forward to part 3.
Alabama vs Michigan–Roster Compare Pt.2
A couple weeks ago I charted the public roster data, rivals ratings and a cursory 3 deep for both Alabama and Michigan. This diary continues that analysis. I’m going to reprise a few mistakes I made in the data table and then chart class by red shirt and EE.
First of all the corrections…
- Clinton-Dix, D.J Pettaway and Woodson are not walk-ons (the hyphenated and abbreviated names makes joining the Rivals data and the school roster date a joy.) This accentuates the difference in Rivals ratings between the players on the field and the scout team.
- I showed this variability chart last time of the team including the scouts and the incoming 2012 class…where the confidence intervals overlapped. (Note I counted Deion Belue twice previously since he was a class of 2010 recruit who is back this year as an EE JUCO.)
- Here’s the same analysis of the 3 deep where the data really separates…
- This was clear before, I think, but I made a mistake and it obfuscated the fact – the Tide are just more star worthy. A quick reminder of what Rivals ratings are… I counted all non rated guys as 5.0 so that makes this not entirely accurate.
The ranking system ranks prospects on a numerical scale from 6.1-4.9.
- 6.1 Franchise Player; considered one of the elite prospects in the country, generally among the nation's top 25 players overall; deemed to have excellent pro potential; high-major prospect
- 6.0-5.8 All-American Candidate; high-major prospect; considered one of the nation's top 300 prospects; deemed to have pro potential and ability to make an impact on college team
- 5.7-5.5 All-Region Selection; considered among the region's top prospects and among the top 750 or so prospects in the country; high-to-mid-major prospect; deemed to have pro potential and ability to make an impact on college team
- 5.4-5.0 Division I prospect; considered a mid-major prospect; deemed to have limited pro potential but definite Division I prospect; may be more of a role player
- 4.9 Sleeper; no Rivals.com expert knew much, if anything, about this player; a prospect that only a college coach really knew about
- OK that’s done. Mea Culpa. Let’s breakdown more stuff…I looked at class before but let’s looks at class by red shirt and early enrollment…
Here’s straight up RS/EE vs. Class – side by side then for each team with cross column/row %…
Here’s the more detailed tables with % … I like it but to each his own…
I debated whether to include the Tests here. But it’s a likelihood vs. the null hypothesis and Alabama is unlikely regardless of the sparse data points. They don’t have preferred walk-ons evidently. This intrigued me so I thought I would look more into that… and that… will have to wait for some other time. I have to go back to bed. It is what it is – so my wife tells me.
prevatt33 came back on oversigning on the original post. There’s more on that here as well just in looking at the rosters… I guess there will be a part 3 later.
(EDIT: I simplified the contingency table for glazed eyes…and put them side by side… Seth I am not. Note I’m going to republish this – which resets the clock but preserves the formatting. For some reason one of my charts disappeared. All better now.)
My knowledge of statistics is very rusty and in some areas nonexistant, so I really only understand what's going on in the top half of your post, but thank you for putting this together. One of the several areas you looked at is something I've been noticing, and it has to do with redshirting players. The teams that are most successful year in and out tend to have a lot of red shirted players. That goes to their depth at each position, and it helps lead to continuity from year to year and having experienced players ready to step in. Michigan should be able to do a lot more redshirting in the future than has been done in recent years.
As to Bama not having preferred walk-ons, I guess you don't really need them when you over-sign. Why bother with the preferred status when you can just sign them?
Bama doesn't red shirt their walk-ons which makes that table (taken from spring rosters) a bit misleading. That is why I broke out walk-ons - it makes that table work. Michigan's take on walk-ons is changing a bit under Hoke but is drastically different than Saban's. Bama did use Walk-on kickers (didn't that bite them in the "first" NC game last year?)
Bama is a deadly serious Football first school under Saban. They are better at red shirting. I would like to see their special teams depth charts - which is where most good modest sized freshman go to burn their shirts. That data is not on the inter tubes. Bama's serious attitude shows in the roster management. In some ways Michigan is adjusting to that sucess (or returning to it) but I think we will never really go to where the Tide is now... at least not that extreme. We are just different.
If the kickers are on scholarship then there is a numbers issue going into fall camp. The Tide is already one over not counting kickers (who were not listed on Rivals though Michigan's are??? ) I suspect some players are not going to be able to grasp Sanan's concepts between now and August.
Thanks for the insight. Roster management is very different as evidently are the terms of the respective fan bases.
Saban not Sanan...can't fix that on my phone.
P33 - good catch on Foster. He is counted in this diary and the original diary as a scholarship kicker and a 3 star to Rivals - though as second string to walk-on Shelley. I do count him as one of the 86 I show on scholarship. I will go back over the list and ferret out the scholarship count in pt. 3 and link my data table as well when I come back to this. Telling who is on schollie or not is not easy when schools are not obliged to tell you. I take no data from oversigning.com nor have I vetted their data.
This diary is not a treatise on math versus football. It's a straight comparison of the public rosters, rivals and depth charts as posted in pt. 1. The charts can be helpful in this comparison and as stated in pt.1 are no substitute for real football. The comparison to this point shows that Alabama is better pretty much in all ways to this point. Certainly I'm not trying to prove Michigan better with these numbers. I have other numbers that do that.
Rivals numbers do mean something. Something does not equal nothing.
This is a good post - though by no means the only one that shows this.
|Recruiting Stars||Percent drafted||Average draft position|
|★★||4.9%||143 (5th rd)|
|★★★||8.1%||124 (late 4th)|
|★★★★||16.7%||107 (early 4th)|
|★★★★★||38.0%||81 (3rd rd)|
This is a diary. It comes from a random guy on the internet...just like you...take it for what it is - not a summary of the Michigan fanbase or even the readers of this blog.
