Recruiting Strategy question - for the experts on the Board

CajunCrimson · Jun 11, 2015

I was looking at the 2007 Recruiting List for us --

We had 0 - 5 Star players -- There was 3* Josh Chapman, 4* Luther Davis, 3* Darius Hanks, 3* Marquis Maze, 4* Kareem Jackson, 3* William Vlachos

Most of which was put together at the last minute, right?

Then in 2008 - we had 3 - 5 Star - Julio, Tyler Love and Burton Scott.
But, also included: 4* Barron, 3* Cody, 4* Hightower, 4* Ingram, 4* Barrett Jones, 4* Lester, 3* Smelley, 4* Courtney Upshaw, 3* Square.....

These are the guys that played prominent roles in the 2009 and 2011 Championships....

Of course then we went crazy with our recruiting classes.....from 2009 forward.

With that said -- for a few years, I feel like we moved forward and grabbed as many 5* and high 4* as we could -- because we could -- regardless of whether it was a position of need or not. I also wonder if we grabbed "Big Fish" from many "Little Ponds" and the chemistry just wasn't there.

Looking at this year's class so far, it sure does seem like we have gone back to find some guys who may not be rated as high, but may have a chip on their shoulder.....guys that have something to prove.....as opposed to a room full of 5* guys who figure that as long as they stay healthy, they have a shot at the NFL.....

Am I off base? Or am I incredibly perceptive

?

CoolBreeze · Jun 11, 2015

From all reports that I have seen, Coach makes his own evaluations. Stars are to sell magazines and for the fans. And it makes sense that if you are a coach recruiting for any sport then you are going to recruit the best of the best according to whom you think can help your team. Certainly, that is easier said than done when you consider character, propensity for injury or that some athletes peek sooner than others. Recruiting is an imperfect science. I mean, remember Wallace Gilberry? He wasn't recruited until he shined in the AL-MS all star game. That dude is still in the pros.

The bottom line is that Saban has recruited extremely well and has gotten more than has gotten away in terms of top targets. That is why we are perennially in contention for the national championship of college football.

WMack4Bama · Jun 11, 2015

Yea...Coach makes his own evaluations. If you'll notice, most guys don't get that 4th or 5th star until they get a Bama offer

imauafan · Jun 11, 2015

IMHO a team is better off with a good mix of 3,4,5 stars instead of being top-heavy with 4 & 5 star players. Winning the recruiting national championship in February does not excite me because I'm old enough now to realize that a lot of the 4 & 5 stars that we get so excited about will never have a major impact. I also think we should take a few more in-state kids even if they aren't quite as talented as some of the national prospects because I think football in Alabama is as good as it is in any state in the country.

imauafan · Jun 11, 2015

One more thought, some years there is more talent than others. As an example, we may sign several highly rated RB's one year because we are thin at that position but if it is a weak year for RB then just because they were the highest rated at their position doesn't mean they will do well in college. I've noticed this with the NFL draft and I believe the same is true for high school talent, it ebbs and flows each year.

gtowntide · Jun 11, 2015

I think when you recruit as many 5 star athletes as we do, you're bound to get the occasional guy who reads all his press clippings and doesn't have a good work ethic. To me this is where the character evaluations are as important as athletic ability. We know that all 4 and 5 star guys don't work out. We also know all 3 star guys don't turn into super stars.
I think coach Saban excells at evaluating recruits, it's one of his strong points. Having said that, there are no guarantees.
I really think a good balance of 3 to 5 stars is ideal. I love the instate 3 stars who have dreamed of playing at Bama all their lives. In order to win at the level we do, you need the 4 and 5 stars too.

TiderJack · Jun 11, 2015

WMack4Bama said:
Yea...Coach makes his own evaluations. If you'll notice, most guys don't get that 4th or 5th star until they get a Bama offer

THIS^^^^. I expect most of these 3* to get the Bama bump and be 4* and we are going to sign several 5* in this class and our class will be in the top 3 if not #1 when February rolls around.

