Coaches 'Recruiting / Technology' survey - results



Last week we placed a survey on the site for coaches to take. The focus of the survey was on recruiting and technology issues. While we didn't quite reach our stretch goal of 3,000 respondents, we still got a very statistically valid sample. 

Coaches were asked to identify the level at which they coached. 15% coached at the FBS level, 8% at FCS, 11% at D-II, 18% at D-III, 4% at JCs and 5% at NAIA programs... thus roughly 60% of respondents coached at the college level. About 38% coached high school ball and 1% coached in the NFL.

The first question we asked was "Which recruiting network's information do you value / trust the most?".

Overall, 54% of respondents chose "I don't value / trust any of these". 29% chose Rivals. 7% chose ESPN. 6% chose Scout and 3% chose 24/7. 

When looking only at FBS coaches' responses however, the answers were significantly different with only 36% choosing "I don't value / trust any of these", 45% choosing Rivals, 9% choosing Scout, 7% choosing ESPN and 4% choosing 24/7. 

High school coaches' responses were: 49% "I don't value / trust any of these", 29% Rivals, 10% ESPN, 6% Scout and 4% 24/7.

ZachGivens wrote:

 

When looking only at FBS coaches' responses however, the answers were significantly different with only 36% choosing "I don't value / trust any of these", 45% choosing Rivals, 9% choosing Scout, 7% choosing ESPN and 4% choosing 24/7. 

I'm guessing when they ask this question again in a few years, Scout will have gained some ground. Rivals was so superior in the early 00s that Scout has been playing catch up. Especially with reputation. Because I think the product is close to even right now.

No coach worth his salt will trust anything but his own eyeball test, they might get some names so they can do there own evaluations but why should they put their jobs on the line on some amateur's evaluation ? Recruiting services are for the fans to argue about, and a way to make money off high school players..

It has been reported that schools can have unlimited player personel/scout employees. This will be a growth industry if true. Horn poster said that a radio show in Texas said that Alabama will have 40 employees dealing with recruiting. Surely this is not just football. I see rampant cheating on the horizon. Some TEXAS schools will hire HS coaches,their relatives and family members in order to get a player. You can always let them go 4 years down the line and do it all over again. Get ready.

gyokie wrote: It has been reported that schools can have unlimited player personel/scout employees. This will be a growth industry if true. Horn poster said that a radio show in Texas said that Alabama will have 40 employees dealing with recruiting. Surely this is not just football. I see rampant cheating on the horizon. Some TEXAS schools will hire HS coaches,their relatives and family members in order to get a player. You can always let them go 4 years down the line and do it all over again. Get ready.

Adding to it, I don't see how this unlimited text messaging/unlimited calling prospects is going to work out. I think Stoops mentioned that it was going to be a circus.

After reading this, I look at it with the idea of what is the definition of trust. Does trust mean that the scouting service is right most of the time or does this mean we should simply take a look at this guy? 
The other thing about scouting services, are they just looking at talent or are they judging the recruit as an overall prospect? I mean do they look at the guys grades? Criminal history? Or whatever else might be a pivotal factor in wether the guy will ever play football at the next level.
I look at how many recruits that seem to have the talent, but never make it to the next level. Or do make it and blow it. The guys who get arrested for dumb crimes.
And yes the new recruiting rules seem to be stupid at best.