Before the season begins, take a look at how well our ACC counterparts perform relative to their recruiting strength. In this final edition, I take a look at some of the 'blue blood' ACC programs: Florida State, Clemson, and Miami.
Methodology
For this installment, I change up the evaluation criteria somewhat. The basic rules are described in parts one and two of this series, here and here.
These programs, however, regularly pull in top-15 recruiting classes or better, so there's not much margin for improvement. Therefore, in addition to the raw recruiting vs. actual result comparison, this evaluation also includes championships. With the level of talent these programs pull in, they are expected to win conference titles and more. But do they? Let's see.
Florida State
Coaches:
| Coach | Recruiting | Expected | Actual | Diff | Years | Wins | Loss | Win Pct. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bobby Bowden | 10.13 | 8.33 | 27.67 | -19.33 | 1976-2009 | 304 | 97 | 0.758 |
| Jimbo Fisher | 4.75 | 8.14 | 11.14 | -3.00 | 2010-pres. | 77 | 17 | 0.819 |
Recruiting Rankings, Expected Results, and Actual Results, by Year:
| Year | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recruiting | 4 | 4 | 6 | 24 | 13 | 13 | 7 | 2 | 3 | 11 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 6 |
| Expected | 6 | 7 | 7 | 9 | 9 | 12 | 14 | 13 | 8 | 7 | 5 | 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Actual | 15 | 23 | 33 | 40 | 21 | 34 | 17 | 23 | 10 | **1** | 5 | 14 | 8 | |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
Grades:
- Bowden:
- There's no doubt that things tailed off for the legendary coach during his final years. Despite the still-elite level of recruiting, the on-field results weren't there. FSU underachieved each of Bowden's last five years, and they fell out of the top-25 three of those years. There was one ACC championship and one division title in that span, so it wasn't all bad, but it was bad enough.
Recruiting: A, Results: B,
Coaching-em-up: D
- Fisher:
- Fisher's record at FSU has been exceptional, both on the recruiting trail and on the field. The -3 differential looks a bit disappointing, but consider the three conference championships, 5-2 bowl record, and one national championship. That's good enough for me.
Recruiting: A+, Results: A,
Coaching-em-up: A
Clemson
Coaches:
| Coach | Recruiting | Expected | Actual | Diff | Years | Wins | Loss | Win Pct. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tommy Bowden |
27.67 | 31.40 | 28.80 | 2.60 | 1999-2008 | 72 | 45 | 0.615 |
| Dabo Swinney |
16.20 | 17.38 | 16.88 | 0.5 | 2009-pres. | 87 | 28 | 0.757 |
Recruiting Rankings, Expected Results, and Actual Results, by Year:
| Year | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
| Recruiting | 46 | 18 | 13 | 17 | 10 | 31 | 28 | 10 | 15 | 15 | 17 | 9 | 11 | 16 |
| Expected | 37 | 37 | 33 | 29 | 21 | 16 | 18 | 20 | 20 | 20 | 17 | 14 | 14 | 13 |
| Actual | 43 | 21 | 29 | 21 | 30 | 24 | 52 | 22 | 11 | 8 | 15 | 2 | **1** | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grades
- Tommy Bowden:
- I was surprised by the numbers on this one. Lil' Bowden's teams actually outperformed expectations in three of his five years at Clemson, with an overall coach-em-up differential in the positive range. There were no championships of any form during his tenure, but the recruiting wasn't at the elite level either. Overall not a bad job.
Recruiting: B, Results: B,
Coaching-em-up: C+
- Dabo Swinney:
- This is the one my devoted readers (both of you!) are probably here to see. What did it take to get that national championship we all crave for VT? Swinney's first year was an obvious disappointment, finishing well below expectations. After that one-year stumble, however, Swinney's squads have overachieved every year. The recruiting hasn't been top-10 level elite, but a consistent stream of classes ranked in the top 10-15 range got it done. Swinney has won 5 division titles, 3 ACC crowns, owns a 6-3 bowl record, and, oh yeah, one national championship. That's coaching-em-up at it's finest.
