A Look Ahead in College Football

[Sea Ray]

It was a good showing by the Big Ten this year but don't get used to it unless they pick up recruiting. Let's look at some things in regard to 2010 recruiting. I know these things are fluid and subjective but you do see a correlation between this and results on the field. It's no accident that Alabama and Texas are top five in recruiting.

In the top ten they show 5 SEC schools, 2 Big Ten schools and 1 PAC 10 school (Wash #7). If you look at the top 25 the Big Ten only gains OSU at #19; the PAC 10 gets USC and Stanford. I would argue USC has a top ten class because they have 7 top 100 players coming in. They're ranked low because their total number of recruits are low but what they're getting are top notch. Only Texas (#2) had more top 100 recruits with 8.

The fact is the recruits are going to the warmer climates and not to Wisconsin, Illinois, Purdue, Mich St or Minnesota. Recruiting is just as competitive as play on the field in the SEC. Tennessee is ranked #16 but that's only good enough for #6 in the SEC

http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=14&yr=2010

[Puffy]

There is an old saying - Rivals for football and Scout for basketball. And ESPN ratings for laughs ;)

http://rivals100.rivals.com/teamrank.asp?SID=880

[Hoosier Red]

Meh. Wisconsin never has been a force in recruiting but they managed to take a top 15 team out to the woodshed.
tOSU, Michigan and tPSU will always carry the water in recruiting for the Big 10.

I actually believe that the Big 10 isn't losing a ton of talent and the middle of the conference will be better than this year. (Bad news for my Hoosiers.)

[texasdave]

Back-to-back BCS Bowls and UC ranks 60th. Not good.

[Sea Ray]

Meh. Wisconsin never has been a force in recruiting but they managed to take a top 15 team out to the woodshed.
tOSU, Michigan and tPSU will always carry the water in recruiting for the Big 10.

I actually believe that the Big 10 isn't losing a ton of talent and the middle of the conference will be better than this year. (Bad news for my Hoosiers.)

No doubt PSU, OSU and UM will lead the Big Ten in recruiting but how does that keep Wisconsin and Illinois from breaking into the top 25?

IMO Michigan is all screwed up regardless of its recruiting because of their coach. Until they get RichRod out of there, all this recruiting is for naught.

[jimbo]

Are you claiming this is just a recent trend? Because from taking a look back through the conference rankings to 2006, it's been pretty much the same as it is today. The SEC ranks first and the Big 10 consistently comes in 4th or 5th. I also think it has less to do with the climates, and more to do with the styles of play.

I think these recruiting ranking a bunch of fluff anyways, way too subjective and speculative. More entertaining than anything.

[Hoosier Red]

No doubt PSU, OSU and UM will lead the Big Ten in recruiting but how does that keep Wisconsin and Illinois from breaking into the top 25?

IMO Michigan is all screwed up regardless of its recruiting because of their coach. Until they get RichRod out of there, all this recruiting is for naught.

Illinois is kept from the top 25 by virtue of the fact their coach sucks.

Also Wisconsin and Iowa right or wrong don't tend to recruit the types of players who are going to wow recruiting lists. They tend to get linemen who may redshirt a year, will start seeing action as freshman and sophomores and by their junior years are ready to crack some skulls. They build the team around that philosophy.

Recruiting top 10 level talent works for top level SEC schools along with tOSU and tPSU because they are able to incorporate those players into a system and win every year.

Teams like Tennessee and Georgia, and to a more extreme example Michigan will recruit the top 25 talent, don't get to develop it in the way top schools do and then have to replace it because talented players will bolt from mid level or worse schools and go to the NFL.

Think of it this way;
Top level schools:
Alabama
Florida
LSU
The Ohio State University
Texas
Oklahoma
USC

These schools can have their cake and eat it too, they get top level talent which can play right away and can offer the incentive to stay around(a chance at a heisman or a chance at a(nother) national championship.

Next level down:
Penn State
Iowa
Wisconsin
Georgia
Tennessee
Auburn
Oregon
Cal

These schools probably have little to no chance at a national title(Penn State perhaps is the exception) I guarantee you every year Tennessee will have a better recruiting class than Iowa. Georgia will have a better class than Wisconsin. But Georgia and Tennessee will have to replace talent on a faster schedule and will not be able to fully integrate the replacements into the lineup as well as Iowa and Wisconsin. Sometimes talent wins out, sometimes not.

[KoryMac5]

This thread should be renamed "A Look Ahead in College Football, and Why I think the Big Ten Still Sucks Based on Recruiting".

