Banner Society Over/Underachievers

In today's Read Option email newsletter, Banner Society compared schools' four year recruiting rating to their SP+ ranking. VT is in the underachievers.

These are how teams' performances (measured by SP+) most diverged from their four-year recruiting rankings (calculated by us using the 247Sports Composite, which retroactively changes slightly over time).

Let's start with the teams that had a 2019 SP+ rank more than 10 spots worse than their four-year recruiting ranking:

School 4-year recruiting rank 2019 SP+ rank Diff
Arkansas 31 104 -73
Maryland 33 96 -63
Georgia Tech 49 109 -60
Rutgers 59 117 -58
UCLA 24 80 -56
NC State 38 92 -54
Florida State 5 57 -52
Stanford 23 74 -51
West Virginia 43 94 -51
Vanderbilt 54 103 -49
Arizona 51 97 -46
Toledo 74 114 -40
East Carolina 78 116 -38
Kansas 68 105 -37
Northwestern 52 88 -36
UTSA 89 125 -36
Nebraska 21 52 -31
Ole Miss 22 53 -31
California 45 76 -31
USF 72 102 -30
South Carolina 20 49 -29
UMass 102 130 -28
Mississippi State 25 50 -25
Colorado 47 72 -25
Louisville 39 63 -24
Bowling Green 104 128 -24
UConn 103 126 -23
Texas 7 29 -22
UNLV 99 120 -21
Duke 46 66 -20
Middle Tennessee 90 110 -20
Nevada 93 112 -19
FIU 82 99 -17
USC 6 22 -16
Tennessee 16 32 -16
Pittsburgh 41 56 -15
Colorado State 77 91 -14
Michigan State 29 42 -13
TCU 26 38 -12
North Carolina 27 39 -12
Virginia Tech 28 40 -12
Boston College 70 82 -12
Arizona State 30 41 -11
Houston 64 75 -1

These are the teams that outperformed their recruiting ranks by more than 10 places:

School 4-year recruiting rank 2019 SP+ rank Diff
Air Force 116 27 89
Appalachian State 113 28 85
UL Lafayette 110 33 77
Navy 97 34 63
Ohio 114 54 60
Memphis 69 13 56
UCF 65 14 51
Wyoming 119 68 51
Army 108 64 44
Temple 86 43 43
Liberty 130 87 43
Tulane 84 44 40
Buffalo 122 84 38
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.

Comments

I suppose I'd expect this, as the players recruited are just now getting to the field, and didn't get much help from Seniors this year. VT struggled, particularly at the beginning of the year, but those were the first times a lot of those players were seeing the field.

I'd also expect some marked improvement next year.

I would definitely expect overall improvement as the bulk of players from Fuente's first two classes now become seniors and juniors. However, I'm a little concerned with QB progression and development. Willis was in our program for three years and arguably regressed to the point that he was not an effective option by his r-Sr year. With better QB play to start the season, I'm confident we don't lose to BC and Duke.

Hooker shows a ton of promise, but he will miss the entire spring with rumored surgery. I worry that this will hurt his continued development and the offense will be slow out of the gate yet again. We really can't afford that with a huge national stage test early in the year.

I don't think Willis regressed. He just never progressed. He has the physical skills, but never quite developed the awareness required.

I don't think it's the training, because Hooker has the awareness required (well, for the most part - he does need to learn when to throw it away and not take a sack).

I didn't realize we finished #40, that's damn impressive considering we were #75 after 5 games.

A lot of ACC schools in that first list, including 3 of the top 7 biggest under-performers.

Hokie fan | W&M grad

I don't think you can really count GT there. They recruited for a completely different system than they have now.

My 2019 Season Challenge: only comment with Star Wars memes. (completed as of Nov. 29)

Florida State obviously sticks out big time.

How is Miami not on the list on underachievers?

Probably because they finished #26 in SP+, and haven't quite been recruiting at an elite level over the last few years.

The lack of power 5 over-performers makes me wonder if the SP+ is a little inflated in the G5 arena.

"I am probably too rational to be here"

I think it has more to do with the fact that the better you recruit, the harder it is to over achieve. If you have the best recruiting and finish 5th overall you're technically under achieving.

Twitter me

You aren't wrong but they spotted each side 10 places.

Another explanation could be the false inflation of recruit rankings following power 5 offers

"I am probably too rational to be here"