Recruiting Class 2015

http://byu.scout.com/a.z?s=338&p=9&c=4&yr=2015" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



We have committments from #3, 4 and 6. Good chance at #2, 5, 7 and 9.

Most years, it seems we have gotten some last minute disappointments due to defections. Last year was just the opposite. We had some folks come from out of nowhere, seemingly. Seniors who already graduated and that can play right away. Returned missionaries who had a change of heart. JC transfers. Pleasant surprises.



Much could depend on what Taysom Hill and J Swag do at the end of this year. I could see anyone that is in a position to play immediately like a stud freshman, RM, graduated senior or JC transfer deciding that This Is The Place!



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

http://lawlessrepublic.com/2014/09/27/byu-recruiting-class-2015-big-board-3-0/?utm_source=FanSided&utm_medium=Network&utm_campaign=Trending%20on%20FS" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Nice write-up on our class and prospects.

Is Ieremia related to the defensive tackle that used to play for BYU? I think his name was Mikelly.

What do Rivals, Scout, 24x7, and others think about our class and Utah's class. All I care anymore is that we beat Utah every year in recruiting.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

59 Brigham Young 12 0 0 12 83.87 135.89

65 Utah 12 0 0 11 83.02 127.73

Per 247 Sports



#74 Utah 12 0 0 8 2.67 660

#77 Brigham Young 10 0 0 6 2.6 600

Per Rivals



66. Brigham Young 10 Indep 753 0 0 1 7 2 8 0 9 1 2.90

68. Utah 12 Pac-12 737 0 0 0 10 8 3 1 11 1 2.83

Per Scout

Average - Actually - Median - would be 61.5, which means:



Utah is below the Median according to all three services.



Scout and Rivals show BYU as below the Median, again.



24X7 Shows BYU slightly above the Median.



Average no matter how you look at it.



Wait.....I only cared that we are better than Utah so we do not have to hear Ute Trolls yap about stars - bad enough listening to them yap about P5, and PA 12. Out recruiting them will eventually resolve the constant yapping about NFL draft as well.



The good news, if any, in all of this on-going mediocrity, is that this is about where BYU is usually ranked, but Utah, after riding up in recruiting for a decade or so, is slipping back almost, but not quite, to where they used to be before Meyer.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

We just got #5 Ieremia who committed to BYU today via Twitter

Cougarbib wrote:
Average - Actually - Median - would be 61.5, which means:



Utah is below the Median according to all three services.



Scout and Rivals show BYU as below the Median, again.



24X7 Shows BYU slightly above the Median.



Average no matter how you look at it.



Wait.....I only cared that we are better than Utah so we do not have to hear Ute Trolls yap about stars - bad enough listening to them yap about P5, and PA 12. Out recruiting them will eventually resolve the constant yapping about NFL draft as well.



The good news, if any, in all of this on-going mediocrity, is that this is about where BYU is usually ranked, but Utah, after riding up in recruiting for a decade or so, is slipping back almost, but not quite, to where they used to be before Meyer.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

There is one big flaw in these recruiting ratings; number of signed players. It hurt us last year as well. Byu will sign another relatively small class this year as well which will hurt our overall score.

A better indicator would be to just look at the recruits we do land. An average star ranking would be closer to reality. Byu imo is getting better average players. By that I mean more 3 star guys and less 2 star guys. We always were able to land 1-2 4 star guys per class but we usually had a good amount of 2 star guys. Now it seems like we still get the 1-2 4 star but are landing many more 3 star guys. As well as top 100 3 star guys.

It is not a flaw over the long haul. Class size varies for all schools. This is right about where BYU usually lands regardless of class size. I agree that we have swapped some s2 out for 3s to an extent.



But ever year some fans want to rationalize the result. As long as we do not let Utah beat us in recruiting, head to head games, and NFL draft, all of which are directly correlated to recruiting, I am happy enough with the result and who BYU is on and off the field.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I think we need a 3A star and 3B star ranking. I think we are getting better quality 3 star athletes.

You know your recruiting class is pretty average when it needs annual rationalization.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib wrote:
You know your recruiting class is pretty average when it needs annual rationalization.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

It's not rationalization it's clarification.

What is the reason for Byu's small recruiting classes of 14' and 15'? I'll give you a hint, it isn't a problem any other school deals with. MISSIONS.