I mean c'mon we know where you stand on what conference is the best but the backhanded compliments to the Big Ten after this bowl season is ridiculous. The Big Ten didn't just have a good showing they had a great showing with several games on national TV. These games will no doubt help to boost recruiting for the next couple of years.

[bucksfan2]

The difference between OU and OSU right now are 13 commits. I wouldn't take too much stock in recruiting rankings until the class is complete. Also note the disparity in rankings between schools who have big recruiting classes vs schools that have smaller recruiting classes due to graduation and early NFL declarations.

[Scrap Irony]

Yeah, recruiting is one way of checking the future, but it's neither the best way nor is it complete. At all.

And there's really no way at this point to tell who's going to look good next season and beyond.

[dsmith421]

Yeah, recruiting is one way of checking the future, but it's neither the best way nor is it complete. At all.


Unless it fits the poster in question's preconceived narrative, in which case it's the most important thing ever.

[Chip R]

Unless it fits the poster in question's preconceived narrative, in which case it's the most important thing ever.


I closed a thread before the holidays because of stuff like this. I don't want to have to do it again.

[Sea Ray]

Yeah, recruiting is one way of checking the future, but it's neither the best way nor is it complete. At all.



It's a very inexact science to be sure and that's what makes it a provocative subject to bandied about by us college football fans in the off season.

[Sea Ray]

Are you claiming this is just a recent trend? Because from taking a look back through the conference rankings to 2006, it's been pretty much the same as it is today. The SEC ranks first and the Big 10 consistently comes in 4th or 5th. I also think it has less to do with the climates, and more to do with the styles of play.



Oh it's not a recent trend at all.

You think it's schemes? What's so exciting about Alabama's scheme? They looked like the Bengals last night...yet they're at the top of the recruiting heap and have been under Nick Saban.

[gonelong]

Oh it's not a recent trend at all.

You think it's schemes? What's so exciting about Alabama's scheme? They looked like the Bengals last night...yet they're at the top of the recruiting heap and have been under Nick Saban.

Alabama plays Tressel-ball, which works nicely when you have the trio of Defense, Offensive Line, and running backs to make it work.

GL

[Sea Ray]

Alabama plays Tressel-ball, which works nicely when you have the trio of Defense, Offensive Line, and running backs to make it work.

GL

I agree but the issue here is recruiting. Do you think Tressel-ball attracts recruits due to its scheme?

[gonelong]

I agree but the issue here is recruiting. Do you think Tressel-ball attracts recruits due to its scheme?

They get their fair share at tOSU so it doesn't seem to be driving them away. I'd suspect that it helps a great deal that a good number of NFL teams play a type of Tressel-ball and many of those same kids have NFL dreams.

Win and almost nobody really quibbles about your style of play. Kids come to play for a winner and would probably wear pink jerseys to do so. Lose and almost everybody cares about your style of play.

Winning, coaching staff, NFL aspirations, style of play, facilities, tradition, proximity, and scholarship availability all attract players.

In general, I'd guess the upper tier probably assign more weight to their decision from left to right, and the lower tier guys probably assign more weight from right to left.

GL

[15fan]

Hoosier - I think you need to stick FSU and Miami and your 2nd list.

[Roy Tucker]

I agree but the issue here is recruiting. Do you think Tressel-ball attracts recruits due to its scheme?


This quote struck me from a recent SI article...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1164570/2/index.htm



Aware that freakish athletic ability alone would only get him so far, Pryor chose Ohio State, in large part because he wanted to play in a pro-style offense to bolster his NFL prospects.

[jimbo]

Do you think Tressel-ball attracts recruits due to its scheme?

I most certainly do. "Tressel-ball" has produced a good number of quality NFL players. Why wouldn't recruits be attracted to it's scheme, based simply on that?

My feeling is just that coaches and schemes and play a much bigger role with recruits decisions on college choices than the climate they will be playing in.

[Sea Ray]

I most certainly do. "Tressel-ball" has produced a good number of quality NFL players. Why wouldn't recruits be attracted to it's scheme, based simply on that?

My feeling is just that coaches and schemes and play a much bigger role with recruits decisions on college choices than the climate they will be playing in.

OK, well now this argument has come full circle. Interesting...

This discussion started with me saying that recruits went for the good weather which is why they were flocking to Florida, Alabama and USC. To which someone said no, it was scheme not weather. Now it's being argued that because of scheme the recruits are going to the Big Ten (OSU).