Signing more than your program can accomodate is oversigning. Alabama has done it (along with most of the SEC.) Saban has moved kids out as better talent becomes available. He's not fessed to it. Good for you if you are into that. Michigan has not had that luxury nor do they move kids like Alabama does. We've had our fair share of attrition. Under Hoke we have offered a grayshirt and previous scholarship athletes have not been invited to fall camp. We don't offer kids who can't be admitted. We don't take JUCO players (at anywhere near the rate at least) as the Tide. The way the teams have managed their rosters is different. It shows when you look at the roster data.
This is a comparison not a statement of superiority. Alabama vs. Michigan - so far... as I am seeing it... is more apples to oranges than mano e mano (though mano e mano it will ultimately be.) The really good stuff is going to see how Michigan schemes around the difficiences in this comparison - because they are real... Fluker is about 100 lbs heavier than Black or Roh were last year - and it's not bad weight on DJ.
I like your comments for the insight but don't go dissing the stats. I mis-spoke on Foster in my comment above but not in the diary. I will re-hash the scholarship numbers in pt. 3. Stats can lie but they are not doing so here.
This is not my issue or my thesis here... but I will address this because it's an issue in pt. 3. Thanks again for the get back. I look forward to pachyderms on MGoBlog. In many ways the Tide is showing Michigan how to get it done.
I compared the rivals recruiting classes with the official Bama roster and had a few discrepencies with your numbers. I counted 11 players that have left Bama's 2009 class, not 10. Also, Philip Sims transferred to be closer to home and is still listed on the roster, but is not. And in addition to Deion Blue, Quinton Dial was also listed in the rivals classes twice due to sign and place. Now, I did count one fewer guy in the class of 2011 that left. So, that would add up to 3 more scholarships available than you have listed.
I'm also told that in Alabama, the desire to win is such that when a player (usually white) comes from an affluent family, the player will on ocassion give up his scholarship so they can sign another player, but there is no mention of it to the media. No matter what way you look at it, they don't fully disclose who is on athletic scholarship and who isn't, so it's damn near impossible to know what their exact scholarship situation is.
I commend your effort, this is a very difficult thing to try and figure out. And, it's the offseason therefore fun to look at. However, the NCAA hasn't investigated Bama at all for oversigning related issues and no one can give solid proof that Saban has done anything wrong. The only thing people can do is look at numbers for which the inputs and sources are unreliable at best.
Nick Saban is a dick and I can't personally stand him, but until someone actually proves that he has screwed over a kid, I can't say he's a cheater. The fact you can't prove he's not a cheater, is not evidence that he is a cheater.
As always, Go Blue!
for Alabama...I'm not going to get near the actual count given the vagaries of CFB (this isn't clear at any school.)
This puts the attrition from this class at 10. Do you know who I'm missing or if one the guys below is no longer with the team?
Air Force is an even greater challenge IMO.
If IIRC each team needs to summarize their 85 scholarship guys twice a year for the NCAA. I've done a little research on that but it's pretty dry material vs. actual comparisons of the two teams - which is what I'm really after.
in our numbers for 2009 is the number of kids that were in the class to begin with, it took me a while to figure that out. I had the class at 27, not 26, thus attrition of 11 kids. Either way, I think you got the number of kids in the program currently correct. I probably should have seen that.
And in the 2011 class, I think I counted one less player that left because you didn't count Quinton Dial since he's already in the 2009 class? Or is there someone else that left other than Aaron Douglass and Duron Carter?
Ya, figuring out the exact scholarship count is all but impossible. I thought it would be a piece of cake when I started counting and now wish I would have taken your numbers as fact to start.
Looking at the attrition numbers, it will be nice when Michigan gets to the point where we aren't losing players left and right in the first couple of years a class is on campus. Hopefully, the attrition from the 2010 and 2011 classes doesn't come back to haunt Michigan too bad. Early contributions from the 2012 would go a long way to mitigating that.
My head hurts
My apologies...it was either the whole enchilada or just not post it. You shouldn't see the stuff I'm not posting. I'll spare you.
I know you mentioned before that you didn't want to get into any subjective analysis of the data and would leave that for others, but do you think you could add an objective summary at the end? I bet there are others like me who see charts with numbers in them and get a little lightheaded.
I simplified the contingency tables to ease the pain. I'll try to add more objective and subjective analysis in pt. 3. It really comes down to time. The data is easy...what it means is hard to say. I’m here for the gang bang.
This is good feedback. I hear you.
I don't quite understand what EE status means in this -- early entrants can still redshirt, right?
It's nice to see in such graphic terms the relative effects of having to play so many freshman in the past few years. How Hoke manages the effects of this on the classes he recruits over his first five years will set the course for the following five. He will have to burn more redshirts than Saban -- Kalis being the prime example. Saban can afford to keep a prospect like that on the sideline, Hoke cannot. But I think he can turn the tide (ha, ha) with two pieces of luck -- keeping DG healthy next year so Morris can redshirt, and not having to burn additional redshirts (beyond Kalis) this year on the OL, for whatever reason. The latter is a very thin line. On defense, I don't know -- my sense is that some of the new guys (beyond Bolden) will make very strong cases for places in the two-deep before this season is over. So Mattison will need more than luck -- he will need decent performances on the field by the non-freshman to keep Pipkins, for example, off the field.
EE = Electrical Engineers. Bama is going to kill us on the nerd front.
Just kidding EE = Early Enrollee