- NOTE: For a more comprehensive analysis of Clemson's recruiting runup to the title, see this
excellent writeup by BrooklandHokie.
Recruiting: A, Results: A,
Coaching-em-up: A+
Miami
Coaches:
| Coach | Recruiting | Expected | Actual | Diff | Years | Wins | Loss | Win Pct. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Larry Coker |
6.60 | 4.33 | 25.67 | -21.33 | 2001-2006 | 60 | 15 | 0.800 |
| Randy Shannon |
11.00 | 9.25 | 38.50 | -29.25 | 2007-2010 | 28 | 22 | 0.560 |
| Al Golden | 19.00 | 16.60 | 45.40 | -28.80 | 2011-2015 | 32 | 25 | 0.561 |
| Mark Richt | 17.00 | 16.60 | 20.00 | -4.00 | 2016-pres | 9 | 4 | 0.692 |
Recruiting Rankings, Expected Results, and Actual Results, by Year:
| Year | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 |
| Recruiting | 1 | 9 | 14 | 12 | 2 | 16 | 14 | 33 | 10 | 14 | 12 | 26 | 21 | 13 |
| Expected | 4 | 4 | 5 | 7 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 13 | 16 | 18 | 18 | 18 | 16 | 18 |
| Actual | 11 | 17 | 49 | 70 | 35 | 19 | 30 | 51 | 48 | 32 | 40 | 56 | 20 | |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grades
- Before I even get to grades, take a look at that graph, and have yourself a good laugh. Take your time and savor it.
- Well, that was fun. Now on to the grades...
- Larry Coker:
- Larry Coker's glory years came before 2004, and they were glorious. But this analysis includes only the last three years of his regime, and things really went off the rails for Miami during that time. Despite elite recruiting, the on-field got worse every year, culminating in the 7-6 mediocrity that was 2006. In those last three years, there were no championships of any sort, and the coach-em-up differential of -21 was woefully bad. The top-25 finishes were nice, but not when you pull in the #1 recruiting class in the nation. All that gets you is fired.
Recruiting: A, Results: B,
Coaching-em-up: D-
- Randy Shannon:
- They say that nice guys finish last, and here's your proof. Shannon's hurricanes underperformed every year, and by an average differential of -30! No championships for coach APR, and only one top-25 finish. Academics are nice, but a failure to coach-em-up was Shannon's undoing.
Recruiting: A, Results: B-,
Coaching-em-up: F
- Al Golden:
- A new coach, more top-notch recruiting, and more mediocre results. Same-old, same-old. A -29 coaching differential, no championships, and no top 25 finishes for the Golden boy from Temple.
Recruiting: A, Results: C,
Coaching-em-up: F
- Mark Richt:
- Has Mark Richt righted the ship in hurricane alley? Only time will tell, but year one had Miami finishing pretty close to expectations. The differential of -4 isn't bad, but without an ACC championship, the U aint back yet.
Recruiting: A, Results:
A-, Coaching-em-up: C-
Conclusion
I think there are two takeaways from this group of coaches:
- It's tough at the top. Big-time recruiting brings big-time expectations. Those expectations are near impossible to live up to over the long haul, and even the best coaches have been done in by winning seasons that failed to match fans' hopes (see Beamer, Frank).
- It takes A-grade recruiting to win it all. The only coach in this study to coach-em-up to a national title is Dabo Swinney. But his recruiting classes averaged 16th overall, and 14th leading up the the title run. It's rare for a coach to overachieve by more than ~10 slots over the bar set by recruiting, so to have a shot, you better be pulling in some top-10 classes.
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Well done Pi. Here's to hoping that the Miami coaching them up stays less than average. I'll believe they bak when I see it.
I'm really hoping this is the year that we see some Hokies have big years (looking at your Tremaine and Cam) and help attract some blue chips.
