Minnesota Football Recruiting (since 2004)

Donate To GopherHole
M

Monty519

Active member
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
4,208
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Let me preface this: I KNOW STARS DON'T MATTER!!!!!!!

But this is about recruiting, so, I'm going with it. I don't know why I felt compelled to do this, I guess just got to wondering about it after all the outcries about how we're back to Mason-like recruiting again and all of that. I just wanted to see how many "quality" type players we're really getting now, vs. before. So I looked up all of the listed signed recruits rated 5.6 or higher on Rivals since 2004, just to kinda see what's up. I picked 5.6 because I know there's iffy stuff when it comes to the 5.5 guys. Usually 5.6 means they were at least evaluated, at least that's my thought. And I'm well aware, there are guys rated lower who turn out to be beasts and I do note some of the others who were in the class, but I just wanted to look at what's going on with our recruiting the last seven classes. I feel like maybe we've lost some perspective on how we were previously recruiting vs. how we have been recruiting the last few years.

2004 - 1 (Class rank: 58th nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.25)
Leland Jones (5.6)

Following the nice 2003 class and the season we had that year, recruiting for this season is kinda disappointing. We could have really built off that momentum, but doesn't seem like it worked that way.
Others: Dom Barber (5.5), Jack Simmons (5.5), Justin Kucek, (5.2), Deon Hightower (5.1), Gary Russell (5.1), Willie VanDeSteeg (5.1)


2005 - 1 (Class rank: 55th nationally, 10th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.67)
Alex Daniels (5.9)

We all know what happened with him, tough one to lose.
Others: Steve Davis (5.5), Dominic Jones (5.5), Ned Tavale (5.5), Jay Thomas (5.5), Nate Triplett (5.5), Eric Decker (5.3), Matt Stommes (5.0)


2006 - 4 (Class rank: 62nd nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.33)
Jamar Howard (5.6), Robert McField (5.6), Sean McWhirther (5.6), Terrence Sherrer (5.6)

Did any of these guys stick? I can't recall.
Others: Garrett Brown (5.5), DJ Burris (5.5), Adam Weber (5.5), Dom Alford (5.3), Eric Ellestad (4.9), Lee Campbell (2 stars, no RR)


2007 - 6 (Class rank: 57th nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.46)
Anthony Jacobs (5.8), Clint Brewster (5.7), Andre Tate' (5.7), Curtis Thomas (5.7), Trey Davis (5.6), Ryan Orton (5.6)

Odd class with Brew coming in late and all that. Jacobs could be a big contributor this year possibly. Davis and Orton have been good contributors.
Others: Chris Bunders (5.5), Ryan Collado (5.5), Duane Bennett (5.4), Eric Small (5.4), Ryan Wynn (5.3), Kyle Theret (5.1)


2008 - 15 (Class rank: 17th nationally, 3rd Big Ten, Avg. Star: 3.07)
MarQueis Gray (5.9), Keanon Cooper (5.8), Brandon Green (5.8), Vince Hill (5.8), Sam Maresh (5.8), David Pittman - JUCO (5.8), Traye Simmons - JUCO (5.8), Jewhan Edwards (5.7), Spencer Reeves (5.7), Broderick Smith (5.7), Kevin Whaley (5.7), Tramaine Brock (5.6), Eric Lair (5.6), Simoni Lawrence (5.6), Rex Sharpe - JUCO (5.6)

We know the deal with this class, obviously the best lot we've had. If you take away the guys who were JUCOs or left prematurely, the number dips to 7.
Others: Deleon Eskridge (5.5), Brandon Kirksey (5.5), Cedric McKinley - JUCO (5.5), Troy Stoudermire (5.5), Gary Tinsley (5.5), D.L. Wilhite (5.5), Da'Jon McKnight (5.3)


2009 - 15 (Class rank: 39th nationally, 6th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 3.05)
Hayo Carpenter - JUCO (5.9), Michael Carter (5.9), Hasan Lipscomb (5.8), Moses Alipate (5.7), Bryant Allen (5.7), Josh Campion (5.7), Matt Garin (5.7), Kendall Gregory-McGhee (5.7), Ra'Shede Hageman (5.7), Kerry Lewis (5.7), Joey Searcy (5.7), Victor Keise (5.6), Ed Olson (5.6), Brent Singleton (5.6), Kenny Watkins (5.6)

I think this class is underrated. There's some real potential great players in this class, despite its smaller size. Plus, 13 are still in the program and have chances to make great contributions to the program.
Others: Jeff Wills - JUCO (5.5), Dan Orseske (5.3)


