Teams that are better than their recruiting

Strangely enough I was planning to start compiling this very data, and then I saw this article.



http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--4KXgZ_X3--/v8oln0qsi9qkmfs3jg0d.jpg" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">



http://regressing.deadspin.com/chart-which-ncaa-football-teams-outplay-their-recruit-1640831522/+benes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It confirms some of the data that I have compiled.



Scout and Rivals have their recruiting rankings going back to 2002. I decided take each season from 2006 to present and see where BYU stands compared to their opponents strictly by looking at 5 year relative recruiting ranking averages. For example, BYU's overall average recruiting rating from 2002-2006 on Scout.com was 52. On Rivals during the same time period it was 68. Therefore their average recruiting rating for the 2006 schedule was 60. I went through BYU's and all their opponents' 5 year recruiting ranking from the 2006 season to present. Here are the results:



2006- BYU average recruiting ranking 60



@Arizona 32 L

N Oregon 34 W

@ BC 44 L

@ TCU 68 W

SDSU 68 W

@Utah 74 W

@CSU 78 W

Tulsa 82 W

UNLV 82 W

NM 91 W

USU 92 W

Wyo 96 W

@AF 110 W



2007- BYU average recruiting ranking 62



@UCLA 31 L

N UCLA 31 W

Arizona 36 W

@SDSU 67 W

TCU 70 W

Utah 71 W

CSU 84 W

@ UNLV 84 W

@Tulsa 86 L

@NM 91 W

@Wyo 97 W

AF 109 W

Eastern Washington NA W



2008- BYU average recruiting ranking 59



UCLA 25 W

@ Washington 36 W

N Arizona 36 L

@Utah 65 L

SDSU 74 W

@TCU 77 L

@CSU 88 W

UNLV 90 W

NM 95 W

Wyo 96 W

@Utah St. 99 W

@AF 106 W

Northern Iowa NA W



2009- BYU average recruiting ranking 56



N Oklahoma 11 W

FSU 12 L

N Oregon St. 48 W

Utah 61 W

TCU 72 L

@SDSU 83 W

@UNLV 87 W

@NM 93 W

@Wyoming 94 W

CSU 95 W

@Tulane 96 W

USU 105 W

AF 108 W



2010- BYU recruiting average ranking 51



@FSU 13 L

Washington 35 W

@Utah 56 L

@TCU 71 L

SDSU 85 W

UNLV 90 W

@CSU 90 W

N UTEP 92 W

NM 93 W

Nevada 96 L

Wyo 97 W

@AF 104 L

@USU 107 L



2011- BYU recruiting average ranking 52



@Texas 6 L

@Miss 24 W

@Oregon St. 51 W

Utah 52 L

UCF 57 W

N TCU 63 L

@Hawaii 79 W

N Tulsa 80 W

SJSU 101 W

Idaho 102 W

USU 103 W

NMSU 108 W

Idaho St. NA W



2012- BYU recruiting average ranking 54



@ND 14 L

@Utah 45 L

@GT 45 W

Oregon St. 51 L

Washington St. 67 W

@BSU 69 L

Hawaii 83 W

@SDSU 85 W

@SJSU 100 L

Idaho 104 W

USU 106 W

@NMSU 108 W

Weber St. NA W



2013- BYU average recruiting ranking 54



Texas 8 W

@ND 14 L

N Washington 30 L

@Virginia 39 L

Utah 42 L

@Wisconsin 51 L

GT 52 W

@Houston 59 W

BSU 65 W

Nevada 100 W

MTSU 102 W

@Utah State 106 W

Idaho St. NA W



2014- BYU average recruiting ranking 58



@Texas 10 W

@Cal 28

Virginia 41 W

Houston 63 W

BSU 64

@ UCF 72

@UConn 85 W

Nevada 95

MTSU 98

UNLV 104

USU 105



Overall record 80-28

Overall record vs. inferior talent: 56-10

Overall record vs. similar talent (+/- 10 in the rankings): 13-6

Overall record vs. superior talent: 11-12

This seems like a fantastic metric for evaluating a coaching staff. If you're better than your recruiting, it means 1) you can find talent the scouts undervalue, 2) you can coach up inferior talent to play at a higher level, and/or 3) your game prep and scheme puts your inferior talent in a position to win against superior talent.

Fascinating...So the farther away from the line the better the coaching, minus recruiting? I mean coaches have to recruit well and even if you coach to the line, like Alabama but recruit as well as they do, then you still come out ok, yes?

The problem for teams like Alabama is that when you always have the best recruiting class, the only direction for you to go is down. There's no way to outperform your recruiting rank by double digits like BYU or Navy can if your recruiting rank is in the top 10.



Another really interesting thing would be to track movement over time with the same 5 year rolling average, so we could see which direction teams are headed. For example, I would expect Virginia to be on the upswing, and Michigan about to nose dive, and sharp direction changes to correlate well with coaching changes.



A couple of surprising things:

* USC is still one of the best at recruiting, despite the scholarship restrictions, post-season ban, and Lane Kiffin

* Penn State is in the top 25 of recruiting, despite the fact that their post-season ban was only lifted this season

* USC has out-recruited Oregon and Stanford, yet those two have ruled the Pac-12 for years now.

* Look at the data for Utah St. and Nevada vs. Cal. I'd probably still take Cal over either of those two this season, but those are two incredible polar opposites. And in the period in question, Cal did play and lose to Nevada - twice.

Good thing we dumped Jake Heaps onto Miami! Hah! Suckers!

redneckjedi wrote:
This seems like a fantastic metric for evaluating a coaching staff. If you're better than your recruiting, it means 1) you can find talent the scouts undervalue, 2) you can coach up inferior talent to play at a higher level, and/or 3) your game prep and scheme puts your inferior talent in a position to win against superior talent.

It also shows where bias is in terms of scouting rankings or lack of scouting coverage.



However, in terms of production... getting more out of less means when you get more... they should flourish...yet the jake heaps, ross apo ryker mathews have not directly led to success on the field.. however when you consistently recruit those 4-5 star guys, enough of them pan out to be on the oregon, alabama metric, but certainly not without at least a coach with half a clue...



No surprise to see Miami, Texas, Michigan, USC and UCLA far below the line.. they have hired halfwits in the past to coach their teams.