Jr/Sr Top 100 Recruits In The Big 3 (Bama, Clemson, & OSU)
I thought it might be interesting to see how many of the Top 100 players in the junior and senior classes (2017 & 2018) are playing for Bama, Clemson, & OSU. I purposefully left out ND because 1) ND does not recruit on their level, and 2) they didn't have a single player in the Top 100 from 2017 or 2018. Not surprising, I found that of the junior class (2018) 26% of the Top 100 are playing for one of these three teams. And, of the senior class (2017) the juniors account for 26% of the Top 100. I thought it was interesting, and not that surprising, that such significant amount of the top recruits who are juniors or seniors are playing the CFP. This is another good example that recruiting is important. ND, however is the exception without a single top 100 player. So you can still get there (just like you can blow top classes like UM or Texas) without being an elite recruiting team. But, we saw how ND only beat Clemson without their junior top overall recruit in the 2018 class (Justin Lawrence). FWIW if you swapped out ND with UGA, it would be 50% for the junior class and 44% of the senior class! 50% of the top 100 on 4 teams! It's one thing to know that those 4 recruit the best the past several years, but it's crazy when you consider that 50% of the top 100 recruits of the junior class are on one of 4 teams. Think we need change in CFB???
January 1st, 2021 at 8:11 PM ^
It's pretty easy to recruit when you can guaranty HS kids that they will be in the CFP. The rich get richer (until the CFP expands)
January 1st, 2021 at 8:29 PM ^
And pay them and/or their families while the NCAA looks the other way.
January 1st, 2021 at 11:30 PM ^
"So you can still get there (just like you can blow top classes like UM or Texas) without being an elite recruiting team."
You can pay them or blow them.
January 3rd, 2021 at 1:35 PM ^
Expansion wouldn’t bring parity by itself. Getting beat by 21+ points in the first round of a playoff isn’t going to being recruits swarming to your door. Kids want to play for champions, until other teams can actually win it won’t bring a sea of change in recruiting.
January 1st, 2021 at 8:13 PM ^
Justin Lawrence?
January 1st, 2021 at 8:16 PM ^
Hybrid
January 1st, 2021 at 8:18 PM ^
Ha. The all-time top dual-threat QB recruit
January 1st, 2021 at 8:28 PM ^
Johnny Lawrence?
January 1st, 2021 at 8:34 PM ^
Jennifer Lawrence! Much better choice than Justin.
January 1st, 2021 at 8:19 PM ^
Make the right hire , make the decision to play at the big boys table and M is in the mix. Michigan's football program,is to win all games. It is not to lead the nation in GPA. Michigan's educational standard should not be based on the athletic programs.
January 1st, 2021 at 11:49 PM ^
Fantasyland.
January 1st, 2021 at 8:25 PM ^
Most of the recruits move into the top100 BECAUSE they committed to those teams.
January 1st, 2021 at 8:34 PM ^
This may be the most important response to the initial post.
On a different note, after Bobby Bowden (FSU) got rolling he once got 25% of the Parade All-American two-deep roster and none them won the national championship.
MGoStrength makes a good point that I missed which is these are top 100 not just the bottom half of their recruiting classes.
January 1st, 2021 at 9:01 PM ^
Easiest way to see how this works at a fundamental level is to see how the recruits in S. Carolina and N. Carolina are on average much higher ranked the last few years because those are groups Clemson chooses from.
January 1st, 2021 at 11:02 PM ^
Eng1980, a side note:
My high school (Tallahassee Lincoln) had a Parade All-American four consecutive years. All four played for Bobby Bowden. None of them played in a national championship game
January 1st, 2021 at 8:34 PM ^
So they’re winning championships with fake top recruits?
January 1st, 2021 at 8:46 PM ^
No, Bama can win with most any players from the top500 but we'll never know since almost all of their recruits will bump to top247.
It's the whole reason Clemson made the Championship with the 13th best team talent composite in '15 and won with the No. 9th best in '16.
And now all their guys get bumped into the top100 too.
January 1st, 2021 at 8:35 PM ^
There is definitely a recruiting "bump" players get for singing on with these teams - the rationale for the services there is "if you're signing with Bama, you're probably better than either our initial evaluation or inability to evaluate yet". But it's not so pronounced that recruiting services move guys into the top 100 simply because they sign with Bama/Clemson/OSU/Georgia, etc.
More likely, top 100 players sign with these same 3/4 programs because it all but guarantees they will get a shot in the College Football Playoff. When only 4 teams get in, the talent consolidates more tightly around the 4-6 programs that perennially make the tournament.
Expand the field. Overtime, that will spread the talent across more programs that can make the playoff with any consistency as players can consider other factors about the roster and university they pledge to play for other than "it's the only avenue I have to compete for a championship".
January 1st, 2021 at 8:36 PM ^
Most
Your dictionary must be different than mine if that means most. Kidding aside, I know some more lightly recruited guys get a bump if they sign with a blue blood, but I'm not seeing a low 4-stars or 3-star getting bumped into the Top 100 based on where they signed. The Top 100 are elite recruits. That's different than going from 600 to 500 after signing with Bama for example. And, it's not like these teams are signing a slew of those lightly recruited players that might get slight bumps. For example the junior class at OSU only had three 3-stars out of 26 signees. Most of their guys were highly recruited the whole time.
January 1st, 2021 at 8:53 PM ^
Uh sorry, too much data goes into this, just read one of Seth's "Stargazer" articles on the front page to see how much movement there is especially in the last few months of a cycle.