2010 - 12 (Class rank: 50th nationally, 6th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.92)
Lamonte Edwards (5.8), Jimmy Gjere (5.8), Tom Parish (5.7), Marquise Hill (5.6), Donnell Kirkwood (5.6), Marek Lenkiewicz (5.6), Christyn Lewis - JUCO (5.6), James Manuel (5.6), Jon Ragoo (5.6), Josh Tauaefa (5.6), Herschel Thornton (5.6), Brock Vereen (5.6)

It's funny that we actually were only 3 less 5.6 commits in 2010 than in the previous two years. The issue really is we didn't have as many higher level guys, only three over 5.6. But I think this is still an actually pretty good class, and is a vast improvement over the past. There's still work to be done, Brewster needs to get on that field and have some great success so we can parlay that into grabbing more of those highly recruited "studs", so this program can really go to another level.

I just think that people need to relax a little bit, realize that this was going to be a process, and just watch these young kids develop and see if they can be the difference for Gopher football. As frustrating as last year was, you can't deny that there is a lot of nice young talent in this program right now, and I'd stress for people to be a little more patient. The last two years, yes, we're a .500 program, but these young kids haven't even gotten a real chance to make their mark and people are ready to dismiss them. This is a sentiment that has been echoed many times on these boards, but you know, Brewster may, or may not work out, but we have to at least give him a true chance to prove himself with this crop of players he is bringing in.

Okay, I'm done now haha, just wanted to get that out there. You can rip it to shreds or whatever.
 

Monty519 said:
Okay, I'm done now haha, just wanted to get that out there. You can rip it to shreds or whatever.
Click to expand...

Wow, you are waaay too level-headed to be posting in this forum! Great post, in my opinion.
 

W/ the 2008 class mostly juniors and redshirt-sophomores, no better time than now to get it revved up. Difficult schedule be damned, lets win 4 or 5 Big Ten games.
 




Excellent post, I feel the exact same way about the program. Thanks for providing all those stats and numbers, it's interesting to look through some of older names and realize they never did a thing for us. I'm really starting to get excited to hear about spring ball battles, and fall ball position winners, there are some talented players who will be fighting for starting spots. And I for sure am all Jacked up for MTSU!
 

Monty519 said:
Let me preface this: I KNOW STARS DON'T MATTER!!!!!!!

But this is about recruiting, so, I'm going with it. I don't know why I felt compelled to do this, I guess just got to wondering about it after all the outcries about how we're back to Mason-like recruiting again and all of that. I just wanted to see how many "quality" type players we're really getting now, vs. before. So I looked up all of the listed signed recruits rated 5.6 or higher on Rivals since 2004, just to kinda see what's up. I picked 5.6 because I know there's iffy stuff when it comes to the 5.5 guys. Usually 5.6 means they were at least evaluated, at least that's my thought. And I'm well aware, there are guys rated lower who turn out to be beasts and I do note some of the others who were in the class, but I just wanted to look at what's going on with our recruiting the last seven classes. I feel like maybe we've lost some perspective on how we were previously recruiting vs. how we have been recruiting the last few years.

2004 - 1 (Class rank: 58th nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.25)
Leland Jones (5.6)

Following the nice 2003 class and the season we had that year, recruiting for this season is kinda disappointing. We could have really built off that momentum, but doesn't seem like it worked that way.
Others: Dom Barber (5.5), Jack Simmons (5.5), Justin Kucek, (5.2), Deon Hightower (5.1), Gary Russell (5.1), Willie VanDeSteeg (5.1)


2005 - 1 (Class rank: 55th nationally, 10th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.67)
Alex Daniels (5.9)

We all know what happened with him, tough one to lose.
Others: Steve Davis (5.5), Dominic Jones (5.5), Ned Tavale (5.5), Jay Thomas (5.5), Nate Triplett (5.5), Eric Decker (5.3), Matt Stommes (5.0)


2006 - 4 (Class rank: 62nd nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.33)
Jamar Howard (5.6), Robert McField (5.6), Sean McWhirther (5.6), Terrence Sherrer (5.6)

Did any of these guys stick? I can't recall.
Others: Garrett Brown (5.5), DJ Burris (5.5), Adam Weber (5.5), Dom Alford (5.3), Eric Ellestad (4.9), Lee Campbell (2 stars, no RR)


2007 - 6 (Class rank: 57th nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.46)
Anthony Jacobs (5.8), Clint Brewster (5.7), Andre Tate' (5.7), Curtis Thomas (5.7), Trey Davis (5.6), Ryan Orton (5.6)

Odd class with Brew coming in late and all that. Jacobs could be a big contributor this year possibly. Davis and Orton have been good contributors.
Others: Chris Bunders (5.5), Ryan Collado (5.5), Duane Bennett (5.4), Eric Small (5.4), Ryan Wynn (5.3), Kyle Theret (5.1)


