I'd certainly hope our staff uses this in their pitches for recruits. What's striking is how close VT and UL are, and how pathetic Uva, FSU and the U are.
https://blogs.emory.edu/sportsmarketing/2013/04/25/best-worst-colleges-f...
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Interesting information, thanks for sharing. Any clue how the rating is calculated? Seems that schools that get high rankings typically don't land many blue chip recruits. Also, I'm curious as to why the difference between us and WVU is so large? The difference between our rating and WVU's is just as large as the difference between our score and Oklahoma.
It's calculated by dividing the number of draft picks by the number of 4 and 5 stars. I think the study period was the last 6 years, or something close to that. So it isn't the most scientific or enlightening analysis, but it is still interesting.
Pretty much. But this proves that uva football... is uva football
someone send this to Quin Blanding...
Is this only looking at power conference schools? Because I find it hard to believe that Boise State wouldn't be on that list.
It said it was like 60 schools, but they had to have had both draft picks and 4+ four- or five-star recruits over the last 6 years.
This statistic is really in our favor. Bud picks up a lot of 3 star kids who fit his scheme well and then coaches them up to NFL level. A lot of those teams in the bottom 15 only really sign 4 and 5 star kids. Granted, they don't coach these kids as well. I think the reason more of the classic elite teams are in the bottom 15 rather than the top 15 is for this reason. The top 15 seems to have teams who sign recruits who are deemed to have lesser talent, when the kids are really gems no one has looked into. Really skews this data to the schools who do a little more homework when they recruit.
I'd agree with you, but I don't think the statistic includes 3-star recruits
That's my point. A smaller number of our recruits are 4/5 stars. So if we have the same number of players drafted as FSU does, then our number is higher than FSU's. I bet the statistic would change drastically if 3 star recruits changed. I think this metric is best to express which teams do the best job of recruiting and coaching. Not necessarily who converts 4/5 star prospects into NFL draft picks.
This really is "Who does more with less" vs. "Who does less with more"
Except for Minnesota, K-State, and Wazzou. Don't quite fit the paradigm.
I'm not sure if they tracked the outcome of 4 and 5 star recruits or just the number of draft picks versus recruits. I think they did the simplier analysis. They did not check the stars of each draft pick.
If that is the case then any number over 1.0 would indicate "coaching up", i.e. more 3 or less stars getting drafted. Less than 1.0 means fewer 4 or 5 stars getting drafted then expected. The big assumption is an expectation that 4 or 5 star recruits should end up drafted into the NFL. Not all do and there are many reasons why.
The most interesting part of this stat is the lack of individual success of teams with lots of high ranked recruits. It shows that predicting success based on numbers is not very easy.