BigBama · Jun 12, 2015

While I am no recruiting expert I am an admitted junkie, no 12 step program here baby! Rehab is for quitters

But really, I think the original poster is on to something. This may not be a popular opinion here but I don't think there is that much athletic difference at the top 5% of football players. It is all the other stuff that goes into making a good football player such as wanting to be coached, getting along with teammates, staying clean off the field, going to class, and incredible drive to be the best. Many of the top athletes seem to have a bit of entitlement to them. I'd take a three or four star guy that can be a program player for four years over a super star that cant seem to get out of the way of himself. With all that said, I do think that we are looking to take the right players for the program and mix them in with a few superstars to be added later.

CrimsonForce · Jun 12, 2015

Speaking of recruiting, just saw this picture on Twitter. Very impressive. I wonder if there is any other team in recent history that has had every member of its starting offense make an NFL roster..

4Q Basket Case · Jun 12, 2015

There's no question talent matters, and the more 4* and 5* recruits you have, the better your chances of being in the NC discussion in mid-November.

I'll offer three inter-related thoughts:

First, predicting human performance is inexact. So it becomes a numbers game. Put another way: We all know kids who made 30 or more on the ACT, yet flunked out. We also all know kids that made 25 and went on to academic honors. But put a room full of 30+ against aroom full of 25s, and the 30s' overall academic performance will stomp a mudhole in the 25s. It's an exact parallel with 3* prospects vs. 4-5*.

Second, I see numerous comparisons of All-America teams vs. the individuals' high school star rankings. Invariably, you see a lot of former 3*, and even the odd 2*, and talking heads and ink-stained wretches use that to bolster the idea that recruiting rankings don't matter. Few assertions are more wrong. The comparison should be the incidence of the star rankings on the AA team versus their incidence across all FBS rosters.. What you'll find is that 5*s make up a minuscule percentage of all FBS scholarships, and have a far disproportional representation on AA teams.

Third, as successful as we've been recruiting lately, disappointing finishes to 2013 and 2014 have, in many fans' eyes, overshadowed consistent brilliance. Guys, on November 20 in six of the last seven years, we've been in the top two favorites for the NC. Three times, we've won it all. There's no doubt in my mind that the lack of enforcement of the ineligible blocker downfield rule cost us another.

Without all the 4-5* recruits, none of that happens.

bama579 · Jun 12, 2015

^ Like. Lots. ^

BamaInBham · Jun 12, 2015

4Q Basket Case said:
There's no question talent matters, and the more 4* and 5* recruits you have, the better your chances of being in the NC discussion in mid-November.

I'll offer three inter-related thoughts:

First, predicting human performance is inexact. So it becomes a numbers game. Put another way: We all know kids who made 30 or more on the ACT, yet flunked out. We also all know kids that made 25 and went on to academic honors. But put a room full of 30+ against aroom full of 25s, and the 30s' overall academic performance will stomp a mudhole in the 25s. It's an exact parallel with 3* prospects vs. 4-5*.

Second, I see numerous comparisons of All-America teams vs. the individuals' high school star rankings. Invariably, you see a lot of former 3*, and even the odd 2*, and talking heads and ink-stained wretches use that to bolster the idea that recruiting rankings don't matter. Few assertions are more wrong. The comparison should be the incidence of the star rankings on the AA team versus their incidence across all FBS rosters.. What you'll find is that 5*s make up a minuscule percentage of all FBS scholarships, and have a far disproportional representation on AA teams.

Third, as successful as we've been recruiting lately, disappointing finishes to 2013 and 2014 have, in many fans' eyes, overshadowed consistent brilliance. Guys, on November 20 in six of the last seven years, we've been in the top two favorites for the NC. Three times, we've won it all. There's no doubt in my mind that the lack of enforcement of the ineligible blocker downfield rule cost us another.