2008 - 15 (Class rank: 17th nationally, 3rd Big Ten, Avg. Star: 3.07)
MarQueis Gray (5.9), Keanon Cooper (5.8), Brandon Green (5.8), Vince Hill (5.8), Sam Maresh (5.8), David Pittman - JUCO (5.8), Traye Simmons - JUCO (5.8), Jewhan Edwards (5.7), Spencer Reeves (5.7), Broderick Smith (5.7), Kevin Whaley (5.7), Tramaine Brock (5.6), Eric Lair (5.6), Simoni Lawrence (5.6), Rex Sharpe - JUCO (5.6)

We know the deal with this class, obviously the best lot we've had. If you take away the guys who were JUCOs or left prematurely, the number dips to 7.
Others: Deleon Eskridge (5.5), Brandon Kirksey (5.5), Cedric McKinley - JUCO (5.5), Troy Stoudermire (5.5), Gary Tinsley (5.5), D.L. Wilhite (5.5), Da'Jon McKnight (5.3)


2009 - 15 (Class rank: 39th nationally, 6th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 3.05)
Hayo Carpenter - JUCO (5.9), Michael Carter (5.9), Hasan Lipscomb (5.8), Moses Alipate (5.7), Bryant Allen (5.7), Josh Campion (5.7), Matt Garin (5.7), Kendall Gregory-McGhee (5.7), Ra'Shede Hageman (5.7), Kerry Lewis (5.7), Joey Searcy (5.7), Victor Keise (5.6), Ed Olson (5.6), Brent Singleton (5.6), Kenny Watkins (5.6)

I think this class is underrated. There's some real potential great players in this class, despite its smaller size. Plus, 13 are still in the program and have chances to make great contributions to the program.
Others: Jeff Wills - JUCO (5.5), Dan Orseske (5.3)


2010 - 12 (Class rank: 50th nationally, 6th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.92)
Lamonte Edwards (5.8), Jimmy Gjere (5.8), Tom Parish (5.7), Marquise Hill (5.6), Donnell Kirkwood (5.6), Marek Lenkiewicz (5.6), Christyn Lewis - JUCO (5.6), James Manuel (5.6), Jon Ragoo (5.6), Josh Tauaefa (5.6), Herschel Thornton (5.6), Brock Vereen (5.6)

It's funny that we actually were only 3 less 5.6 commits in 2010 than in the previous two years. The issue really is we didn't have as many higher level guys, only three over 5.6. But I think this is still an actually pretty good class, and is a vast improvement over the past. There's still work to be done, Brewster needs to get on that field and have some great success so we can parlay that into grabbing more of those highly recruited "studs", so this program can really go to another level.

I just think that people need to relax a little bit, realize that this was going to be a process, and just watch these young kids develop and see if they can be the difference for Gopher football. As frustrating as last year was, you can't deny that there is a lot of nice young talent in this program right now, and I'd stress for people to be a little more patient. The last two years, yes, we're a .500 program, but these young kids haven't even gotten a real chance to make their mark and people are ready to dismiss them. This is a sentiment that has been echoed many times on these boards, but you know, Brewster may, or may not work out, but we have to at least give him a true chance to prove himself with this crop of players he is bringing in.

Okay, I'm done now haha, just wanted to get that out there. You can rip it to shreds or whatever.
Click to expand...

Great post, it alway seemed that this was a decent recruiting class. I think the disappointment of losing the 2 receivers towards the end has hurt the overall perception of the class.
 

Very nice job with this thread. Interesting read and well put together. Thanks a ton.
 

First of all, great post. This board has been severely lacking in informative posts, regardless of what side of the issue(s) an individual falls on.

What I do not like about this class, is the lack of impressive offers from a number of the recruits. Neither Jon Ragoo or Marek Lenkiewicz hold an offer (unless you believe the Miami offer with Ragoo) that gives me any confidence in their ranking. I also do not like that it appears ( I stress that word, because I can't know for sure) that the Gophers were desperate at the end of this recruiting class and filled scholarships with Ben Perry and Lee Hutton.

Any of these 4 guys could turn out to be excellent college players, even standout NFL players. I do not think the Gophers are back to Mason level recruiting, but I do think they slipped this year. In a previous post, I pointed to the losses of Shumpert and Kirksey to Iowa. That was the type of battle Brewster was winning consistently prior to this year. I will also point out that the Gophers could not sway any of their later visitors to become Gophers from Adrian Lee and Corey Nelson, to the S who ended up at Illinois and the DT who stuck with Louisville. How much of the poor finish to the recruiting season had to do with Brewster's contract? How much did it have to do with the poor on field performance? How much did it have to do with recruiting techniques that have become stale? I have no answers. I do know that I can't give Brewster a break on the contract issue, because his lack of performance on the field was a large factor in the contract becoming an issue in the first place.
 



since when do stars not matter?????? That is loser talk.
 