It's context more than anything. Looking at the average star ranking lets you know the quality of players, not the quantity of such players.



Looking at 2015 Byu is currently 62nd(ave star 2.91) Utah is 63rd(ave star 2.79)



That average star ranking puts them as the 45th best average. (utah 57th) If you were to add in the number of recruits to the equation it puts Byu at 62. So because Byu has a lot of missionaries coming back they have a smaller class which hurt it's ranking. The talent is there but because some wait 2 years they ranking is hurt. How is that a fair or accurate rating?

To get the best IMO you'd add return missionaries to a recruiting class.

With the new commitment today our rank raised to #54 from 59 at 247 sports



54 Brigham Young 13 0 0 13 83.97 143.36

With the new commitment today our rank raised to #54 from 59 at 247 sports, #77 to 71 on Rivals and, #65 to #62 on Scout.

St George



We sign many recruits every year that go straight out on a mission and thus are less constrained by the missionary factor than you think. The missionaries coming back in these years were counted when they signed before their missions and we got full credit for every one of them and we're still average.



These early rankings are meaningless, because as we saw last year, we pulled some scholarships out of the proverbial hat since some signees headed straight on missions and we signed some extra guys at the last minute. Still pretty aversge, though.



I will be happy as long as we beat Utah every year in recruiting, every time we play them on the firld, and in players who get drafted in the NFL. It starts with the recruiting battle - then the rest follows. Worry not, however, every single missionary coming back was counted in a previous average class and missionaries heading straight out will be counted in this one. No need to try to count them twice - that would be double counting. The success and excitement this season may have some last minute lift to this class and BYU knows how to find scholarships. Took a few away from 5th year guys last year. For example.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

29m

Geoff Martzen @geoffmartzen

This official we just scheduled is going to turn some heads! Coaches are killing it right now! Winning makes it easy

Retweeted by Jarom Jordan

ExpandReplyRetweetFavorite



Any ideas who this might be?

Cougarbib wrote:
St George



We sign many recruits every year that go straight out on a mission and thus are less constrained by the missionary factor than you think. The missionaries coming back in these years were counted when they signed before their missions and we got full credit for every one of them and we're still average.



These early rankings are meaningless, because as we saw last year, we pulled some scholarships out of the proverbial hat since some signees headed straight on missions and we signed some extra guys at the last minute. Still pretty aversge, though.



I will be happy as long as we beat Utah every year in recruiting, every time we play them on the firld, and in players who get drafted in the NFL. It starts with the recruiting battle - then the rest follows. Worry not, however, every single missionary coming back was counted in a previous average class and missionaries heading straight out will be counted in this one. No need to try to count them twice - that would be double counting. The success and excitement this season may have some last minute lift to this class and BYU knows how to find scholarships. Took a few away from 5th year guys last year. For example.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

My comments were all about perspective when looking at recruiting rankings, nothing more. I personally believe that average star ranking is a better indicator for BYU than the point system is.

A point system says were are ranked in the 60's(average) Average star ranking puts us in the 40's (slightly above average)

Missionaries dictate how many kids we sign per class. No double counting, just an accurate look at at how strong a class really is.

If you want to get all excited in a year where more missionaries come home than go out that year thus constraining that recruiting class - fine. Average stars should be higher the smaller the class because you can be really picky. But just go back 2 years ago and you will find that the average star approach will have the opposite effect on that class when more went out than came home. It all washes out. Just a timing issue if you try to look at just one year in isolation. Whichever number you like to use, use it to adjust every year - up some years down other years - and you still get a trend that is very average.



Take an extreme example. Say we had 12 scholarship players graduate this year. 12 openings. But 6 new recruits in this class go straight on missions. 18 openings. And a couple of current scholarship players decide to go on missions. 20 openings. But a huge influx of 19 returning missionary scholarship players comes back due to the 19/18 year old adjustment 2 years ago. BAM 1 opening. Now let's say we go all out and land Porter Agustin. BAM. Average Stars 4. Pretty impressive. But, so what. Go back to the 35 players signed 2 years ago with a 2.5 star average and that is much more indicative of your team talent.



But do it either way - consistently - over a 3-5 year trend and you get the same answer - average

Obviously the average ranking means squat. With a consistently average recruiting ranking, the Cougars are in the top-25 on a regular basis. We want to get the best recruits possible. But more importantly, we want them to perform once the get here.