Without all the 4-5* recruits, none of that happens.

I agree with much of what you say. However, IMO, the primary fallacy of what you are saying is that the evaluations are accurate to begin with. Many ARE NOT. The "analysts" in general are far inferior to the real experts, the coaches. And as good as some coaches are, even they misevaluate occasionally, the more average coaches much more frequently. How much more the recruiting services. They have improved and are better than rank amateurs, but in general, don't compare with the real experts.

Yes, some of their "evaluation" comes from coaches directly and indirectly, but that is subject to known manipulation and outright deceit by coaches. Also, known deceit by the recruiting services, e.g., add a star if the recruit will delay their commitment, etc., adds to the number of "misevaluations".

Yes, in general, you want a GROUP of higher rated players, but to think that any specific 5 star player is definitely more talented than a specific 3 star player is preposterous. It's likely, but not close to definite.

Also, it is not even certain that a group of higher rated players is more talented. Look at 5 of the top 8 teams in the final AP poll: Oregon, TCU, Mich St, Baylor and Ga Tech. None of those teams finished in the top 20 in Rivals recruiting in the 5 years prior to the 2014 season, except Oregon 9, 16, ~20. In fact, most of those teams are usually 30s and higher. We can add Missouri to that list. These teams put players in the NFL too.

The bottom line is that a 5 star rating does not mean a recruit has 5 star talent and so on, that's just someone's non-expert opinion. And projecting human potential before it is developed usually requires a great deal of skill.

4Q Basket Case · Jun 12, 2015

BamaInBham said:
I agree with much of what you say. However, IMO, the primary fallacy of what you are saying is that the evaluations are accurate to begin with. Many ARE NOT. The "analysts" in general are far inferior to the real experts, the coaches. And as good as some coaches are, even they misevaluate occasionally, the more average coaches much more frequently. How much more the recruiting services. They have improved and are better than rank amateurs, but in general, don't compare with the real experts.

Yes, some of their "evaluation" comes from coaches directly and indirectly, but that is subject to known manipulation and outright deceit by coaches. Also, known deceit by the recruiting services, e.g., add a star if the recruit will delay their commitment, etc., adds to the number of "misevaluations".

Yes, in general, you want a GROUP of higher rated players, but to think that any specific 5 star player is definitely more talented than a specific 3 star player is preposterous. It's likely, but not close to definite.

Also, it is not even certain that a group of higher rated players is more talented. Look at 5 of the top 8 teams in the final AP poll: Oregon, TCU, Mich St, Baylor and Ga Tech. None of those teams finished in the top 20 in Rivals recruiting in the 5 years prior to the 2014 season, except Oregon 9, 16, ~20. In fact, most of those teams are usually 30s and higher. We can add Missouri to that list. These teams put players in the NFL too.

The bottom line is that a 5 star rating does not mean a recruit has 5 star talent and so on, that's just someone's non-expert opinion. And projecting human potential before it is developed usually requires a great deal of skill.

I fully agree that projecting human performance requires a great deal of skill. I'd actually go so far as to say, for any given individual subject, it is an educated guess. Some 3s will be AAs and some 5s will bust.

Which is why recruiting lots of elite talent is so important. As I stated above, the inherent uncertainty turns the whole concept into a numbers game. Let him have 85 4s and 5s, and an inferior coach would beat a team of 85 3s, even if Vince Lombardi were coaching the 3s.

Search

Recruiting Strategy question - for the experts on the Board

CajunCrimson

Moderator (FB,BB) and Vinyl Enthusiast

CoolBreeze

Hall of Fame

WMack4Bama

Administrator

imauafan

All-American

imauafan

All-American

gtowntide

All-American

TiderJack

Hall of Fame

BigBama

All-SEC

CrimsonForce

Hall of Fame

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator

bama579

Hall of Fame

BamaInBham

All-American

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop - NEW Stuff!