Jump to content
  • Welcome to GoMeanGreen.com!

    Thank you for visiting us!  Registering is easy and free, and provides you with the ability to participate in the discussions along with many cool features and content.

Sign in to follow this  
BillySee58

3 years into CUSA - recruiting take

Recommended Posts

So if a player has more offers than a player that has 0 offers the player that has more offers will be a better product when it is all said and done. Not to rain on your parade because I think you do a fine job in following recruiting for us, but...duh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you do a spreadsheet or something with these values comparing us with other CUSA schools? Do you have a link?

No, and I didn't want to take the time to look at every scholarship player in our conference and look at their offer lists listed on all four recruiting sites. Plus, it's not like all of our recruiting is comparable. For example, Southern Miss is more likely to get a good player who doesn't have an impressive offer list because he might play high school ball in an area where there isn't much exposure for to be recruited. Then you compare that to our recruits who are coming primarily from areas where they get all the exposure you could ask for.

But like I said, it has been a good predictor for us, in particular.

So if a player has more offers than a player that has 0 offers the player that has more offers will be a better product when it is all said and done. Not to rain on your parade because I think you do a fine job in following recruiting for us, but...duh. 

What I'm exhibiting is how accurate offer lists are for us, and how they're better indicators for our signees in particular than star rating.

Rod Lancaster was a 3-star signee for us while Cyril Lemon was a 2-star. If that's how you're evaluating our signees, you'd look at Lancaster as a bust, and view Lemon as a pleasant surprise. But if you look at the offer lists you'd see that Lemon was an "A" recruit with 7 FBS offers, while Lancaster had no other offers, it makes complete sense that Lemon was a 4-year starter while Lancaster never played a meaningful snap.

  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, and I didn't want to take the time to look at every scholarship player in our conference and look at their offer lists listed on all four recruiting sites. Plus, it's not like all of our recruiting is comparable. For example, Southern Miss is more likely to get a good player who doesn't have an impressive offer list because he might play high school ball in an area where there isn't much exposure for to be recruited. Then you compare that to our recruits who are coming primarily from areas where they get all the exposure you could ask for.

But like I said, it has been a good predictor for us, in particular.

What I'm exhibiting is how accurate offer lists are for us, and how they're better indicators for our signees in particular than star rating.

Rod Lancaster was a 3-star signee for us while Cyril Lemon was a 2-star. If that's how you're evaluating our signees, you'd look at Lancaster as a bust, and view Lemon as a pleasant surprise. But if you look at the offer lists you'd see that Lemon was an "A" recruit with 7 FBS offers, while Lancaster had no other offers, it makes complete sense that Lemon was a 4-year starter while Lancaster never played a meaningful snap.

What about Jucos and transfers? Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, and I didn't want to take the time to look at every scholarship player in our conference and look at their offer lists listed on all four recruiting sites. Plus, it's not like all of our recruiting is comparable. For example, Southern Miss is more likely to get a good player who doesn't have an impressive offer list because he might play high school ball in an area where there isn't much exposure for to be recruited. Then you compare that to our recruits who are coming primarily from areas where they get all the exposure you could ask for.

But like I said, it has been a good predictor for us, in particular.

What I'm exhibiting is how accurate offer lists are for us, and how they're better indicators for our signees in particular than star rating.

Rod Lancaster was a 3-star signee for us while Cyril Lemon was a 2-star. If that's how you're evaluating our signees, you'd look at Lancaster as a bust, and view Lemon as a pleasant surprise. But if you look at the offer lists you'd see that Lemon was an "A" recruit with 7 FBS offers, while Lancaster had no other offers, it makes complete sense that Lemon was a 4-year starter while Lancaster never played a meaningful snap.

Jingle my memory, wasn't Lancaster a transfer? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is good stuff.  Would love to see our classes historically using this system as well as moving forward.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is good stuff.  Would love to see our classes historically using this system as well as moving forward.  

I was just thinking we could add this as a column to the Roster spreadsheet in the recruiting forum.  In fact, I could also add a column or two for All Conference selections. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using this system, I'd be curious to see how next year's senior class (which you mentioned was one of the biggest we've had in a while), is rated. 