I would rather not see Miami get back. I would love for Richt to do well enough this year that he leaves them for greener pastures and Miami falls to Duke, Wake, and LOLUVA levels of mediocrity.
Legitimacy. The Coastal needs it. A bak Miami provides it.
I got zero problem hating on the U. But in terms of national perception, the Coastal is just "the other division" in the ACC, in large part because they (UM) have been down for so long. (VT's own struggles of the last 5 years has reinforced that image.). VT, Miami, and UNC are the closest thing the Coastal has to mirror the Clemson/FSU/Louisville triumvirate in the Atlantic. All three of those Atlantic games are big games of late. VT-Miami has to become a yearly national marquee game - a game that decides the Coastal, ideally.
if we start ripping off ACC championships - beating these Atlantic heavies in the process - then the legitimacy will take care of itself. But until having Miami on the schedule adds to the SOS, the book on the Coastal will remain "weak division".
Agree 100%. And I don't hate the U like I hate WVU and UVA. I'd love to see teams like Miami, Pitt, and yes even Georgia Tech become great as long as we're still better than they are more times than not. I'd rather beat a team adding to our SOS than just rubbing dirt in the face of shitty ones. Except for WVU and UVA, they can suck forever and I'll still wish them to be worse.
What is missing from the Clemson piece is that they won because they landed superprospects at QB to help mask some of the deficiencies they had elsewhere. With Deshaun Watson, they essentially ran the same path we did with Vick, but they had a MUCH better foundation built by consistently good but not great recruiting to push them over the edge.
What's scary about what Dabo is doing is now they have the next 2 #1 overall QB recruits either in the fold or committed on top of National Top 5 recruiting classes. Our path to success now must run through that monster of a program, and it will take us significantly raising our standards on the recruiting trail to really get us there. Of course, this is assuming Dabo and Venables stay in town, either of which very well could be gone within the next few seasons (Venables as a Head Coach and Dabo to Bama after Saban retires).
Clemson did their best to tie up Dabo with a big raise and extension. The question is in that contract how much of a raise did Venerables get and will it matter if the SEC comes calling.
The SEC isn't as attractive as it once was. Like Foster, I don't think Venerables is leaving for anything other than a P5 head coaching job.
Their Dline was nasty. As was their entire offense. Deshaun was amazing, but I don't think the 'relative talent gap' between him and he teammates was near that of Vick's VT teams.
Sorry to ask, but what did Mark Richt's tenure at Georgia look like. Might offer some insight for how da U will do in the future.
A lot like Beamers...Lots of 10 win seasons in the SEC, but never got over the hump. Only difference was, Richt had players when he got there and Beamer created his own legacy.
Edit From Wiki..
yeah, but was he doing more with less recruiting wise or was that all expected.
Being transplanted in the 404, most UGA alumni I run into love Richt but were severely disappointed in his inability to translate the body of work into a national championship or a perennial SEC championship. Such high hopes and expectations for Richt but he just couldn't get it done even with the talent coming in year after year.
Agree - would love to see a similar analysis of Richt's UGA teams
Nice work on this project. While it's entertaining to see the Bakness exposed for the myth that it has truly been, the landscape of the ACC looks quite a bit different from 10 years ago, and we're no longer standing on top.
I was as ready as anybody to discount the hiring of Dabo as a huge mistake, but with a huge donor base, an overhaul of their facilities and a rekindling of their past success to go along with an energetic young coach, Clemson made it to the top of the ACC in a few incredible years.
Hopefully our time is coming!
CALLING Pi!!! CALLING Pi!!
Do you mind dusting off your spreadsheet and performing a little check-up on how Fuente is looking in the coaching-em-up category. Since the GT game, there seems to be a divide between the "Team is Young" crowd and the "Coaches should adapt" crowd and I just remembered you putting this together. I would to see if this year's team is performing to the expected result based on your metrics.
Was weird reading this I was like what year is it?