• The KillerFrogs

Winning & Recruiting

FeistyFrog

Sir FeistyFrog
Knock out victories against lower division teams and watch Tech fall in line and difference for TCU become more pronounced.
 

ectofrog

New Member
There's no question that the big recruiting services are simply wrong about a lot of kids. There's also no question that they have completely different metrics than CGP and staff have when evaluating kids (they can't give a player a ranking who would be great in CGP's system but not work nearly as well in many other systems).

At the same time, there's no question that certain coaches do more with less...CGP, Whittingham, Petersen all being among those coaches.

But let's remember, this is a list that evaluates nothing but winning percentage. Have we won at a higher clip than LSU and Florida over this time span? Yes, and with much lower-ranked recruits. But, have most of LSU's and Florida's teams over this span been better than TCU's and only had slightly lower winning percentages because they play murderer's row compared to what we play? Yeah, gotta give 'em that. MWC is not chump-change, and I put it up there with the Big East and the ACC and in some years the Big 10, Pac 10, and Big 12. But the SEC it ain't.

What I'd like to see is average recruiting ranking vs. average finish. That'd be a more interesting list, IMO.
 
QUOTE(ectofrog @ Jun 22 2010, 04:30 PM) [snapback]585943[/snapback]
There's no question that the big recruiting services are simply wrong about a lot of kids. There's also no question that they have completely different metrics than CGP and staff have when evaluating kids (they can't give a player a ranking who would be great in CGP's system but not work nearly as well in many other systems).

At the same time, there's no question that certain coaches do more with less...CGP, Whittingham, Petersen all being among those coaches.

But let's remember, this is a list that evaluates nothing but winning percentage. Have we won at a higher clip than LSU and Florida over this time span? Yes, and with much lower-ranked recruits. But, have most of LSU's and Florida's teams over this span been better than TCU's and only had slightly lower winning percentages because they play murderer's row compared to what we play? Yeah, gotta give 'em that. MWC is not chump-change, and I put it up there with the Big East and the ACC and in some years the Big 10, Pac 10, and Big 12. But the SEC it ain't.

What I'd like to see is average recruiting ranking vs. average finish. That'd be a more interesting list, IMO.


SEC has their fair share of crap schools: Mississippi State, Vandy, Kentucky, Arkansas, Tennessee. Add to that the fact that SEC schools travel far less than any other schools in the country in OOC games and you start to make up for the Alabama, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Auburn type schedule.
 
Recruiting ratings are a textbook example of a tautology. 4 star athletes are 4 stars because they get recruited by the top schools. The top schools are good because they get the most 4 star athletes. Repeat.
 

jake102

Active Member
Arkansas and Tennessee are far from crap schools. They may not be at the top right now, but they would be between 2-4 in the MWC.
 
QUOTE(West Coast Johnny @ Jun 22 2010, 03:56 PM) [snapback]585921[/snapback]
http://bluegraysky.com/forum/index.php?id=22283

Interesting analysis. Do TCU, Boise and Utah do more with less? Or is Rivals just wrong.

It is an interesting analysis but I think it needs to account for the fact that there is a time lag between the publication of the recruiting ranking and the point at which most of those athletes have an impact on the won-loss record. Second, I'd be interested to see how well the correlation fits, not with won-loss but something like a Sagarin ranking that tries to account for more performance factors than just won-loss.
 
QUOTE(Duquesne Frog @ Jun 22 2010, 03:46 PM) [snapback]585953[/snapback]
Recruiting ratings are a textbook example of a tautology. 4 star athletes are 4 stars because they get recruited by the top schools. The top schools are good because they get the most 4 star athletes. Repeat.


Agree 100%. Additionally when a 4 star signs with a school like ours, they quickly become a 3 star and so forth
 

gdu

Active Member
QUOTE(Jake102 @ Jun 22 2010, 03:50 PM) [snapback]585960[/snapback]
Arkansas and Tennessee are far from crap schools. They may not be at the top right now, but they would be between 2-4 in the MWC.

Not the last couple years, they wouldn't. They would be 4-5, fighting for the 3 spot.
 

TopFrog

Lifelong Frog
QUOTE(frog9999 @ Jun 22 2010, 04:06 PM) [snapback]585972[/snapback]
Additionally when a 4 star signs with a school like ours, they quickly become a 3 star and so forth
Repeat
 

ectofrog

New Member
QUOTE(Frognosticator @ Jun 22 2010, 03:42 PM) [snapback]585950[/snapback]
SEC has their fair share of crap schools: Mississippi State, Vandy, Kentucky, Arkansas, Tennessee. Add to that the fact that SEC schools travel far less than any other schools in the country in OOC games and you start to make up for the Alabama, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Auburn type schedule.


Wow, the "crap schools" you're talking about would be better than several teams in our league.

Arkansas is 71-54 for the decade...went to seven bowls in ten years, won their division of the SEC twice, and beat 10-win teams five times.

Tennessee is 83-44 for the decade...went to eight bowls in ten years, won their division of the SEC three times, and beat 10-win teams eight times.

Kentucky I'll grant you was crap in the early half of the decade, but in the last four years has gone 30-22, been to four straight bowl games, won three of them, and beaten an 8-5 Auburn, an 8-5 Georgia, a 9-5 East Carolina, a 7-6 Florida State, an 8-5 Clemson, a 9-4 Georgia, and a 12-2 BCS Champion LSU.

