYU was a joke. Minnesota was 1960. Only Nebraska had done it more than once.

If we use the same model that Alabama uses, we'll lose every time due to the fact that they have structural advantages we can't negate. We have to be more creative and get more from what we have than any of the others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GILL T and kakdawg
rivals, 247, scout, how do these guys miss on sooooo many prospects? It’s easy to spot a 5 star but how many friggin 4 stars are duds? Just at NU alone at the top of my head: Guy Thomas, Mikale Wilbon, Adam Taylor, all the Calabass kids, Jalin Barnett, Avery Anderson, Eric Lee, Raridon, Lindsey, McQuity etc just to name a few. How tough is it? I think some of these “scouts” need to start attending more high school games in person instead of basing their ratings on the ones that come to their camps. Nearly all of Iowa’s entire team consists of 3 and 2 star players. You see teams like Boise, Wash St., Utah, etc that are never in the top tier of recruiting and consistently compete. Are we being sold a false bill of goods by these services?

I think they have “missed” on a disproportionate amount of neb players bc the development of talent has been so poor in the last 7 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: red scowl
You won't find a team since rankings have been widely tracked who didn't have elite recruiting leading up to the title.

If you can't understand that stars matter then you don't understand how statistics work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GretnaShawn
.. or don’t understand basic weather causes and blame ominous man made forces
Here in SoCal I don't notice it too much, but back in NE last week for the MSU game it was evident. Very cold and snow flurries during game, then 50 degrees and nice the next day. I looked at Mrs. HuskerWed and said, yup, the climate changed from Saturday to Sunday. She surmised the climate has been changing for the last several billion years or so, even before the Flintstones started making man made changes. I couldn't wait to get home to fire up my SUVs in hopes of making it change some more.
 
We can't change the past of Bo and Riley recruits. You still want to go after the most talented players but also want to have a strong belief that you will get players that will put in the work. Let's focus on Frost recruits going forward. Martinez and Washington are off to great starts. Most the recruits will redshirt. We will not know for a few years if the class seems worth their rating or is a bust. I have faith that more guys will improve than not going forward. It helps that Nebraska lifts weights again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TennesseeHusker75
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT