D1 talent graph

[a10koaksfed]

Here's a link to an Illini post that has a graph showing all the D1 teams and places them according to their class talent ratings and what they are getting for it. Top left is the teams with highly rated classes and very few victories. Bottom right is the teams with average and below rated classes and numerous victories. #1 is Cincinnati, then CMU, Boise, Houston... The Illini stand alone at top left, which is why they posted it. They are unhappy campers.

Kind of an interesting graph. http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=169&f=2617&t=4962591

[bgsufalcon24]

Here's a link to an Illini post that has a graph showing all the D1 teams and places them according to their class talent ratings and what they are getting for it. Top left is the teams with highly rated classes and very few victories. Bottom right is the teams with average and below rated classes and numerous victories. #1 is Cincinnati, then CMU, Boise, Houston... The Illini stand alone at top left, which is why they posted it. They are unhappy campers.

Kind of an interesting graph. http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=169&f=2617&t=4962591

Notice all the non-bcs schools on the right side of that regression line, and all the bcs schools to the left of the line. This just proves that recruiting rankings are convoluted to the point that they just don't accurately measure the talent coming into the schools outside of the bcs.

You mean to tell me that Bowling Green is honestly the 105th best team in the country in recruiting? I find that VERY hard to believe.

[a10koaksfed]

I think it shows that outside the big six conferences the recruits are lesser known, are given lesser ratings because their not being recruited by Florida, USC, etc.. Also, it shows that coaches of these programs are young, full of enthusiasm, and have the ability to coach up their recruits, while some of the BCS teams are getting players that are already coached up and don't have as much room for improvement as the MAC/WAC/MWC, etc. And yes, it shows that the ratings are very subjective and mean almost nothing. 5 stars, yes their fantastic, after that it gets really fine lined.

[bgsufalcon24]

I think it shows that outside the big six conferences the recruits are lesser known, are given lesser ratings because their not being recruited by Florida, USC, etc.. Also, it shows that coaches of these programs are young, full of enthusiasm, and have the ability to coach up their recruits, while some of the BCS teams are getting players that are already coached up and don't have as much room for improvement as the MAC/WAC/MWC, etc. And yes, it shows that the ratings are very subjective and mean almost nothing. 5 stars, yes their fantastic, after that it gets really fine lined.

I agree that generally speaking the 5 star players are great, can't miss guys, but sometimes even they end up being terrible (coughterrellepryorcough)