- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Success on field compared to recruiting
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:09 am
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:09 am
[/URL]
dunno if Germans, i would think it's gotta be but nevertheless i think it speaks for itself.
one of the arguments against Miles is his disparity btwn recruiting and success. this doesn't seem to be the case.
also from deadspin with how the graph was assembled
link to article if you want to read more.
LINK
dunno if Germans, i would think it's gotta be but nevertheless i think it speaks for itself.
one of the arguments against Miles is his disparity btwn recruiting and success. this doesn't seem to be the case.
also from deadspin with how the graph was assembled
quote:
When college football teams fail to meet expectations, fans tend to turn to an old stand-by: Our coach is an all right recruiter, but he just can't coach. This is the narrative behind, for example, Will Muschamp's downturn at Florida. On the other hand, coaches who significantly exceed expectations are perceived as solid coaches despite meager recruiting skills. (This the case for Bill Snyder.) But these coaches are outliers. How does the rest of college football fare in translating expected talent to actual success?
We compared how teams recruited to where they ended up in computer polls at the end of each of the last five seasons. To measure on-field success, we used Kenneth Massey's ranking composite. Massey is a statistician whose work contributed to the BCS computer rankings; his composite index averages dozens of rankings including the six computers used in the BCS, the AP poll, and the USA Today coaches' poll.
Rivals rankings were used to measure recruiting. For each season, we used an average of the five previous recruiting classes. Even though upperclassmen generally contribute more than underclassmen, we avoided weighted averages because upperclassmen also transfer schools, declare for the NFL draft early, and have career-ending injuries.
To give an example of how we rated teams, 2009 teams are made up of recruiting classes from 2005-09. In 2009, USC had a 3.2 average, since the five recruiting classes that made up that team were, on average, ranked 3.2.
We then averaged results from 2009-2013 and compared the metrics. Doing this tells you that from 2009-2013, USC finished 22nd in Massey's poll on average with teams that had recruiting classes ranked 4.2 on average, meaning they "underperformed" their recruiting rankings by 17.8 spots on average. Perhaps as a consequence, Lane Kiffin got fired.
The further teams are from the chart's dotted red line, the greater the discrepancy between their recruiting and on-field rankings. Teams in the blue region did better on the field while teams in the red region were better at recruiting.
Of teams in the red region, Kansas had the most distance between its talent and team success. The Jayhawks are near the middle of the horizontal axis, so it's not like they recruited blue chippers. They've just been so awful on the field, as Charlie Weis lost 19 of 20 contests against Power 5 schools, that they haven't come close to meeting the expectations of their mediocre recruiting classes, underperforming their recruiting classes by 48.9 spots on average.
Of teams in the blue region, Navy had the most distance between talent and success. Despite military-academy restrictions that make recruiting top players difficult, Navy made bowl games in four of the last five seasons as they outperformed their recruiting expectations by 57.4 spots on average.
link to article if you want to read more.
LINK
This post was edited on 12/17/14 at 10:16 am
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:10 am to TDTGodfather
That's pretty cool and basically what I expected. LSU is near the top with both recruiting and success.
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:12 am to TDTGodfather
quote:Oh oh - LSU is underperforming.
Success on field compared to recruiting
The decline is real!
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:15 am to TDTGodfather
over what timeframe is these rankings?
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:21 am to TDTGodfather
Graph is shite
Used Toonces
Used Toonces
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:24 am to TDTGodfather
This makes me actually at the Miles detractors. It PROVES two things: that they are wrong when they say that he under uses or under develops talent, and that they are clearly Bamasessed.
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:24 am to TDTGodfather
that's encouraging for the future as I'm sure LSU was even closer to the blue in 2011
that said I'd obviously rather be in the blue than the red at any given point. It's pretty telling that Oregon and Stanford are so far into the blue, and both coaches who coached them to that point are in the NFL now....
that said I'd obviously rather be in the blue than the red at any given point. It's pretty telling that Oregon and Stanford are so far into the blue, and both coaches who coached them to that point are in the NFL now....
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:33 am to TDTGodfather
I didn't read all that, does it take into account a team playing 3-4 teams ranked in the top 10 of recruiting every year?
I like how we are above FSU though. And people would trade miles for jimbo in a heart beat. They out recruit us almost every cycle and still find ways to lose to nc state, wake Forrest and uva.
We've also played 12 of those teams bunched up at the top under Miles. If you include Wisconsin that is 13.