So I ask, if it's scheme then why are the recruits going to Florida, USC and Alabama and not Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota?

[jimbo]

Now it's being argued that because of scheme the recruits are going to the Big Ten (OSU).

Not really. You mentioned Alabama's scheme and someone else equated it to "Tressel-ball." Just making the comparison and pointing out the fact that that scheme produces quality NFL players.


So I ask, if it's scheme then why are the recruits going to Florida, USC and Alabama and not Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota?

It's all individual, IMO. A recruit is going to choose the program where he feels he has the best opportunity to be successful, improve, and become NFL ready, and this has everything to do with the coach and his scheme. I'm not saying one scheme is better than another or produces more NFL players. I just don't think that the climate that the player will play in is as big of a factor as you seem to think it is. That was your original argument, correct?

[gonelong]

OK, well now this argument has come full circle. Interesting...

This discussion started with me saying that recruits went for the good weather which is why they were flocking to Florida, Alabama and USC. To which someone said no, it was scheme not weather. Now it's being argued that because of scheme the recruits are going to the Big Ten (OSU).

I don't think anybody is buying the weather angle, so that was a complete non starter. I'm sure it influences a few kids, but it's not a major factor IMO.

The Big10 doesn't draw recruits based on its schemes. I'd say some teams within the Big10 might though. I'd say PSU, MICH, and tOSU have shown that they can win in the NCAA and put guys in the NFL.


So I ask, if it's scheme then why are the recruits going to Florida, USC and Alabama and not Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota?

Scheme may be a factor, but it's just one, and probably only really applicable to those top tier recruits.

Winning, coaching staff, NFL aspirations, style of play, facilities, tradition, proximity, and scholarship availability all attract players.

FLA, USC, and ALA are at the top of the pile right now (winning), and WISC, Iowa, and Minn are not. FLA, USC (did), and ALA have top flight coaches, and WISC, Iowa, and Minn do not. FLA, USC, and ALA will put a ton of guys on NFL rosters, and WISC, Iowa, and Minn will put fewer. Minn could run the identical scheme that USC runs, and the won't take recruits from CAL out to Minn.

Some players will be interested in the scheme. I have no doubts that tOSU pulls some LBs, DBs, and RBs because they are successful in putting those guys on NFL rosters. I have no doubt they pulled Prior over Mich because of scheme. On the balance though, I doubt that is a top consideration for most guys.

Most teams have a majority of guys from in-state on their roster. The kids are familiar with the schools, some of them root for them, and the teams tend to concentrate recruiting in their own area.
GL

[Sea Ray]

I just don't think that the climate that the player will play in is as big of a factor as you seem to think it is. That was your original argument, correct?

Yes that's correct. I think they like seeing palm trees and Hollywood or beaches.

[Sea Ray]

Minn could run the identical scheme that USC runs, and the won't take recruits from CAL out to Minn.


GL

Good point. I agree that's a big factor, much more than scheme. It seems like the fast athletes are in Florida and California

[bucksfan2]

Good point. I agree that's a big factor, much more than scheme. It seems like the fast athletes are in Florida and California

I think you are right and wrong here. OSU has been pretty good at getting speed players in the Midwest. I think the issue becomes the speed on the OLine and DLine's where the depth is better in Florida than Ohio. That has been OSU's biggest Achilles heal in the past 2 national championship games.

If you look at it OSU has been pretty darn good at producing skill position players in the Draft. DB's, WR's, and LB's have been positions of strength at OSU and are considered speed positions.

[jimbo]

Minn could run the identical scheme that USC runs, and the won't take recruits from CAL out to Minn.

Out of curiosity, I counted 13 players on this past season's Minnesota team from California and Florida.

http://www.gophersports.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=8400&SPID=3280&SPSID=38606

[gonelong]

I think you are right and wrong here. OSU has been pretty good at getting speed players in the Midwest. I think the issue becomes the speed on the OLine and DLine's where the depth is better in Florida than Ohio. That has been OSU's biggest Achilles heal in the past 2 national championship games.

If you look at it OSU has been pretty darn good at producing skill position players in the Draft. DB's, WR's, and LB's have been positions of strength at OSU and are considered speed positions.

Including the NFL draft from 1998 to present ... tOSU has had as many kickers drafted in the top 3 rounds as offensive lineman, 2. In 2004 a punter, Sanders was drafted 87th, and in 2005, Nugent was drafted 47th.

