SIAP - Elite CFB Recruiting Ratio

Submitted by canzior on

SB Nation has updated their 2017 Blue Chip recruiting sheet.

In summary only teams with 50% of the roster being blue chippers (4 or 5 star) will win the title.

Michigan is one of only 10 teams in the nation.

 

Team Blue-Chip Ratio
Team Blue-Chip Ratio
Alabama 80%
Ohio State 71%
LSU 65%
Florida State 65%
Georgia 63%
USC 63%
Michigan 61%
Auburn 59%
Clemson 56%
Notre Dame 56%

 Article is a good read...also MSU is a riser...going from 16% to 26% this year!

ND...no one understands why. 

Big 12 noticeably absent from the list. 

 

https://www.sbnation.com/a/cfb-preview-2017/blue-chip-ratio

UMAmaizinBlue

August 25th, 2017 at 10:46 AM ^

Michigan is an outlier on this list in 2 ways (along with Notre Dame): not in a talent-rich state, and not in warm weather. Notre Dame and Michigan certainly seem to benefit from program history and prestige. If Notre Dame can do this w/o winning much, imagine what Harbaugh can do after winning some B10 championships.

MEMSwolverine

August 25th, 2017 at 10:54 AM ^

Ohio State is in the same boat; they're in the chilly midwest and have a historically strong program.  Also, one could argue that the state of Ohio is a dump and not a desitnation for many reasons.  I would be willing to bet that an M program with B1G rings would be similar to OSU's recruiting over the last few years.  JH might need to win a national championship before he recruits as well as Meyer did this year, though.

UMAmaizinBlue

August 25th, 2017 at 11:05 AM ^

Might have been confusing the way I said it. OSU is definitely in a top 5 talent-rich state (Florida, California, Texas, Ohio, Georgia), so they can pull great players w/o having to battle distance and/or weather.

bdneely4

August 25th, 2017 at 3:40 PM ^

not too long ago, and he was trying to convince me why Columbus is the 2nd most prestigious city after Chicago in the midwest.  Buckeye fans are in love with themselves and everything they have and do is the best ever.  I cannot wait until they have some down years (it is going to happen) because the last decade has been absolutely miserable living by them.  I am born and raised in Ohio (went to college in Arkansas) and the last decade in a half has almost made me despise my home state mainly because of Buckeye fans.

Denard P. Woodson

August 25th, 2017 at 12:06 PM ^

When looking objectivly, I'm honestly suprised Michigan can compete with OSU.  

OSU is the only power 5 team in a top 5 talent state.  No one else in the country has that home state advantage.  (Maybe LSU some years).

In addition to that gift, they have a fan base that seemingly doesn't care much about acedemicly or behavioraly troubled players.  Oh by the way, they also have the second most accomplished active head coach in college football and, given the lack of big 10 recruting depth, they VASTLY out talent 9-10 teams on their schedule annually.

The new normal may be that Michigan needs to have an ELITE head coach to even compete with them.

Please don't ever leave JH!

MichiganG

August 25th, 2017 at 1:08 PM ^

OSU is the only power 5 team in a top 5 talent state.  

Wait, what?  I'm assuming you didn't mean "power 5", but even from the list above, almost all of the teams above are in states with very high talent levels.

Top 5 talent-producing states: Florida, California, Texas, Georgia, Ohio

(OSU, FSU, UGa, USC)

And when you look at the top 5 talent states on a per capita basis, which is also a huge advantage, you add: Louisiana, South Carolina, and Alabama.

(Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Clemson)

Which means of the remaining teams in that top 10, only Michigan and Notre Dame are not in highly concentrated talent areas.  Every other team is.

Blue in Paradise

August 25th, 2017 at 1:26 PM ^

OSU is the only P5 team in its own top 5 talent state.  Florida, California, Texas and Georgia all have multiple P5 teams in their states.

To make the advantage even more stark, for nearly 10 years, there were no regional P5 powers threatening OSU from a recruiting standpoing.  Historically, Michigan had always been able to go into Ohio and get its share of elite talents.

That slowed down during the late Carr / RR / Hoke and early Harbaugh years (2019 seems to be a possible turning point).  Hoke did pick up some Ohio talent (Butt, Wormley, De'Veon and Taco) but they were not top tier recruits [even if they turned into top tier B1G players].

So not only did OSU have a lock on Ohio but they have been getting top players out of Kentucky, Missouri, Indiana, and (welp) Michigan (for a couple of years anyway). 

Add in Urban Meyer and his nationwide recruiting prowess along with the results on the field and OSU recruiting sucess actually makes a lot of sense.

With Harbaugh at Michigan and the results we expect over the next 3 years - I think CFB is looking at a Big 5 of recruiting over the next 5 - 10 years (Bama, OSU, USC, FSU and Michigan).

 

 

Denard P. Woodson

August 25th, 2017 at 11:55 AM ^

Or, to look at it another way, imagine what ND could do without a hot head jack ass coach and a few 10 win seasons strung together.  

 

They are already annoyingly good at recruiting and will always be top competition to UM for the athletic smart recruit that doesn't mind playing in the midwest.

Farnn

August 25th, 2017 at 11:11 AM ^

Their recruiting early on under Meyer wasn't quite as elite as it's been this year and last year.  They had plenty of 4/5 stars but the classes had a fair number of 3 stars too.  I'd expect this number to jump a bunch over the next 2 years.

CRISPed in the DIAG

August 25th, 2017 at 11:12 AM ^

Clemson makes the most sense of anyone on the list. They have many factors (except maybe prestige - and that's a huge maybe) point toward recruiting success.

1) Proximity to talent

2) Good weather

3) Not Harvard 

4) [trying to find a way to say bagmen without sounding completely cynical]

5) Recent excellence on the field and offseason

6) Rabid fanbase/support (usually equals good recruiting visits and positive feedback)

 

M-Dog

August 25th, 2017 at 11:23 AM ^

When you look at the risers section, it's interesting to see that even when Michigan was bad, our recruiting never fell off that much.  

The Hoke tenure finished at 55% 4/5 stars, good enough to still be on the "elite" recruiting list.  The man could recruit.  

getsome

August 25th, 2017 at 11:50 AM ^

weve had some interesting discussions / debates on this topic and most seem to agree.  yes, hoke recruited well, no doubt...harbaugh won 20 games with many hoke guys and just sent a bunch to nfl.  as weve previously discussed though hoke failed to recruit several positions and also failed to develop his roster and get the most out of his talent...and it crushed him teams.  harbaugh immediately added several QBs and brought in much needed talent and depth at skill positions (among other things)...and unlike hoke, he also hired the best possible coaches and then held them accountable to develop players (speight, winovich, mccray, hill, etc made huge strides to became key contributors) and mold tough culture and winning teams.  youre right though, hoke signed talent, not surprising to see m on that list

SMart WolveFan

August 25th, 2017 at 12:35 PM ^

Shows that Michigan's recruiting is strong and still trending up.

 

Not so sure that 50% barrier won't be broken soon by a surprise team, since recently there were a 53% and a 52% that won.

Frank Chuck

August 25th, 2017 at 6:41 PM ^

graphic: NFL ratio (the number of players that reach the NFL w/r/t to magnitude i.e. round drafted). It's no surprise Alabama, Florida State, Ohio State, Clemson have become NFL factories in recent years. Michigan took a big step forward last season. Harbaugh coached up many of Hoke's recruits.