Comparing Recruiting Across The Years (December 2018)

BillySee58 · December 21, 2018

Over the years I have tracked the offer lists of our signees and compared classes based on those offer lists. I came up with a letter grade scale based on how many FBS offers each signee had and who offered them (P5 vs G5).

C means we were the only FBS offer for that signee, C+ is one other FBS offer, B is two to four other FBS offers, B+ is two to four but with a P5 offer, A is five to nine other FBS offers, A+ is 10 or more other FBS offers.

I finally made a spreadsheet to archive it all, as Scout was bought by 247 so some of the profiles I used to see all of the offers are gone, and it’s becoming harder to access older profiles and articles in general.

Anyways, here are a couple of charts showing a few things from the 2011-2019 classes. The first chart shows what percentage of the class had a “B” or better offer list (at least two other FBS offers). The second chart shows what percentage of the class had an “A” or better offer list. The last chart is based on a points scale I created where each G5 offer is worth one point and each P5 offer is worth 1.5 points. The last chart shows how many points each class accumulated in total between all of its signees.

NorthTexan95 · December 21, 2018

Wow. The improvement has been tremendous!

outoftown · December 22, 2018

Hard not to see why so many think this class could be a game changer.

Also have to wonder whether there might be some small regression the next two years, when the 16/17 classes are the upper classmen who should carry the load.

Mad Hatter · December 26, 2018

On ‎12‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 5:56 AM, outoftown said:

Hard not to see why so many think this class could be a game changer.

Also have to wonder whether there might be some small regression the next two years, when the 16/17 classes are the upper classmen who should carry the load.

Hopefully the next 2 years can be smoothed over with the JUCO and transfers available.

GMG_Dallas · December 26, 2018

On 12/22/2018 at 5:56 AM, outoftown said:

Also have to wonder whether there might be some small regression the next two years, when the 16/17 classes are the upper classmen who should carry the load.

I don't think there will be. Our QB recruiting and development has been strong and our key players are from the current regime (16/17 recruits). That 2014 class was strong but did not overwhelmingly compose the leaders of last year's team.

Now the real question is, which P5s do we play in 2022/23 who will have to deal with this year's class as upperclassmen?

H-towngreen · December 26, 2018

Great work Billy! The key to doing big things long term is to have back to back classes of what we just signed.

Talon90 · December 27, 2018

On 12/26/2018 at 9:22 AM, GMG_Dallas said:

I don't think there will be. Our QB recruiting and development has been strong and our key players are from the current regime (16/17 recruits). That 2014 class was strong but did not overwhelmingly compose the leaders of last year's team.

Now the real question is, which P5s do we play in 2022/23 who will have to deal with this year's class as upperclassmen?

Aldo · December 28, 2018

On 12/21/2018 at 4:01 PM, BillySee58 said:

Wonder if you could use win % as a third axis?

BillySee58 · December 28, 2018

1 hour ago, Aldo said:

Wonder if you could use win % as a third axis?

I could. But I’m not going to. Too many other factors, plus I’m strictly focusing on evaluating recruiting and quality of signees that we are bringing in. Not evaluating the quality of job that we are doing in developing and retaining these players.