Not one single tOSU OT or Guard was drafted in the top 3 rounds since Orlando Pace went #1 overall in 1997. The only 2 offensive linemen, both centers have been drafted in the top 3 rounds, Mangold, 29th, in 2006, and Bentley, 44th, in 2002.

GL

[Chip R]

Out of curiosity, I counted 13 players on this past season's Minnesota team from California and Florida.

http://www.gophersports.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=8400&SPID=3280&SPSID=38606


I think most D-1 teams in both subdivisions are getting kids from Florida and California at the speed positions - especially Florida.

[gonelong]

Out of curiosity, I counted 13 players on this past season's Minnesota team from California and Florida.

http://www.gophersports.com/SportSelect.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=8400&SPID=3280&SPSID=38606

Due to the number of kids playing football in FLA and CAL, many kids will end up on rosters all over the country. It's a little harder (say practically impossible) for the Minn of the world to pry a guy out of CAL/FLA that USC or FLA is really interested in.

I wouldn't have guessed that many though, interesting.

The Big10 rosters always have a number of Ohio kids on them as well. Minn has 4.

GL

[redsbuckeye]

California, Texas and Florida have a lot of in state talent to choose from too. Not so much Minnesota. I think this is just a case of schools being closer to hotbed recruiting areas.

[Red Heeler]

OK, well now this argument has come full circle. Interesting...

This discussion started with me saying that recruits went for the good weather which is why they were flocking to Florida, Alabama and USC. To which someone said no, it was scheme not weather. Now it's being argued that because of scheme the recruits are going to the Big Ten (OSU).

So I ask, if it's scheme then why are the recruits going to Florida, USC and Alabama and not Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota?

You are really comparing apples to oranges with this argument. Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota need to be compared to Auburn, Arkansas, and Ole Miss type schools. Sure, a five star recruit out of a Florida HS isn't likely to move to Wisconsin. A five star recruit out of Ohio is probably going to Ohio St. or Michigan. Texas and Oklahoma are going to pick up the vast majority of Texas' blue chip kids. Mid level programs in any conference have to depend on snapping up whatever high level recruits happen to be in their area and then pick up the scraps left over after the top tier programs have had their fill from the hotbed areas.

As a fellow Volunteer fan, you have seen the last several years how tough it is to maintain a top level program without being in a recruit rich area. That fact is going to be driven home over the next three weeks unless they make a great hire. Ohio St., Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, or USC might loose a few top picks if their coach left at the last minute. Tennessee's class is going to be decimated.

[Sea Ray]

You are really comparing apples to oranges with this argument. Wisconsin, Iowa, and Minnesota need to be compared to Auburn, Arkansas, and Ole Miss type schools.


As a fellow Volunteer fan, you have seen the last several years how tough it is to maintain a top level program without being in a recruit rich area. That fact is going to be driven home over the next three weeks unless they make a great hire. Ohio St., Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, or USC might loose a few top picks if their coach left at the last minute. Tennessee's class is going to be decimated.

Good point. Let's do that.

In last year's recruiting class Auburn, Arkansas, and Ole Miss were all in the top 20.

Of Wisconsin, Iowa and Minnesota, only one made it into the top fifty, Minnesota barely sliding in at 48. Iowa was 75. So if you want to compare those schools fine...

So your example illustrates my point beautifully. The recruits just aren't going to the Big Ten short of the big two or three.

http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=9&c=14&yr=2009

As for your comments on Tennessee you're absolutely right, however UT still has three weeks to woo recruits if they hire the right guy by this weekend. Right now it looks pretty bleak but it all depends on the next hire. The timing really sucked for UT, no doubt.

[Hoosier Red]

Just curious Sea Ray what's been Auburns' average recruiting rank for the last 6 years?
What's been their average rank in the final AP poll?

Do the same for Wisconsin. My guess is Wisconsin generally has a recruiting class in the 50s and an AP poll number around 30 or so.

I'm guessing you'd see the reverse true of Auburn.

[Roy Tucker]

SI's early look at the top 25 in 2010. Looks like Boise State is finally getting some love...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/andy_staples/01/12/early-2010-1/index.html?eref=sihp

[Red Heeler]

Just curious Sea Ray what's been Auburns' average recruiting rank for the last 6 years?
What's been their average rank in the final AP poll?

Do the same for Wisconsin. My guess is Wisconsin generally has a recruiting class in the 50s and an AP poll number around 30 or so.

I'm guessing you'd see the reverse true of Auburn.