Great post. I've been wanting to do something like this since Wednesday (when the official motto of GH became "The Sky is Falling") but wasn't nearly dedicated enough to take the time. Thanks.
 

Simple take: Brewster's got some real advantages (the stadium, the campus, the Big Ten, the only D1 team in MN). But it's hard to sell a program, even one with those great assets, when your season is disappointing. A quick survey of the program seems to show that the improvement stopped this year. That's why, even though Brewster is a charismatic guy, he had a tough time selling himself and the U this year.

Not to worry - I'm confident the Gophers will win 8 games (+/-) this year (counting the bowl game) and next year's class will exceed all expectations.
 

We were sold by brewster reporters after his 1-11 season that we should be patient because he was getting all sorts of 4 star players. And now that we had a down year stars don't matter? YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS!
 




Good upper classmen win games in the B10. We will begin to turn the corner this upcoming season and make a real statement in 2011.
 

Thanks for putting together the analysis:

Not to be a Debbie Downer here - but it seems like with the increase in hype and attention paid to recruiting nowadays it seems like there has been some inflation with the rankings.

Think about it. More higher rated players - means more people will pay attention and read about the highly ranked recruits. It makes sense for recruiting services in a business sense to want to inflate rankings to draw in people to the sites.

For example in 2004 & 2005 we had one guy each class ranked 5.6 and above, an average star ranking of 2.5 - and both classes were ranked in the 50's nationally.

In 2009 & 2010 we had similarly nationally-ranked classes of 40th and 50th - but a total of 27 guys at a 5.6 & above and an average star raning of about 3.0

I think in order to be fair we have to compare against other schools rather than just looking at the pure numbers because it seems the ratings base has risen over the last few years.
 

josh087 said:
it seems like with the increase in hype and attention paid to recruiting nowadays it seems like there has been some inflation with the rankings. Think about it. More higher rated players - means more people will pay attention and read about the highly ranked recruits. It makes sense for recruiting services in a business sense to want to inflate rankings to draw in people to the sites.

I think in order to be fair we have to compare against other schools rather than just looking at the pure numbers because it seems the ratings base has risen over the last few years.
Click to expand...

OR.... Brewster is a better recruiter and luring in better talent. The results have been the same, but it's only been 3 years -- and we've had quite some unusual coaching turnover that surely stunted us. If you think the level of talent of the players today are comparable to those 5 years ago, you're certainly not paying attention.
 

EG#9 said:
. In a previous post, I pointed to the losses of Shumpert and Kirksey to Iowa. That was the type of battle Brewster was winning consistently prior to this year.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the Iowa finished second in the Big 10 this year. We're literally one place behind them in the Rival's conference ranking. I would suggest Iowa should be the one to be disappointed in that they're only in fifth place in the conference in ranking.

Brewster is was playing with much lower ranked recruits (overall) compared to Iowa and Wisconsin last year. In two years Brewster will have all of his guys on the team, then we can compare.

What happens if the Gophers have a break through season? How good of a recruiting class will Brewster bring in then? I think 2011 is our season, I expect a lot of growth for the next two years as the talent level catches up and the team's understanding of the offensive and defensive schemes becomes much better.
 

Good post, can't wait to see the 08 and 09 classes mature and grow on the field.
 

josh087 said:
Thanks for putting together the analysis:

Not to be a Debbie Downer here - but it seems like with the increase in hype and attention paid to recruiting nowadays it seems like there has been some inflation with the rankings.

Think about it. More higher rated players - means more people will pay attention and read about the highly ranked recruits. It makes sense for recruiting services in a business sense to want to inflate rankings to draw in people to the sites.

For example in 2004 & 2005 we had one guy each class ranked 5.6 and above, an average star ranking of 2.5 - and both classes were ranked in the 50's nationally.

In 2009 & 2010 we had similarly nationally-ranked classes of 40th and 50th - but a total of 27 guys at a 5.6 & above and an average star raning of about 3.0

I think in order to be fair we have to compare against other schools rather than just looking at the pure numbers because it seems the ratings base has risen over the last few years.
Click to expand...

I agree in part, it's true that there are more players with rankings, so yes, the number of "5.6s", or three star, or whatever guys has indeed increased. I don't know if rankings have actually been necessarily "inflated" though. I think more players are just accounted for because of I assume an increase in staff that allows the ability to watch more film, do analysis, etc. But you could be right as well.