Mississippi State and Vanderbilt, I will grant you, are crap teams (2 of 12 instead of the 2 of 9 we have that are total crap year-in, year-out in SDSU and UNLV). But BOTH have been to bowls in the last three years, something SDSU hasn't done since 1998 and something UNLV hasn't done since 2000.

Arkansas and Tennessee would compete for conference championships in the MWC...I'm not saying I think either are as good as TCU, BYU, Boise, or (for one more year) Utah right now. But there would be years where they would be. Kentucky would make for a better fourth team than Air Force right now. And their worst (MSU and Vandy) are at the very least better than our worst.

MWC and SEC have different definitions for their crappy teams.
 

Mike Brooks

New Member
All about subscriptions and mag sales. I read DCTF at Barnes and Noble over the weekend (refuse to pay money for that Big 12 rag) and found it humorous that they tweaked their recruiting rankings formula this year and, like magic, Baylor is ranked higher. Despite the fact most services had us ranked higher.

You would think, at some point, they might attend some game and they would see we faster, stronger and just as big as just about anyone. But would the large state schools slurp that up? Not a chance.
 
QUOTE(Jake102 @ Jun 22 2010, 04:50 PM) [snapback]585960[/snapback]
Arkansas and Tennessee are far from crap schools. They may not be at the top right now, but they would be between 2-4 in the MWC.


Bullcrap. Tennessee sucks. They'd finish about 6th behind the big three, AF and UNLV. Arkansas is going to be pretty good this year with all the talent they've got coming back, but they'd still finish 4th , behind the big 3.

But hey, way to think highly of the MWC that you'd think Arky and Tennessee could finish 2nd. Way to support your conference. We need more fans like you. :wacko:
 

ricksterh

Full Member
QUOTE(froglicious @ Jun 22 2010, 09:57 PM) [snapback]585998[/snapback]
All about subscriptions and mag sales. I read DCTF at Barnes and Noble over the weekend (refuse to pay money for that Big 12 rag) and found it humorous that they tweaked their recruiting rankings formula this year and, like magic, Baylor is ranked higher. Despite the fact most services had us ranked higher.

You would think, at some point, they might attend some game and they would see we faster, stronger and just as big as just about anyone. But would the large state schools slurp that up? Not a chance.


+1 it's a matter of $ paid by the number of subscribers plus the fact that part of the analysis has to do with the fact that say Texas or Ohio State for example recruit a kid the services ASSUME that he must be good and rank him higher. TCU has gained a lot of credibility in this area and the fact that the Frogs are getting players with higher ratings is partly because they are good and the services are starting to respect TCU more. :biggrin:
 
QUOTE(ectofrog @ Jun 22 2010, 05:40 PM) [snapback]585989[/snapback]
Wow, the "crap schools" you're talking about would be better than several teams in our league.

Arkansas is 71-54 for the decade...went to seven bowls in ten years, won their division of the SEC twice, and beat 10-win teams five times.

Tennessee is 83-44 for the decade...went to eight bowls in ten years, won their division of the SEC three times, and beat 10-win teams eight times.

Kentucky I'll grant you was crap in the early half of the decade, but in the last four years has gone 30-22, been to four straight bowl games, won three of them, and beaten an 8-5 Auburn, an 8-5 Georgia, a 9-5 East Carolina, a 7-6 Florida State, an 8-5 Clemson, a 9-4 Georgia, and a 12-2 BCS Champion LSU.

Mississippi State and Vanderbilt, I will grant you, are crap teams (2 of 12 instead of the 2 of 9 we have that are total crap year-in, year-out in SDSU and UNLV). But BOTH have been to bowls in the last three years, something SDSU hasn't done since 1998 and something UNLV hasn't done since 2000.

Arkansas and Tennessee would compete for conference championships in the MWC...I'm not saying I think either are as good as TCU, BYU, Boise, or (for one more year) Utah right now. But there would be years where they would be. Kentucky would make for a better fourth team than Air Force right now. And their worst (MSU and Vandy) are at the very least better than our worst.

MWC and SEC have different definitions for their crappy teams.


Arkansas sucks. They feed off of D1AA OOC opponents and other crap SEC schools like Mississippi State.

Tennessee? haha, you're kidding. They used to be a powerhouse. Now they suck. You don't remember Wyoming going down there and beating them a couple of years ago? In Knoxville.

To suggest that Arkansas and Tennessee would compete for MWC championships is downright funny.

Where is you guys' MWC pride??
 

icemonkee

New Member
I'll agree that tennessee sucks, but Arkansas is one of those teams that you just don't want to have to play. That offense is good.
 

West Coast Johnny

Full Member
QUOTE(icemonkee @ Jun 22 2010, 03:20 PM) [snapback]586008[/snapback]
I'll agree that tennessee sucks, but Arkansas is one of those teams that you just don't want to have to play. That offense is good.


Arkansas sucks now too.
 
QUOTE(Jake102 @ Jun 22 2010, 06:19 PM) [snapback]586007[/snapback]
Ah I forgot about the powerhouse UNLV. They would steamroll Arkansas and Tennesse....


Yeah, well they have more wins against top 25 teams in the past couple years than half of the Big XII and SEC. Just because we consistently slaughter them doesn't mean they can't play.
 
Top