I like how we are above FSU though. And people would trade miles for jimbo in a heart beat. They out recruit us almost every cycle and still find ways to lose to nc state, wake Forrest and uva.
We've also played 12 of those teams bunched up at the top under Miles. If you include Wisconsin that is 13.
This post was edited on 12/17/14 at 10:43 am
Posted on 12/17/14 at 10:33 am to TDTGodfather
Correct me if I'm wrong..
But Bama having #1 recruiting classes like the last 7 years and only having 3 championships is actually underachieving..
AMIRITE?!
But Bama having #1 recruiting classes like the last 7 years and only having 3 championships is actually underachieving..
AMIRITE?!
Posted on 12/17/14 at 11:55 am to TDTGodfather
I wish we could add an additional two metrics from 05 to date: 1)success rate of LSU players getting drafted/picked up in NFL (as compared to other schools; and 2) success of players who have played and are currently playing in the NFL (although I realize the second is somewhat problematic...maybe success = 3 or more years in NFL, or whatever it takes to receive retirement benefits).
Then, take all 3 metrics and have the admins sticky it at the top of the recruiting page.
I don't know why LSU doesn't do this and send out a press release; could be a project for students in statistical analysis classes. The comparison is HUGE ('cept for our nemesis BAMA of course, but we even beat them in these two particular categories).
Then, take all 3 metrics and have the admins sticky it at the top of the recruiting page.
I don't know why LSU doesn't do this and send out a press release; could be a project for students in statistical analysis classes. The comparison is HUGE ('cept for our nemesis BAMA of course, but we even beat them in these two particular categories).
Posted on 12/17/14 at 12:10 pm to TDTGodfather
I think it would be kind of funny to have an arrow pointing to LSU with something along the lines of, "Mediocrity."
Posted on 12/17/14 at 12:26 pm to TDTGodfather
1a. Missouri (3 10-win Seasons, 2 SECe Titles)
1b. Vanderbilt (James Franklin )
3a. Alabama (Hard to overachieve when you have 7 straight #1 classes)
3b. South Carolina (3 11-win seasons, 1 SECe Titles)
5a. Mississippi State (Average SEC team with Average Recruiting Ranks)
5b. LSU (4 10-win Seasons, 1 SEC Title, 1 NC appearance, Trails only Bama, Oregon, and Stanford for total results)
7. aTm (3 9-win Seasons)
8. Arkansas (Fired a Coach)
9. Georgia
10. Florida (Fired a Coach)
11. Auburn (Fired a Coach)
12. Kentucky (Fired a Coach)
13. Ole Miss (Fired a Coach)
14. Tennessee (Fired a Coach)
1b. Vanderbilt (James Franklin )
3a. Alabama (Hard to overachieve when you have 7 straight #1 classes)
3b. South Carolina (3 11-win seasons, 1 SECe Titles)
5a. Mississippi State (Average SEC team with Average Recruiting Ranks)
5b. LSU (4 10-win Seasons, 1 SEC Title, 1 NC appearance, Trails only Bama, Oregon, and Stanford for total results)
7. aTm (3 9-win Seasons)
8. Arkansas (Fired a Coach)
9. Georgia
10. Florida (Fired a Coach)
11. Auburn (Fired a Coach)
12. Kentucky (Fired a Coach)
13. Ole Miss (Fired a Coach)
14. Tennessee (Fired a Coach)
Posted on 12/17/14 at 12:36 pm to TDTGodfather
Bu-bu-but!!
Miles is a good recruiter but cant coach players up and we underperform!
Miles is a good recruiter but cant coach players up and we underperform!
Posted on 12/17/14 at 2:14 pm to TDTGodfather
This graph just makes me angry thinking about what LSU could accomplish if we didn't lose eleventy billion underclassmen to the draft every season.
Posted on 12/17/14 at 2:26 pm to TDTGodfather
Boise, Wisocnsin, TCU, and Oregon are how far from the line LSU wants to be.
With the same recruiting though. We couldnt fit on this graph if that were so.
With the same recruiting though. We couldnt fit on this graph if that were so.
Posted on 12/18/14 at 12:36 pm to TDTGodfather
Tulane
Posted on 12/18/14 at 2:11 pm to TDTGodfather
2nd in talent yet only 1 bcs bowl game in 7 years
If that's not underachieving I don't know what is
How is this up for debate?
If that's not underachieving I don't know what is
How is this up for debate?
This post was edited on 12/18/14 at 2:12 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News