One thing I think that influences a ranking is that it is weighted toward big gets. I think if we had netted Seantrel alone it would have jumped us up like 10 spots or something like that (I could be wrong, but I thought I read that somewhere). I know he's a great player, but let's not kid ourselves, him alone would not suddenly make the rest of the players in this class suddenly be beasts. But yet, the perception of the players comprising the class would be better if people saw a 40th ranking, vs. a 50th ranking, or even slightly better. But if you just get a lot of solid players, your class ranking won't budge hardly at all.

This class took a hit because some of the better players that were anticipated in being part of the class ended up not being part of the class (James Green, Chris Hawkins, Josh Huff, etc.). Sometimes you just lose out on hits like that. Plus you had the toying with guys like Corey Nelson, James Louis, that got people excited only to lead to more disappointment. So I understand why there's a more "negative" vibe with this class, even beyond just the numbers. It's was a lot like our past season, "What Might Have Been", or "If Only.....". All I know is, Brewster better come up big next year, even if only by way of perception by garnering a couple big wins (got some nice home opportunities there), and big recruiting gets so he can get people off his back. Otherwise....could be ugly.
 

Star inflation (or ratings inflation) at Rivals

Rivals has inflated their ratings and star system away. Much higher percentage of players evaluated this year were 3 star (5.5 thru 5.7) compard to 2004 where the majority where 2 star players (5.4 or less)

2010
6.1 - 27
6.0 - 32
5.9 - 98
5.8 - 266
5.7 - 366
5.6 - 594
5.5 - 687
5.4 - 695
5.3 - 417
5.2 - 646
5.1 - 151
5.0 - 84
4.9 - 0
Total players evaluated: 4063
Total 5 stars - 27 (.7%)
Total 4 stars - 396 (9.7%)
Total 3 stars - 1647 (40.5%)
Total 3 stars - 1993 (49%)


2004
6.1 - 25
6.0 - 45
5.9 - 53
5.8 - 103
5.7 - 106
5.6 - 152
5.5 - 256
5.4 - 231
5.3 - 232
5.2 - 464
5.1 - 346
5.0 - 333
4.9 - 102
Total players evaluated: 2446
Total 5 stars - 25 (1%)
Total 4 stars - 201 (8.2%)
Total 3 stars - 514 (21%)
Total 2 stars - 1708 (69.8%)

Evaluated players are twice as likely to be a 3 star recruit in 2010 compared to 6 years ago.

Comparing classes based on Rival's 5.6 ratings or higher can't be done over that that difference in time. Apples to Oranges. A 5.6 rated player today is most likely a 5.4 or worse in 2004 according to the numbers above if you average out the ratings.
 

Very good stuff Pewter, and pretty much explains why the class was only rated a little bit higher than some of the others despite more three star guys.

Obviously though, you can't completely discredit all of the 5.6 guys because some of them probably deserve their ranking, while you probably have 5.5 or even 5.4 guys from '04 who may have been bumped up now, but some still stay where they were. If you combine with offers, maybe that'd be a good way to kinda neutralize that difference. Say, if you take a 5.6 guy in the last couple of seasons, he has to have some kind of BCS offer to go with his ranking in order to count him. I might do something like that a little later today, just to go deeper. This whole thing is just kinda intriguing to me.
 

Pewterschmidt, thank you for taking the time do this comparison. It would be interesting to know if this is a recent trend, or a jump this year in evaluating players higher than previous years. It's also worth noting that the percentage of 4 and 5 stars are similar, while it's the 2 and 3 stars that have a noticeable change.
 

Results for years 2005 thru 2009

2005
6.1 - 28
6.0 - 45
5.9 - 63
5.8 - 107
5.7 - 102
5.6 - 171
5.5 - 370
5.4 - 189
5.3 - 268
5.2 - 458
5.1 - 367
5.0 - 370
4.9 - 567
Total players evaluated: 3105
Total 5 stars - 28 (.9%)
Total 4 stars - 215 (6.9%)
Total 3 stars - 643 (20.7%)
Total 2 stars - 2219 (71.5%)

2006
6.1 - 29
6.0 - 41
5.9 - 74
5.8 - 170
5.7 - 156
5.6 - 172
5.5 - 402
5.4 - 220
5.3 - 259
5.2 - 458
5.1 - 326
5.0 - 390
4.9 - 457
Total players evaluated: 3154
Total 5 stars - 29 (.9%)
Total 4 stars - 285 (9%)
Total 3 stars - 730 (23.1%)
Total 2 stars - 2110 (66.9%)

2007
6.1 - 36
6.0 - 57
5.9 - 96
5.8 - 191
5.7 - 221
5.6 - 241
5.5 - 525
5.4 - 357
5.3 - 304
5.2 - 381
5.1 - 315
5.0 - 567
4.9 - 85
Total players evaluated: 3376
Total 5 stars - 36 (1.1%)
Total 4 stars - 344 (10.2%)
Total 3 stars - 987 (29.2%)
Total 2 stars - 2009 (59.5%)

