Why Recruiting Rankings Matter To PJ FLeck and the Gophers

[Dano564]

I think whether you win or not will typically break down as follows:

Recruiting 75%
Coaching 25%


Now here is the hard part for people on here to understand who take things very literally.

I think there is a 5 - 15% chance that a team can pull an upset if they lake in coaching or recruiting.


Team A
Say team A has a excellent recruits. (We'll say 74 out of 75).
And team A has good coach (we'll say 20 out of 25).
Total score 94

Team B
Say Team B has good recruits (We'll say 69 out of 75)
Team B has a good coach as well (we'll say 19 out of 25).
Total score of 88

Team C
Team C has okay recruits (we'll say 60 out of 75)
Team C has okay coach (we'll say 19 out of 25)
Total score 79

I feel team B could be team A, but most of the time they will lose. (win maybe 1 out 0f 4-7 games)
I feel team C could also beat team A, but the frequency would be far less because the talent gap is bigger despite both coaches being about equal. (maybe 1 out of 10-15 games)

So over a course of 12 games, Team A would win most
Team B would win more than C and less than A
Team C would win the least of the 3

 

[LakerFan]

I think whether you win or not will typically break down as follows:

Recruiting 75%
Coaching 25%


Now here is the hard part for people on here to understand who take things very literally.

I think there is a 5 - 15% chance that a team can pull an upset if they lake in coaching or recruiting.


Team A
Say team A has a excellent recruits. (We'll say 74 out of 75).
And team A has good coach (we'll say 20 out of 25).
Total score 94

Team B
Say Team B has good recruits (We'll say 69 out of 75)
Team B has a good coach as well (we'll say 19 out of 25).
Total score of 88

Team C
Team C has okay recruits (we'll say 60 out of 75)
Team C has okay coach (we'll say 19 out of 25)
Total score 79

I feel team B could be team A, but most of the time they will lose. (win maybe 1 out 0f 4-7 games)
I feel team C could also beat team A, but the frequency would be far less because the talent gap is bigger despite both coaches being about equal. (maybe 1 out of 10-15 games)

So over a course of 12 games, Team A would win most
Team B would win more than C and less than A
Team C would win the least of the 3

You forgot the 5% advantage for being on the sunny sideline on a cold day or the shady sideline on a hotday. And the 1% advantage if all the plastic geese are facing the correct endzone.

 

[Dano564]

You forgot the 5% advantage for being on the sunny sideline on a cold day or the shady sideline on a hotday. And the 1% advantage if all the plastic geese are facing the correct endzone.

I wanted to keep it at all the macro level items.

Also absent:
Did either team win/lose last week
Did one team travel west coast to east coast or vice-versa.
Are players given proper nutrition
Is the team overcoming any emotional setback which is bringing the team together (recent diagnosis / death)
Color combination of uniform
Were there any transportation delays
Was hotel fire alarmed pulled
etc.

 

[e.bigelow]

I wanted to keep it at all the macro level items.

Also absent:
Did either team win/lose last week
Did one team travel west coast to east coast or vice-versa.
Are players given proper nutrition
Is the team overcoming any emotional setback which is bringing the team together (recent diagnosis / death)
Color combination of uniform
Were there any transportation delays
Was hotel fire alarmed pulled
Did the team win 9 games last year
etc.

FIFY.

 

[Spoofin]

He doesn't seem to want to believe anything you say about recruiting rankings.

Or, GWG has made the same argument over and over and never once actually paid attention to what my argument is. Instead I get "been proven many times" rinse and repeat response. I find it amusing, TBH.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Or, GWG has made the same argument over and over and never once actually paid attention to what my argument is. Instead I get "been proven many times" rinse and repeat response. I find it amusing, TBH.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've asked you time and again to provide data show your work to prove your 'argument'. You have refused to do that time and again.

 

[hungan1]

I forgot to include these tables showing the breakdown of 3*s, 4*s, 5*s for the roster of every team in B1G West and B1G East for the years 2015, 2016, & 2017.

Stars really do shine except in Nebraska. tOSU is a virtual winning machine. Wisconsin's perpetual self propelling system keeps winning.

B1G West Team Roster Breakdown for 2015, 2016, & 2017:


B1G East Team Roster Breakdown for 2015, 2016, & 2017:


Source: 247 SPorts College Team Talent.

 

[PMWinSTP]

I think whether you win or not will typically break down as follows:

Recruiting 75%
Coaching 25%


Now here is the hard part for people on here to understand who take things very literally.

I think there is a 5 - 15% chance that a team can pull an upset if they lake in coaching or recruiting.


Team A
Say team A has a excellent recruits. (We'll say 74 out of 75).
And team A has good coach (we'll say 20 out of 25).
Total score 94

Team B
Say Team B has good recruits (We'll say 69 out of 75)
Team B has a good coach as well (we'll say 19 out of 25).
Total score of 88

Team C
Team C has okay recruits (we'll say 60 out of 75)
Team C has okay coach (we'll say 19 out of 25)
Total score 79

I feel team B could be team A, but most of the time they will lose. (win maybe 1 out 0f 4-7 games)
I feel team C could also beat team A, but the frequency would be far less because the talent gap is bigger despite both coaches being about equal. (maybe 1 out of 10-15 games)

So over a course of 12 games, Team A would win most
Team B would win more than C and less than A
Team C would win the least of the 3

Way closer to 50/50.

