Recruiting rankings a key piece of college football puzzle

[Coach Andy Mac]

Teams that do the most/least with their recruiting classes

Signing a quality recruiting class is only the start. Coaches need to develop talent and mold players into a functioning unit in order to be successful. Some programs have demonstrated that ability better than others. Let’s look at some programs that have distinctly demonstrated opposite ends of this spectrum.

The teams below are sorted by the difference between their average national recruiting rankings over the last five years compared to my end-of-year power ratings. As you analyze why each of these teams appears on the list, be sure to consider which programs have undergone coaching changes in recent years and how relevant that information might be for 2022. 

Top 20 teams whose on-field performance has exceeded their recruiting ranking

Teams on the “overachieving” list typically have stable coaching situations or coaches who leave because they are sought by other programs. 

Such is the case for Appalachian State, No. 1 on the list for the second straight season. Shawn Clark is entering his third season as Mountaineers coach (after the school changed coaches for three straight seasons). Also of note, the three armed forces teams are ranked Nos. 2, 3 and 7, likely a credit to the character of players those schools recruit. 

Eight of the top nine teams on the list — other than Liberty slipping in for Tulsa — were top-nine teams last year, a sign of programs with a consistent method of operation. 

All but three teams in the Top 20 are from Group of 5 conferences, with only Iowa State, Kansas State and Wake Forest representing the Power 5. It’s hard to compete for conference titles in the Power 5 if you aren’t recruiting well. Power 5 teams that were in the Top 20 last year but fell out this time around are Wisconsin, Iowa and Oklahoma State.

1. Appalachian State — Recruit Rank: 95, Steve Makinen Power Rating Rank: 46.4, Difference: + 48.6

2. Air Force — Recruit Rank: 106.75, SM Power Rating Rank: 62.5, Difference: + 44.25

3. Army — Recruit Rank: 112, SM Power Rating Rank: 70.2, Difference: + 41.8

4. Liberty — Recruit Rank: 102.75, SM Power Rating Rank: 65, Difference: + 37.75

5. Buffalo — Recruit Rank: 115, SM Power Rating Rank: 79, Difference: + 36

6. Wyoming — Recruit Rank: 108.8, SM Power Rating Rank: 74.4, Difference: + 34.4

7. Navy — Recruit Rank: 108.8, SM Power Rating Rank: 74.8, Difference: + 34

8. UCF — Recruit Rank: 60.4, SM Power Rating Rank: 26.8, Difference: + 33.6

9. Ohio — Recruit Rank: 110.2, SM Power Rating Rank: 78.2, Difference: + 32

10. Iowa State — Recruit Rank: 51.4, SM Power Rating Rank: 19.8, Difference: + 31.6

11. Utah State — Recruit Rank: 109.6, SM Power Rating Rank: 80, Difference: + 29.6

12. Fresno State — Recruit Rank: 90.8, SM Power Rating Rank: 62.8, Difference: + 28

13. Tulsa — Recruit Rank: 105.4, SM Power Rating Rank: 78.2, Difference: + 27.2

14. Coastal Carolina — Recruit Rank: 111, SM Power Rating Rank: 86.8, Difference: + 24.2

15. Boise State — Recruit Rank: 61.2, SM Power Rating Rank: 37.6, Difference: + 23.6

16. BYU — Recruit Rank: 75.6, SM Power Rating Rank: 52.4, Difference: + 23.2

17. UAB — Recruit Rank: 100.2, SM Power Rating Rank: 79.2, Difference: + 21

18. La.-Lafayette — Recruit Rank: 89.8, SM Power Rating Rank: 71, Difference: + 18.8

T19. Kansas State — Recruit Rank: 59.2, SM Power Rating Rank: 40.6, Difference: + 18.6

T19. Wake Forest — Recruit Rank: 63, SM Power Rating Rank: 44.4, Difference: + 18.6

Read more:  https://www.vsin.com/recruiting-rankings-a-key-piece-of-college-football-puzzle/