2008
6.1 - 37
6.0 - 59
5.9 - 113
5.8 - 196
5.7 - 262
5.6 - 304
5.5 - 428
5.4 - 409
5.3 - 324
5.2 - 544
5.1 - 375
5.0 - 232
4.9 - 295
Total players evaluated: 3578
Total 5 stars - 37 (1%)
Total 4 stars - 368 (10.3%)
Total 3 stars - 994 (27.8%)
Total 2 stars - 2179 (60.1%)

2009
6.1 - 35
6.0 - 65
5.9 - 100
5.8 - 236
5.7 - 272
5.6 - 456
5.5 - 571
5.4 - 427
5.3 - 365
5.2 - 602
5.1 - 323
5.0 - 142
4.9 - 269
Total players evaluated: 3863
Total 5 stars - 35 (.9%)
Total 4 stars - 401 (10.4%)
Total 3 stars - 1299 (33.6%)
Total 2 stars - 2128 (55.1%)


Looks like the '04 thru '06 classes are pretty similar.

Then a jump

'07 and '08 very similar

Then a jump

'09 stands by itself

Then the final inflation jump to '10.
 

Thanks Pewter for taking the time to get those numbers - Unfortunately it supports my hypothesis of inflation - I just didn't have the time to really dig into it.
 

I've compiled these numbers before and it's why comparing classes based on Rivals ratings or stars can't possibly be accurate if you're going back more than a year or 2. It's just not comparable.

Here's the most damning fact:

2010 had 958 more players evaluated compared to 2005. If you add 958 more players to the 2005 class to equal the total from 2010 and assign every single one of them a 3 star ranking, you still end up short of the number of 3 stars in the 2010 class.

Rivals seems to be really consistent in handing out 4 and 5 stars given the number of players evaluated. In fact, it's obvious that for 5 stars, it has even more meaning today. However, the devaluation of the 3 star rating is obvious over the years. It doesn't carry the same weight it once did. Are HS football players that better today compared to 5 years ago that Rivals deems it appropriate to hand out 3 stars at over twice the rate? Highly doubtful. More than likely it's a system without many guidelines for the evaluation and therefore isn't a good guage in determining the strength of a class compared to previous years.

Offer lists and the good 'ol eyeball test of a recruit's video are more valid ways to compare than Rivals star/rating system. Of course, the proof is always in the pudding and that's how they perform on the field but what's the fun in that?

I even think the class ranking is flawed when comparing classes over the years. The Gophers many 2 stars from '03 thru '07 that would have turned into 3 stars or better if it were 2010. Not nearly as many 3 stars would be turned into 4 stars given the same case. Basically what I'm saying is how Rivals assigned their rankings hurt a team like the Gophers earlier last decade compared to today.

This isn't to say I think Mason recruited on the same level as Brewster. Not at all. Brewster's '08 and '09 classes were clearly better than any of Mason's classes during the Rivals era. What I'm telling you is the 2010 class probably is on roughly the same level as a couple of Mason's better classes. Some on here argued that it was still much better throwing out star rankings as evidence but I don't see it that way.
 

Okay, so I decided to change this up, as I'm in agreement that just simple raw ratings don't show the whole story. So what I did was go through every recruit that we've "signed" since '04 according to Rivals, basically cause their interface is the easiest to use IMO lol. This is all recruits we've gotten over the years with at least one BCS offer, along with their ranking they had. This isn't foolproof either obviously, considering you never know how truly accurate the offer lists are, and it excludes many offers that some of the bigger gets have had who just trimmed their list to a few. Just offers another perspective though, on what has taken place when it comes to strictly recruiting at the U over the last several years.

You also, obviously have to look at who the offers are coming from, as all BCS offers are not created equal. And also early commits can influence the number of offers as well. Just throwing the data out there for all to soak up, hope you found it as interesting as I did.