These recruiting sites start bumping guys as soon as they get an offer from the likes of Bama, so they might all be 4stars and above on signing day but they rarely start there.
January 1st, 2021 at 9:18 PM ^
Uh sorry, too much data goes into this, just read one of Seth's "Stargazer" articles on the front page to see how much movement there is especially in the last few months of a cycle.
Guys not signed at these school outside the Top 100 that then make significant jumps into the Top 100 after signing with them and remain there until signing day? And, that number happens to "most" of the Top 100 guys? That's already out of the realm of possibility since the initial numbers already stated the percentage of the Top 100 that go to these teams is only 26%. Granted, that's a big chunk for just 3 teams, which was the whole point, but it's way under any loose definitions for "most", never mind the percentage of all of those 26% that made jumps only after signing with these schools. "Most" just isn't possible.
January 1st, 2021 at 9:42 PM ^
All you need to do is add Okla, Georgia and currently Oregon (not USC).
The reality is most of the rankings are based on offers from blue bloods.
January 2nd, 2021 at 1:06 AM ^
Are you saying that Alabama, Clemson, and Osu aren’t actually more talented than everyone else and it just appears that way due to artificial ranking bumps? If so, (1) then why does Alabama, Clemson, and Osu make the playoffs almost every year? (2) Even if you’re right, how does this make anything better? Saying their recruits aren’t actually as good as they were ranked, yet they still thump everyone they play, only makes things worse.
I’m just going to assume the rankings in general are accurate because it makes more sense, also because my eyes watch the games and those teams clearly have the better players.
January 2nd, 2021 at 10:53 AM ^
Actually, I'm saying the recruits aren't all that much different in the top500, but certain teams develop them so that the team is more talented.
It makes sense to you that recruiting sites, that rank less than 1% of high school students in purely subjective ways, is accurate?
Well, the 60+% of 5 star WRs that don't even get drafted want to know where that accuracy is.
Plus Georgia's has this team talent composite:
And Cinci's?
Not that accurate it seems.
January 3rd, 2021 at 9:59 AM ^
I'm saying the recruits aren't all that much different in the top500, but certain teams develop them so that the team is more talented.
That is not supported by the data. The only way what you're saying is any where near accurate is if your judgement of a player being successful is based on his team's performance rather than his own. But, that would fundamentally remove any top recruit who was not on a top team, even if he won the Heisman for example, which makes no sense.
It makes sense to you that recruiting sites, that rank less than 1% of high school students in purely subjective ways, is accurate?
It's not purely subjective. Granted, there is a lot of subjective measures in there and there is a lot of projection to the next level, just as there is in the draft from college to NFL. But, things like height, weight, and 40 time are objective and factor in significantly. How many HS offensive lineman, who may be quite successful, but are under 6'3" get ranked in the top 100?
Well, the 60+% of 5 star WRs that don't even get drafted want to know where that accuracy is.
Yes, the hit rate is still quite low. But, it gets consistently lower and lower as the recruiting rankings do, so there is an obvious linear correlation.
Plus Georgia's has this team talent composite:
Here are 247's Team Talent Composite Rankings for the playoff teams
- Bama #2
- OSU #3
- Clemson #4
- ND #8
Seems pretty obvious the most talented teams are getting in. It's not exactly 1-4, but it's pretty damned close. Talent is not a guarantee you'll get in, but not having it seems to guarantee you won't. There are no cinderellas. No one outside the top 10 has a won a NC in the playoff system and only Clemson outside the top 5 has. So, you probably have to be a top 5 team talented team to win a NC. You need both talent and coaching, without both you can't get in. UM has enough talent to make it to the playoffs (probably not enough to win it) with the right coaching. Unfortunately they have the juggernaut in their division which means they have to win out the rest of the season and lose a close game to OSU to get there. But, this is do-able if they have the right staff to maximize their talent and stop playing pattycake with PSU, MSU, Wiscy, etc.
January 1st, 2021 at 8:32 PM ^
Unintended consequence of CFP. College football is broken. Clemson vs Alabama for the foreseeable future. Recruits perpetuating same schools. Very boring. Open up playoff system to as many schools as possible or go back to conference championship / bowl system of the old days.
January 1st, 2021 at 8:50 PM ^
Increase the playoff field to 8 or 16.
Increase the number of scholarships so that other schools can develop more 5th year seniors. Too many Cinderellas fall short with an injury at a position that doesn't have depth or a 4 star in waiting.
January 2nd, 2021 at 12:34 AM ^
Allowing more scholarships will certainly not help the talent disparity in college football
January 1st, 2021 at 9:53 PM ^
Did you really need to put Trevor Lawence in parenthesis like we didn't know who you are talking about? Please stop typing and go have another beer.
January 1st, 2021 at 10:07 PM ^
The Big 3 is only going to get bigger now that the transfer portal has been made so easy. Guys are going to be looking for that quick shot at getting a natty so just watch how many good players from other teams start to jump ship to one of the teams that get to regularly play in the play-offs. The NCAA is screwing up big time by creating this condition.
January 1st, 2021 at 10:22 PM ^
I was just hoping for the numbers. TLDR
January 2nd, 2021 at 11:42 AM ^
I would hazard a guess that our recruits are the recipients of bigger ratings bumps than those schools most seasons. Every year we see several players get the 4 star bump and most years we see a few recruits bumped several hundred spots. Those elite football factories get almost all blue chips. We get a lot of high 3 star and low 4 star kids, there’s a huge gap between that talent and the top 100 recruits. Bama and OSU. Are getting 10-17 of those ek out r kids every year, we’re getting 0-5 of them. The results in the field show that too.