Another thing that skews the rankings quite a bit is that most of the SEC schools will oversign, meaning that they sign more recruits than they have scholarships available for. They plan on flunk outs, not passing admissions, etc. Most Big 10 schools don't do this. Both Rivals and Scouts use number of recruits as a factor in their rankings.

[Sea Ray]

Another thing that skews the rankings quite a bit is that most of the SEC schools will oversign, meaning that they sign more recruits than they have scholarships available for. They plan on flunk outs, not passing admissions, etc. Most Big 10 schools don't do this. Both Rivals and Scouts use number of recruits as a factor in their rankings.

???

They can't offer a scholarship to an athlete that they don't have. I'm not sure what you're talking about here

[Hoosier Red]

Yes they can, and its actually smart to do so. Many SEC schools offer more scholarships than are currently available because they anticipate transfers and/or recruits to back out.

One big difference between football and basketball is the lack of early signing periods means that football recruits are all in play until a)they finish high school early and enroll at said college. b) they sign their letter of intent in February.

[Sea Ray]

Yes they can, and its actually smart to do so. Many SEC schools offer more scholarships than are currently available because they anticipate transfers and/or recruits to back out.

One big difference between football and basketball is the lack of early signing periods means that football recruits are all in play until a)they finish high school early and enroll at said college. b) they sign their letter of intent in February.

So you're telling me schools can have as many athletes as they want sign letters of intent in February? I was not aware of that.

[Hoosier Red]

So you're telling me schools can have as many athletes as they want sign letters of intent in February? I was not aware of that.

To be honest I'm not sure about signing letters of intent but they can offer more scholarships than they currently have available right now.

In basketball the limit is offering one more scholarship than you currently have, but I don't know what the limit is in football.

[Red Heeler]

So you're telling me schools can have as many athletes as they want sign letters of intent in February? I was not aware of that.

Prior to this year, only the Big 10 had a limit on the number of LOI's they could have. As of May 2009, the SEC has a similar rule. I wasn't aware of the SEC rule in my initial posting. See this article for more information on the practice of oversigning and the new SEC rule:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/05/29/oversigning/index.html

[Sea Ray]

Prior to this year, only the Big 10 had a limit on the number of LOI's they could have. As of May 2009, the SEC has a similar rule. I wasn't aware of the SEC rule in my initial posting. See this article for more information on the practice of oversigning and the new SEC rule:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/05/29/oversigning/index.html

Very interesting. Thanks for the info...:thumbup:

[Sea Ray]

As a fellow Volunteer fan, you have seen the last several years how tough it is to maintain a top level program without being in a recruit rich area. That fact is going to be driven home over the next three weeks unless they make a great hire. Ohio St., Texas, Oklahoma, Florida, or USC might loose a few top picks if their coach left at the last minute. Tennessee's class is going to be decimated.


I'm sure you're relieved like I am that you were wrong. Their class did take a hit but far from decimated. That says a lot about the University as a whole. Kids picked the program, not the coach

[Red Heeler]

I'm sure you're relieved like I am that you were wrong. Their class did take a hit but far from decimated. That says a lot about the University as a whole. Kids picked the program, not the coach

I can't say enough about how well Dooley did to hold the class together and even adding to it. He's getting a nice coaching staff together, too. I really like the hiring of Boise's defensive coordinator.

[texasdave]

A brief synopsis on each and every 2010 Bearcat football recruit:

http://www.gobearcats.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/020310aab.html

[Sea Ray]

The beat goes on for the SEC and recruiting. The SEC dominated Signing Day 2011 just like they did a year ago:


Southeastern Conference teams have dominated on the football field in recent years.

Four different SEC teams have won five straight Bowl Championship Series titles, with Florida claiming two national crowns.

It should come as no surprise that SEC teams remained just as dominating on Wednesday's national signing day.

Beauty is in the eye of those who judge high school talent, but looking at Rivals.com, Scout.com and ESPN.com rankings, the SEC overshadowed the rest of the BCS conferences
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110203/COLUMNIST0201/102030318/Joe-Biddle-SEC-crushes-football-opponents-February-too?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Sports

This goes to show that the Lion's share of football talent ends up in the SEC. Kudos to Ohio State who had about as good a class as anyone in any conference and Boise St did quite well too. Nice to see they get to reap some rewards from their recent success

[Chip R]

You hear about this kid's mom who forged his signature on a LOI to Ole Miss?

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/Signing-Day-stories-Floyd-Raven-s-mother-forged?urn=ncaaf-316051

[Sea Ray]

I hadn't heard that. All due respect to the Rebel coach, that is one Nutty story...