2004 - 9/24 (Class rank: 58th nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.25)​

Leland Jones (5.6: Clemson, S.Car, Vandy)
Jack Simmons (5.5: ILL, MSU, NU)
Nhemie Theodore (5.5: Rutgers, VT)
Johnny Sampy (5.4: Mizzou)
Andre Sloan El (5.4: IU, Iowa)
Hussain Shakir (5.2: UConn, UNC, Rutgers)
Matt Degeest (5.1: Nebraska)
Deon Hightower (5.1: KU)
Sam Scroggins (5.1: GT, IU, KU)

Others: Dom Barber (5.5), Justin Kucek, (5.2), Gary Russell (5.1), Willie VanDeSteeg (5.1)


2005 - 12/20 (Class rank: 55th nationally, 10th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.67)​

Alex Daniels (5.9: OSU, OU, Pitt, WV)
Mike Chambers (5.5: MSU, WV)
Boyd Coleman (5.5: UK, Miss, UNC, PU, Becky)
Steve Davis (5.5: Mizzou, NU, Becky)
Dominic Jones (5.5: MSU, Pitt)
Marcel Jones (5.5: Becky)
Keith Massey (5.5: MSU, Pitt, PU, Becky)
Ryan Ruckdashel (5.5: ISU, MSU)
Ned Tavale (5.5: ILL, ISU)
Otis Hudson (5.2: ILL)
Jason Sekinger (5.2: ILL, IU)
Michael McKelton (5.0: IU)

Others: Jay Thomas (5.5), Nate Triplett (5.5), Eric Decker (5.3), Matt Stommes (5.0)

By the way, on Decker? Love the fact that it looks like his Rivals shot is his Senior pic that you take for yearbook LOL.


2006 - 12/22 (Class rank: 62nd nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.33)​

Jamar Howard (5.6: Iowa, Pitt, PU, WV)
Robert McField (5.6: CIN, IU, Mizzou)
Sean McWhirther (5.6, ISU, MSU, NU)
Tommy Becker (5.5: ISU, KU)
Garrett Brown (5.5: ILL, Maryland, MSU, Miss, Rutgers)
D.J. Burris (5.5: WV)
Adam Weber (5.5: Becky)
E.J. Jones (5.3: IU, NU)
R.J. Buckner (5.2: IU)
Lee Campbell (2 stars, no RR: Stanford)
Josh Robertson (2 stars, no RR: KSU, MSU)
Rudy Robinson (no RR: IU, ISU)


Others: Terrence Sherrer (5.6), Dom Alford (5.3), Eric Ellestad (4.9)


2007 - 10/24 (Class rank: 57th nationally, 9th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.46)​

Anthony Jacobs (5.8: Becky)
Clint Brewster (5.7: ILL, Wash St.)
Curtis Thomas (5.7: Baylor, IU, ISU, KU, KSU, MSU, Mizzou)
Logan Uu (5.5: Cal, Wash St.)
Duane Bennett (5.4: KU, Mizzou)
Serge Elizee (5.4: Wash St.)
Eric Small (5.4: ISU, Becky)
Justin Chatman (5.3: NU, Vandy, Becky)
Tray Herndon (5.3: IU)
Damien White (5.2: ISU)


Others: Andre Tate' (5.7), Trey Davis (5.6), Ryan Orton (5.6), Chris Bunders (5.5), Ryan Collado (5.5), Ryan Wynn (5.3), Kyle Theret (5.1)


2008 - 25/29 (Class rank: 17th nationally, 3rd Big Ten, Avg. Star: 3.07)​

MarQueis Gray (5.9: Cincy, ILL, IU, Iowa, Kentucky, MSU, Oregon, PU)
Keanon Cooper (5.8: KU, KSU, Miami, Michigan, OU, TTU, Becky)
Brandon Green (5.8: ILL, Iowa, ISU, MSU, NU, PU, Becky)
Vince Hill (5.8: ILL)
Sam Maresh (5.8: Iowa, ISU, KSU, Michigan, MSU, Becky)
David Pittman (5.8: ASU, UCLA, Wash St.)
Traye Simmons (5.8: Cal, Florida, PU)
Jewhan Edwards (5.7: Syracuse, WV)
Spencer Reeves (5.7: Arizona, Arkansas, KSU, TTU, Becky)
Broderick Smith (5.7: Arizona, Colo St., ILL, KSU, Nebraska, Oregon)
Kevin Whaley (5.7: Uconn, Maryland, MSU, PSU, Virginia, VT, WV)
Tramaine Brock (5.6: Louisville, Miss, S.Car)
Eric Lair (5.6: Baylor, Nebraska, Ok St.)
Simoni Lawrence (5.6: Pitt, WV)
Rex Sharpe (5.6: Colorado)
Terrell Combs (5.5: Kentucky, Louisville, Michigan, MSU, PU, WV)
Tim Dandridge (5.5: Colorado, MSU, PU)
Deleon Eskridge (5.5: Nebraska, Wash)
Brandon Kirksey (5.5: Arkansas, KSU, LSU, Miss)
Cedric McKinley (5.5: ILL)
Shady Salamon (5.5: Mizzou)
Troy Stoudermire (5.5: Cal, ISU, KSU, UNC)
Gary Tinsley (5.5: Arkansas)
D.L. Wilhite (5.5: PU, WV)
Xzavian Brandon (5.4: Wash St.)

