Who decides recruiting stars and what is the criteria?

Submitted by michman79 on
This is something I've always wondered. Is there a board room of people ( like super smart former coach football people) at Rivals and Scout who have significant discussions while breaking down high school tape? Or, is it a bunch of local coaches feeding hype to regional managers for the recruiting services...who then pass the game of telephone on to some proverbial monkey behind a computer. Also, is it just stats or are intangibles such as toughness and character taken into account? The reason I bring this up is, according to recruiting services, we have been dominating Nebraska, PSU, MSU, and the rest of the BIG in recruiting for several years while getting dominated on the field (PSU down several scholarships seems unfathomable). Under Hoke, our recruiting classes have generated a ton of hype, but we aren't winning big games and can't win on the road. Our classes under RR were also rated decently if I remember correctly. So my question is...do these services work? Or do they just give us something to read in the offseason? Are coaches focusing too much on stars and not enough on intangibles like toughness and resolve in the face of adversity? I'm sure MSU doesn't mind that we have out recruited them for the last several years. I'm sure they are just fine beating us on the field where it matters.
MGoBoard

snarling wolverine

November 9th, 2013 at 11:32 PM ^

But you're missing the point: a lot of the guys we recruited in 2009, 2010 and 2011 aren't on the team anymore.  Only 9 of the 27 recruits in the 2010 class are on the current roster.  These guys should be our current seniors/RS juniors - our team leaders.  But two-thirds of them are gone.

How highly-ranked would a 9-man class have been in 2010?  

 

Joined: 12/14/2011

MGoPoints: 98337

leu2500

November 9th, 2013 at 11:01 PM ^

Hoke/Borges/Funk are not to blame for "We haven't won a Big 10 championship in a decade; MSU dominating 5 of 7; only beat OSU once when they were in a state of flux.'  

It's fair to criticize them for 2011-now.  But in that time they've gone 25-10.  3 winning seasons.  1-2 against MSU, 1-1 currently against OSU.  0-3 Big 10 championships.  

I don't have the expertise to judge how good the coaching/play calling has been.  Although it wouldn't seem that a .714 winning percentage warrants Fire [coach X]!. 

As to the youth on the team, and is that a contributor to this season's record?  Let's look at it another way.  Recapping: only 25 upperclassmen on scholarship.  Ideally shouldn't that be closer to 40-42?  So isn't this comparable to losing 7, 8 scholarships for each of 2 years?  Wouldn't one expect a team so sanctioned to see their record suffer?    After all, the Penn State sanctions (no more than 15 scholarships per year, 2012-2015) were expected to have a crippling effect on the team, and for longer than 4 years.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

    

Joined: 01/22/2011

MGoPoints: 2119

B1G_Fan

November 10th, 2013 at 12:11 AM ^

 .714 looks mediocre on paper and when you look at the competition it looks even worse. 3 years ago half the fans wanted to fire the coach, one of the units where performing epically bad, historically bad. We beat bad to mediocre teams but lost to mediocre to good teams. 3 years later we're still in the same boat but now it's the offense thats historically bad. In 3 games this year we rushed over 80 times for -50 yards. By the coaches own words we haven't "executed" since week 2.  We play a sloppy brand of unoriganal, poorly coached football and nothing changes from week 2 week.

 The simularities between this years offense and the 08-09 defenses are remakable.the same excuses where given for the defense back then. It's youth, they are young but they are getting experience. They didn't become a respectable unit until the coach was fired . Poorly coached teams are bad no matter if they are freshman or seniors and bad experience is only slightly better than no experience at all.

Joined: 10/11/2012

MGoPoints: 3411

5starrecruit

November 10th, 2013 at 12:13 AM ^

Recruiting is huge anyone who says differently is either not looking at the facts or ignoring them because there school can't recruit well.

Joined: 01/19/2013

MGoPoints: 79

clarkiefromcanada

November 10th, 2013 at 1:54 AM ^

I did my graduate work at Temple University in Pha. and I also follow the Owls in basketball and football. Last year the Owls received their first "modern era" four star commit and it was elation everywhere in the TU blogosphere. The distance in talent between have schools for recruiting and have not schools for recruiting is miles in football.

Four star basketball recruits at Temple not a huge deal...but football, unreal. For years they minimized it in football importance vs. local schools like Rutgers etc. but once they got one you could see how they'd kind of buried it.

Joined: 11/20/2008

MGoPoints: 49257

Hi Gang

November 10th, 2013 at 3:49 AM ^

Waynes and Dennard were both 2 star guys.  They're the reason MSU can blitz at will....or Devin.

It's not hard science.  It's hardly science.

 

I will admit that 5 star guys, and high (6.0) four star guys tend to pan out far better than others.

But, for most of the others, it's an educated guess as to how they will perform at the next level.

 

Oh, coaching matters.  Development, schemes, adjustments. 

Not to mention the little things - like playing the best guys and putting the team first.  Keeping them humble but confident at the same time.  Not settling, or letting them settle.  Making sure they believe in them.

And character, when using the term related to football, definitely matters.

40 times are important, if you can hit the hole - if there is one.  Or if you can run a route and sell a fake.  If you can take a hit as well as you give one.  If you can...pick up a blitz.

Strength matters, if you have quick feet and a quicker brain.

Size matters (oops) if it fits the scheme.  More like if it fits the play, and everything else is in place.

 

Ask Mack Brown with run of consistent top 5 recruiting classes how important recruiting rankings are.

 

Joined: 06/27/2013

MGoPoints: 76

clarkiefromcanada

November 10th, 2013 at 1:20 PM ^

You mean the same Mack Brown with the National Championship and multiple BCS berths, right?

Their recruiting remains solid but note they began to decline only when "Peter Principle" Will Muschamp went to Florida.

Lesson: Excellent recruits plus good coaching equals outcomes. To minimize recruiting is ridiculous.

Joined: 11/20/2008

MGoPoints: 49257