 

[rugger14]

Way closer to 50/50.

Not really. Nick Saban couldn't win the natty at Minnesota. Maybe after 5-6 years he could get us in the ballpark. Good recruiting is part of good coaching and good coaches can win with good players. Good coaches can't win with bad players. When Saban came back from the NFL why did he go to Alabama? Why didn't he go to Kansas? Why did Urban Meyer go to tOSU when he returned to coaching? What about Kentucky? Of course not. They didn't want to have to build a program and take the chance of failing. Was Bielema a good coach at Wisconsin? Is he a bad coach at Arkansas?

Decent coaches can win with really good players. Look at Mack Brown with Vince Young and CO at Texas.

College football is not made to help the bad teams have a chance and get better. College football is made to keep the good programs good and it takes a good coach, great players, and a lot of luck to win it all.

Wisconsin and MSU have been good but don't have the talent to win it all. I have no doubt that Dantonio is as good a coach as any but he can't recruit with the big boys because he is at MSU. Why did Saban leave MSU? He knew he could get ELITE talent at LSU.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

 

[Spoofin]

Not really. Nick Saban couldn't win the natty at Minnesota.

He doesn't do enough interviews. That is super important to succeed here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mplsbadger]

Recruiting matters. Breakthrough analysis considering that college football coaches spend about 2/3 of their time on it.

Spoofin, Pompous, and others are simply arguing that it is not decisive. What is your position on that question? If your answer is no, then I suspect that everyone is in violent agreement.

 

[PMWinSTP]

Not really. Nick Saban couldn't win the natty at Minnesota. Maybe after 5-6 years he could get us in the ballpark. Good recruiting is part of good coaching and good coaches can win with good players. Good coaches can't win with bad players. When Saban came back from the NFL why did he go to Alabama? Why didn't he go to Kansas? Why did Urban Meyer go to tOSU when he returned to coaching? What about Kentucky? Of course not. They didn't want to have to build a program and take the chance of failing. Was Bielema a good coach at Wisconsin? Is he a bad coach at Arkansas?

Decent coaches can win with really good players. Look at Mack Brown with Vince Young and CO at Texas.

College football is not made to help the bad teams have a chance and get better. College football is made to keep the good programs good and it takes a good coach, great players, and a lot of luck to win it all.

Wisconsin and MSU have been good but don't have the talent to win it all. I have no doubt that Dantonio is as good a coach as any but he can't recruit with the big boys because he is at MSU. Why did Saban leave MSU? He knew he could get ELITE talent at LSU.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

My point is they are equally important. Thought that was pretty clear.

 

[hungan1]

Moved to new post.

 

[rugger14]

My point is they are equally important. Thought that was pretty clear.

I don't think it is 50/50. Both are important but you have to have talent to win regardless of coaching. I guess my point wasn't clear. I think a mediocre coach has a better chance to win with great talent than a great coach with mediocre talent.



Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

My point is they are equally important. Thought that was pretty clear.

You're point is wrong. As usual.

 

[caliGopher]

If only, IF ONLY, we could recruit as well as Nebraska ... then maybe we too would have a chance to finish the season at 4-8.

Oh wait a second .... let's throw that data away, because it doesn't support the agenda we're trying to ram through.


No thanks.

Yeah. Recruiting matters. So does coaching. If you have both, you should win, more than you lose, and more consistently. If you only have recruiting, and your plan is to out recruit the competition, you'll win more than your fair share of games. However, like Lloyd Carr showed, you'll also inexplicably lose to teams you have no business losing to -- if those teams have heart and a coach that doesn't assume the fetal position before kick-off.

 

[Dano564]

Two of the better WR's in the Orange Bowl, Jeff Thomas for Miami and Danny Davis for Wisconsin were both 4 star WR's.

 

[hungan1]

The Gophers need a break and get a QB and WRs who can catch the ball. Maybe, we have the best chances with this group of incoming recruits to move up in the B1G West.

 

[MGGopher]

Two of the better WR's in the Orange Bowl, Jeff Thomas for Miami and Danny Davis for Wisconsin were both 4 star WR's.

Fun fact that most people know but I'll repeat anyway: Jeff Thomas was catching passes in HS from Gophers CB Ray Estes. BTW, he was just an eyelash shy of being a 5* as far as I can tell, considering he was the #40 overall prospect in the country on the 247 composite rankings. I think the top 30 (?) are 5*? Didn't look like a real physical specimen when I watched the documentary about East St. Louis on FS1, but holy cow is he fast...

 

[Section2]

In the B1G, Wisc has consistently made it work. MSU has consistently had results that out performed its class rankings as well. You can also argue that IA has consistently had results that outperformed its recruiting class rankings, with 8 or more wins in six of the last 10 seasons.

Consistency in coaching staff and its ability to develop players for the program is the key. Don't see why that wouldn't apply to this staff.

I agree, and I would add that I think recruiting becomes a crapshoot for kids outside the top 200 or so. It's easy to see the kids that are college ready right now, harder to project, especially for recruiting analysts. And then you add in that the midwest is traditionally undercovered for recruiting services.

If you're getting kids no other power 5 programs want, it's an uphill climb. And that's where we've been for the past 6-7 years. That has clearly changed with Fleck.