Others: Da'Jon McKnight (5.3)


2009 - 13/20 (Class rank: 39th nationally, 6th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 3.05)​

Hayo Carpenter (5.9: ASU, Florida, Oregon St, Wash St)
Michael Carter (5.9: Florida, Georgia, Miami, WV)
Hasan Lipscomb (5.8: Baylor, ISU, Neb, Tx A&M)
Moses Alipate (5.7: Colorado, Wash St.)
Bryant Allen (5.7: IU, Iowa, KU, Mizzou, Becky)
Matt Garin (5.7: ASU, Colorado, Oregon St, PU, Stanford, UCLA, Wash St, WV)
Kendall Gregory-McGhee (5.7: Colorado)
Ra'Shede Hageman (5.7: Florida, Iowa, ISU, MSU, Neb, OSU, OU, Becky)
Kerry Lewis (5.7: Arizona, Iowa, KU, KSU, Ok St, Oregon, Vandy)
Joey Searcy (5.7: Colorado, Iowa)
Brent Singleton (5.6: IU, S.Car, Syracuse, Vandy)
Kenny Watkins (5.6: IU)
Brooks Michel (5.5: Kentucky, NC St.)

Others: Josh Campion (5.7), Vic Keise (5.6), Ed Olson (5.6), Jeff Wills - JUCO (5.5), Dan Orseske (5.3)


2010 - 15/25 (Class rank: 50th nationally, 6th Big Ten, Avg. Star: 2.92)​

Lamonte Edwards (5.8: Iowa, Becky)
Jimmy Gjere (5.8: Becky)
Tom Parish (5.7: Iowa)
Marquise Hill (5.6: Arkansas, Iowa, KU, KSU, MSU, Mizzou, Neb, UCLA, Becky)
Donnell Kirkwood (5.6: KSU, Pitt, Rutgers)
James Manuel (5.6: Cincy, Iowa, Louisville, MSU)
Jon Ragoo (5.6: Miami?)
Herschel Thornton (5.6: Pitt, Rutgers, USF)
Brock Vereen (5.6: Stanford)
Tyrone Bouie (5.5: PU)
Matt Eggen (5.5: IU)
Tiree Eure (5.5: Colorado, UConn, PU, Rutgers, Syracuse)
Harold Legania (5.5: Colorado, Miss, Miss St, UNC, TTU, Virginia)
Devon Wright (5.5: BC, UConn, IU, Michigan, MSU, Rutgers, Wake, Becky)
Dwayne Mitchell (5.4: Duke)

Others: Marek Lenkiewicz (5.6), Christyn Lewis (5.6), Josh Tauaefa (5.6)


So after all of that, what does it mean? I guess it just means we're winning more recruiting battles with BCS schools, even this year albeit slightly, than we have in the past. What does this all mean on the field? Nothing LOL. Simply put, you gotta show me on the field, not just with numbers. We average 9 or 10 wins over the next 5 seasons, I won't care less what the classes were ranked. But I've had fun putting these together. I might also do the same thing with Scout, just to check it out, as I know there can be differences and all that. I'd be interested in seeing how the offer lists differentiate and all that.
 


I much prefer that way of judging. It still has it's flaws as you mention but I'd go one step further. I'd rank players on "potential" offers. That's hard to do but it can be done on some level. Assume that every player commits on NSD and no earlier to mazimize their offer list and calm eligibility concerns. The biggest problem is remembering what the recruiting situation was for each recruit.

Examples of players that would have otherwise received better offers:

Josh Campion committed to the Gophers almost 2 years before his signing day. I would assume that if he had waited, many offers would have come his way.

Gary Russell was considered a stud by many but academic issues scared people away, similar to Wheelwright.

Jay Thomas was always a strong committment to the Gophers once he gave his verbal. There's no doubt in my mind he would have received several offers from BCS schools given my model.

Dom Barber was a big Gopher lock. Similar to Jay Thomas.

Also, it's my understanding that Rivals does a much better job now maintaining an offer list compared to their infancy days. They have more resources to get as much information as possible. Still, if a player has offers from some solid BCS schools while another player has none, especially when they commit late in the process like the recent examples Tillman, Ferguson, Hutton, and Perry, it's the better tool than the inconsistent Rivals star system.
 

Yeah, I was thinking of things like that as well, Pewter. Situations are different for individual recruits, and that may influence the type of offers they get. I just found it interesting to look at the past and just see the names that were committed to this program and how it actually was the case that some of the most successful players here were either light on offers, or didn't have any, like Decker, Barber, Russell, WVDS, etc. It'll be interesting to look at things, say, three years from now and see how these recent classes have truly shaped up.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom