Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 3  Next >

Good class coming together

Posted: 7/8/2014 9:28 PM

Good class coming together 


Halfway through a small class and right now our average player rating is higher than that of UT.  With Smith and Sheffield, 2 of 7 commits are rated 4* and 5 are 3*.  UT has 18 HS commits (one JUCO)- one 5, two 4*. 

When the final rankings come in, just remember that our ranking will be lower because of quantity of scholarships available, not quality of player signed.  At the same time UT will have an inflated ranking because they will sign a million guys, but at the end of the day both of us will have to play with 85.

Last edited 7/8/2014 9:46 PM by Commodoredave1

Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/8/2014 10:31 PM

Re: Good class coming together 


People who follow recruiting understand class size impacts ranking numbers.
Sadly, Nashville media has no clue.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 8:52 AM

Re: Good class coming together 


I agree.  I think getting Smith on board is just the kick-start we needed.  He was a heavy lean for a while, but looks like he will be actively recruiting for us.  I don't think we get Van Jefferson, and probably not Drew Richmond...but McMillon and Vaughn would be two more great pickups with whom Josh could make a difference. 

While he's in Oregon, we need Josh going after Porter Gustin, Osa Masina, Marvell Tell, and Frank Buncom IV.

Last edited 7/9/2014 8:52 AM by zman22

Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 8:56 AM

Re: Good class coming together 



jones2mitchell wrote: People who follow recruiting understand class size impacts ranking numbers.
Sadly, Nashville media has no clue.
True, but if we get the players to win games, I really don't care how they spin it.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 9:15 AM

Re: Good class coming together 


Quantity is as important as quality when recruiting for sports.  A class of 15 football signees with an average 3.5 star rating is not as good as a class of 25 with a 3 star average rating.

You cannot be a good team with 45 players of SEC quality if the other teams have 75.

Here is something that might make somebody here some money.

Come up with some algorithm that takes both quality and quantity of recruits in the big sports and come up with a numerical number rating that makes 15, 3.5 star recruits about equal with 20, 3 star recruits.

I know nothing about football recruiting yet, but I am studying football 2 or 3 hours every day to catch up on what I have missed by not following it for so long. 

All my recruiting knowledge is coming from sites like Scout and ESPN, as well as reading the Phil Steele recruiting numbers which he averages from multiple sites.

Recruiting is not an exact science with many errors obvious through a 5-year period.  However, nobody here would refute that it is better to sign 4 and 5 star recruits, because on the whole, a couple of classes like this will make a school a powerful team, while very few schools with 2 and 3 star recruits dominating the roster will ever ascend higher than what Kentucky has done the last few years.

Edit: It's my 2 cents worth, but I believe Kyle Shurmur is the most important commit to date.  It is the most important position on the team.  He has the best pedigree of any of the current commits.  He comes from a championship program in a league where you have to be really committed to succeed.  He is going to be a tough son of a gun, because I know about these Catholic leagues up in the Keystone State.  He has great size and athleticism, and he is going to improve more than the average recruit will improve.

Penn State may be a curse word here these days, but Shurmur reminds me of several of their former greats both on the field and in the classroom, and I for one would be happy with a class of 20-25 players in his mold.

Last edited 7/9/2014 9:24 AM by CoachG51

Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 9:35 AM

Re: Good class coming together 


I like how when we pull the lower ranked kids the recruiting ratings are garbage, but add one higher ranked and they now have credibility.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 9:41 AM

Re: Good class coming together 


I think many on here warned the nervous Nellies not to judge Mason's recruiting acumen based on the first year recruiting class. He had very little time to recruit plus most of our verbal commitments were raided by You Know Whom.

The class we have coming in for next season doesn't surprise me at all and only a sign of good things to come.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 9:44 AM

Re: Good class coming together 


You understand VU's class is going to be limited due the number of available scholarships, right?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 9:52 AM

Re: Good class coming together 



CoachG51 wrote: Quantity is as important as quality when recruiting for sports.  A class of 15 football signees with an average 3.5 star rating is not as good as a class of 25 with a 3 star average rating.

You cannot be a good team with 45 players of SEC quality if the other teams have 75.

Here is something that might make somebody here some money.

Come up with some algorithm that takes both quality and quantity of recruits in the big sports and come up with a numerical number rating that makes 15, 3.5 star recruits about equal with 20, 3 star recruits.

I know nothing about football recruiting yet, but I am studying football 2 or 3 hours every day to catch up on what I have missed by not following it for so long. 

All my recruiting knowledge is coming from sites like Scout and ESPN, as well as reading the Phil Steele recruiting numbers which he averages from multiple sites.

Recruiting is not an exact science with many errors obvious through a 5-year period.  However, nobody here would refute that it is better to sign 4 and 5 star recruits, because on the whole, a couple of classes like this will make a school a powerful team, while very few schools with 2 and 3 star recruits dominating the roster will ever ascend higher than what Kentucky has done the last few years.

Edit: It's my 2 cents worth, but I believe Kyle Shurmur is the most important commit to date.  It is the most important position on the team.  He has the best pedigree of any of the current commits.  He comes from a championship program in a league where you have to be really committed to succeed.  He is going to be a tough son of a gun, because I know about these Catholic leagues up in the Keystone State.  He has great size and athleticism, and he is going to improve more than the average recruit will improve.

Penn State may be a curse word here these days, but Shurmur reminds me of several of their former greats both on the field and in the classroom, and I for one would be happy with a class of 20-25 players in his mold.
I know quantity is important, but my point was that everyone is allowed 85 scholarships.  We have a strong redshirt program, so most of our guys are here 4-5 years, as opposed to 3-4 years.  If you don't redshirt anyone, you can expect to sign 25+ after normal attrition.  If you redshirt 20 like we did last year, you are only going to be able to sign 15-20, which is exactly where we are.  I'd rather have a lot of 3* redshirt freshmen than 3* true freshmen because the redshirts have had a year in the program to workout, adjust to college, compete vs other college athletes, and learn the system.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 10:05 AM

Re: Good class coming together 



CoachG51 wrote: Quantity is as important as quality when recruiting for sports.  A class of 15 football signees with an average 3.5 star rating is not as good as a class of 25 with a 3 star average rating.

If we had 25 spots available, instead of 15, this opinion might be relevant.

....while very few schools with 2 and 3 star recruits dominating the roster will ever ascend higher than what Kentucky has done the last few years.

Does a three-year combined score differential of 100-14 and 3 straight bowl appearances qualify as "ascend(ing) higher"?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 10:14 AM

Re: Good class coming together 


Class size is important to recruiting rankings simply because the more recruits you have the more likely you are to get a stud. What actually matters in recruiting though is filling your class with quality players and not having to reach to fill spots. I'm not worried about our final ranking, I would like to see a higher percentage of 4 star players in this class though since we have limited spaces and the staff should show they don't have to reach to fill a small class.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 10:14 AM

Per ESPN, we have three 4-star commits and four 3-star commits 


Last edited 7/9/2014 10:15 AM by GoldenFlakes

Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 10:38 AM

Re: Good class coming together 


I don't see why anyone would claim that we're "reaching" on anybody in the spring/summer before their senior year.

I prefer to think that our staff is savvy enough to discover and make a determination on these players before everyone else does.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 11:56 AM

Re: Good class coming together 


QualityxQualityxQuantity ?
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 7/9/2014 12:05 PM

Re: Good class coming together 


Many people think that UT's will take a jump around 7pm tomorrow.  Also, it depends on the service you are looking at.  Scout has UT at an average of 3.16 and Vanderbilt at 3.14.  

On Scout, Vanderbilt has 1 4-star and 6 3-star players.  Tennessee has 1 5-star, 3 4-star, 13 3-star and 2 2-star players.

Not saying that anyone should go by Scout's rankings...but since this is a Scout site, I thought it was appropriate to mention.   
Commodoredave1 wrote: Halfway through a small class and right now our average player rating is higher than that of UT.  With Smith and Sheffield, 2 of 7 commits are rated 4* and 5 are 3*.  UT has 18 HS commits (one JUCO)- one 5, two 4*. 

When the final rankings come in, just remember that our ranking will be lower because of quantity of scholarships available, not quality of player signed.  At the same time UT will have an inflated ranking because they will sign a million guys, but at the end of the day both of us will have to play with 85.

That which exists without my knowledge, exists without my consent.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 12:35 PM

Re: Good class coming together 


I read an interesting article just after the past year that named the programs that have a > 50% blue chip ratio.  A blue chip recruit is defined as a 4 or 5 star recruit.  There are 11 programs that over the past 4 years have signed more blue chip recruits than 3 star and below players:

Alabama - 73% of signees are 4 or 5 star
Ohio State - 68%
USC - 64%
Notre Dame - 63%
LSU - 62%
Texas - 60%
Florida St - 56%
Michigan - 55%
Florida - 54%
Auburn - 53%
Georgia - 51%

Every BCS Championship program since 2005 has signed > 50% blue chip recruits.

Here is the data for the SEC for the last 4 signing classes:

Alabama - 73%
LSU - 62%
Florida - 54%
Auburn - 53%
Georgia - 51%
Texas A&M - 47%
Tennessee - 35%
South Carolina - 30%
Ole Miss - 25%
Arkansas - 18%
Mississippi St - 18%
Missouri - 12%
Kentucky - 12%
Vanderbilt - 9%

Note that 5 teams in our conference are signing > 50% blue chips.  This is the level we need to be at (and sustain) to expect SEC championship contention, playoff contention or major bowl contention.

FYI - 39% of Stanford's signees were blue chip over the same period.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 12:58 PM

Re: Good class coming together 



CoachG51 wrote: Quantity is as important as quality when recruiting for sports.  A class of 15 football signees with an average 3.5 star rating is not as good as a class of 25 with a 3 star average rating.

You cannot be a good team with 45 players of SEC quality if the other teams have 75.

Here is something that might make somebody here some money.

Come up with some algorithm that takes both quality and quantity of recruits in the big sports and come up with a numerical number rating that makes 15, 3.5 star recruits about equal with 20, 3 star recruits.

I know nothing about football recruiting yet, but I am studying football 2 or 3 hours every day to catch up on what I have missed by not following it for so long. 

All my recruiting knowledge is coming from sites like Scout and ESPN, as well as reading the Phil Steele recruiting numbers which he averages from multiple sites.

Recruiting is not an exact science with many errors obvious through a 5-year period.  However, nobody here would refute that it is better to sign 4 and 5 star recruits, because on the whole, a couple of classes like this will make a school a powerful team, while very few schools with 2 and 3 star recruits dominating the roster will ever ascend higher than what Kentucky has done the last few years.

Edit: It's my 2 cents worth, but I believe Kyle Shurmur is the most important commit to date.  It is the most important position on the team.  He has the best pedigree of any of the current commits.  He comes from a championship program in a league where you have to be really committed to succeed.  He is going to be a tough son of a gun, because I know about these Catholic leagues up in the Keystone State.  He has great size and athleticism, and he is going to improve more than the average recruit will improve.

Penn State may be a curse word here these days, but Shurmur reminds me of several of their former greats both on the field and in the classroom, and I for one would be happy with a class of 20-25 players in his mold.
I would rather have for this year 15 with a 3.5 average.  You are correct in saying you need more than 15, but we have HAD more than 15 each year and in fact were WAY over each of the last 3 years.  As a result of losing very few people in those classes, we will be down in numbers this year.  So 15 with a 3.5 is better than 15 with a 3.  Also, If we did have that 3.5, we would have roughly 8 fours and 7 threes.  We have NEVER had that many fours in a class.  Thus, I'd argue that was a WAY better class than any others we have signed.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 1:01 PM

Re: Good class coming together 



madmaxvol wrote: Many people think that UT's will take a jump around 7pm tomorrow.  Also, it depends on the service you are looking at.  Scout has UT at an average of 3.16 and Vanderbilt at 3.14.  