ETA: a quick scan through shows, it's not great. With only a handful of guys from that class getting multiple offers. Could mean, while they will be more experienced, Littrell is going to have some work to do talent-wise his first year. 2014 & 15 were improved and we didn't burn a lot of redshirt this season so that might help. 

I think it's also important to add with JuCos, you shouldn't go off their high school offers. Everyone was very excited about DaMarcus Smith based on his extensive high school offer list, but coming out of JuCo, I show us as his only offer.

Edited by ChristopherRyanWilkes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just thinking we could add this as a column to the Roster spreadsheet in the recruiting forum.  In fact, I could also add a column or two for All Conference selections. 

Possibly, but we'll hold off on it for now. Need to see if I can get something else to work out first.

Jingle my memory, wasn't Lancaster a transfer? 

No. He was rated 3-stars by Rivals despite us being his only offer.

What about Jucos and transfers? Thanks

For jucos I use their offer list out of junior college, but I keep note of their high school offer list if they had one. If they had a really good offer list out of high school then that means they have the athletic talent, generally.

For FBS transfers I don't include them, but I keep track of their high school offer list. Again, it shows an idea of what their talent level is. For example, when heading into the 2013 season and looking at which players fit into my 3 all-CUSA criteria, Marcus Trice fit in there partly because of his high school offer list. He had a great offer list (so he had the talent), he had experience, and he didn't play amazing his junior year but he certainly wasn't a bust. He fit all 3 criteria so his all-CUSA season made reasonable sense.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly, but we'll hold off on it for now. Need to see if I can get something else to work out first.

No. He was rated 3-stars by Rivals despite us being his only offer.

For jucos I use their offer list out of junior college, but I keep note of their high school offer list if they had one. If they had a really good offer list out of high school then that means they have the athletic talent, generally.

For FBS transfers I don't include them, but I keep track of their high school offer list. Again, it shows an idea of what their talent level is. For example, when heading into the 2013 season and looking at which players fit into my 3 all-CUSA criteria, Marcus Trice fit in there partly because of his high school offer list. He had a great offer list (so he had the talent), he had experience, and he didn't play amazing his junior year but he certainly wasn't a bust. He fit all 3 criteria so his all-CUSA season made reasonable sense.

Would like to see it on the spread sheet as well. 

After your post I checked out WKU's class from a few years ago to now. Seeing some of the teams they beat out in recruiting those players makes it obvious why they are a top-25 team now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly, but we'll hold off on it for now. Need to see if I can get something else to work out first.

No. He was rated 3-stars by Rivals despite us being his only offer.

For jucos I use their offer list out of junior college, but I keep note of their high school offer list if they had one. If they had a really good offer list out of high school then that means they have the athletic talent, generally.

For FBS transfers I don't include them, but I keep track of their high school offer list. Again, it shows an idea of what their talent level is. For example, when heading into the 2013 season and looking at which players fit into my 3 all-CUSA criteria, Marcus Trice fit in there partly because of his high school offer list. He had a great offer list (so he had the talent), he had experience, and he didn't play amazing his junior year but he certainly wasn't a bust. He fit all 3 criteria so his all-CUSA season made reasonable sense.

Is 2015 Mac's best class? 

I have always had trouble with comparing 4A or 5A ball in Texas to that in other States. With Texas,  being far superior! 

Thanks for the work and keep it up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is 2015 Mac's best class? 

I have always had trouble with comparing 4A or 5A ball in Texas to that in other States. With Texas,  being far superior! 

Thanks for the work and keep it up!

To me that was just the administration trying to hype up a class following that bad 4-8 season he had (not as bad now by comparison). From an offer list standpoint the 2014 class was much better than 2015, and noticeably better than any of Mccarney's classes.

Thank you!

Edited by BillySee58

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, this is really good work.  Very scientific in terms of a very simple way to compare different methodologies used for analyzing recruitment statistics.  I think you should go a bit deeper and do a nice long write up and submit it to one of the bigs (ESPN, SI, CBS Sports, Fox Sports, etc.).  If you need help with the format for a more extensive research-style article, there are a few of us on here with more experience than we would like to admit in doing so.  I really think you may have something here in terms of an alternative analysis method.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Please review our full Privacy Policy before using our site.