On Scout, Vanderbilt has 1 4-star and 6 3-star players.  Tennessee has 1 5-star, 3 4-star, 13 3-star and 2 2-star players.

Not saying that anyone should go by Scout's rankings...but since this is a Scout site, I thought it was appropriate to mention.   
Commodoredave1 wrote: Halfway through a small class and right now our average player rating is higher than that of UT.  With Smith and Sheffield, 2 of 7 commits are rated 4* and 5 are 3*.  UT has 18 HS commits (one JUCO)- one 5, two 4*. 

When the final rankings come in, just remember that our ranking will be lower because of quantity of scholarships available, not quality of player signed.  At the same time UT will have an inflated ranking because they will sign a million guys, but at the end of the day both of us will have to play with 85.
I don't get why people don't just go by the 247 composite, it's the average rating between all 4 sites.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 7/9/2014 2:19 PM

Re: Good class coming together 


I just went off of Scout because I was already on a Scout site and it was a quick link.  That being said, here are the 24/7 composite averages for the two classes:

Vanderbilt - 85.97 - (2) 4-star, (5) 3-star

Tennessee - 87.07 - (1) 5-star, (4) 4-star, (12) 3-star
vandy735 wrote:
madmaxvol wrote: Many people think that UT's will take a jump around 7pm tomorrow.  Also, it depends on the service you are looking at.  Scout has UT at an average of 3.16 and Vanderbilt at 3.14.  

On Scout, Vanderbilt has 1 4-star and 6 3-star players.  Tennessee has 1 5-star, 3 4-star, 13 3-star and 2 2-star players.

Not saying that anyone should go by Scout's rankings...but since this is a Scout site, I thought it was appropriate to mention.   
Commodoredave1 wrote: Halfway through a small class and right now our average player rating is higher than that of UT.  With Smith and Sheffield, 2 of 7 commits are rated 4* and 5 are 3*.  UT has 18 HS commits (one JUCO)- one 5, two 4*. 

When the final rankings come in, just remember that our ranking will be lower because of quantity of scholarships available, not quality of player signed.  At the same time UT will have an inflated ranking because they will sign a million guys, but at the end of the day both of us will have to play with 85.
I don't get why people don't just go by the 247 composite, it's the average rating between all 4 sites.

That which exists without my knowledge, exists without my consent.

Reply | Quote

Posted: 7/9/2014 5:38 PM

Re: Good class coming together 



Type38 wrote: I read an interesting article just after the past year that named the programs that have a > 50% blue chip ratio.  A blue chip recruit is defined as a 4 or 5 star recruit.  There are 11 programs that over the past 4 years have signed more blue chip recruits than 3 star and below players:

Here is the data for the SEC for the last 4 signing classes:

Alabama - 73%
LSU - 62%
Florida - 54%
Auburn - 53%
Georgia - 51%
Texas A&M - 47%
Tennessee - 35%
South Carolina - 30%
Ole Miss - 25%
Arkansas - 18%
Mississippi St - 18%
Missouri - 12%
Kentucky - 12%
Vanderbilt - 9%

Note that 5 teams in our conference are signing > 50% blue chips.  This is the level we need to be at (and sustain) to expect SEC championship contention, playoff contention or major bowl contention.

FYI - 39% of Stanford's signees were blue chip over the same period.
Most likely, A&M will be solidly above 50% after one more Sumlin class is added. Moving forward, I see that top 6 (Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Texas A&M) as the cream of the SEC for most years. They all have the advantages of huge fan and financial support plus a location in a great recruiting area. USC isn't far off. Arkansas and Tennessee have resources but a below average recruiting base. Missouri will probably stay competitive but not elite. Mississippi and MSU have good recruiting locations but fewer resources. Vanderbilt is unique and could go Stanford or could go old Vandy, depending on the coach and admin. Kentucky has decent resources but prioritizes basketball and has a bad recruiting base.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 3  Next >