Can Oregon overcome their recruiting and win a National Championship?

[RunLeeRun]

So that's 5 composite top 10 classes over a 10 year period for Nebraska.

2 of those top 10 classes came off of championship teams. Thats' when everybody wants you. After 3 titles in 4 years, it was top-15 pretty much every year, but...... The whole point of this exercise was making a Nebraska-Oregon comparison. Pre-national title 1994, Nebraska was the team that could get there, but not win it...hell, they even lost 7 straight bowl games. See the classes spike? Top 10, then not even top 25. Hell, the upperclass for that first title were the two classes ranked as 28th each.

Has Oregon ever had a top 10 class? Even once?

Yes they have. The last 5 classes in reverse chronology (per rivals): 26,22,16,9,13.....it's really pretty similar, in my eyes.

 

[REDEYE]

Right. UCLA has been down since you 'started your run' in 2000. They have won 0 titles after winning 5 of the previous 20. Even mentioning Stanford is laughable.

whats UCLA have to do with anything ? That would be like Bama & LSU is worried about Tennessee....they're not and we're not

 

[rolltide]

go back to the article i posted many times. Oregon was one of, if memory serves me correctly, 4 teams that clearly outkicked their coverage with recruiting rankings vs bcs rankings. basically one team for every power 5 conference...that's it. if you recruit at a top 10 level you will be a top 10 team more times than not. i believe it was oregon, wisconsin, and kansas state and maybe okie state as the only power 5's with significantly better bcs rankings vs their rivals recruiting ranking. was a great article....google deadspin and recruiting and rankings and it should come right up

 

[packer2012]

Boise State also gets the players they want. It doesn't mean they can win a national championship. That has proven to be a different animal than winning a conference. We'll see. I'm pulling for you guys to win tonight. But not by too much if you know what I mean.

Sorry.... I feel sort of bad posting this.... because it is so obvious. But even being this obvious..... so many people don't want to accept it or be comfortable with it.

The above quote may be true, but..... Boise is REALLY not even a Top 20 big-time type football program. They are a gimmicky trick pony.

Here is the truth..... Imagine Boise playing a real big-time program for the National Championship. They would get murdered 10 times out of 10!

In a bowl setting...... where Boise his tickled shitless to be in a bigger game..... and their opponent has little respect for them and no interest in playing them... that is where they can hang in the game. Not when all the marbles are really in play.

If you don't agree with this..... you are either a blind Boise/Mid-Major fan....... or just don't know your ass from a football.

 

[packer2012]

Great respect here for Rolltide. I think he might agree with this. Part of the reason top recruiting classes reflect to closely in tune to rankings is this:

Recruiting numbers are VERY HEAVILY factored into ranking... especially pre-season. Once a team gets the high initial ranking... everything is stacked in their favor. Things strong and noticeable have to occur multiple times for them to take a large fall in the polls.

To me the problem with that is..... how reliable are those recruiting listings? Lots of politics and favoritism is in play in the recruit rankings. Those same rankings so greatly affect where teams are rated as the year goes on.

 

[GoSooners]

Even though Rivals is considered the main recruiting source, I also look at some of the other recruiting services to see where these players rate as a whole. The problem sometimes with Rivals is some of their player rankings are based on highschool players attending their Rivals Spring Camps where they evaluate these players. Problem is, not all of these players attend these regional camps. So a potential 5 star player coming out of highschool could potentially be knocked down to a 4 star if Rivals doesn't see that kid in person and look at his talents first hand. That isn't always the case, but a player can only help himself by attending the camp. But sometimes things like injuries prevent it. I know this happened with QB Hansen of Oklahoma. He didn't attend the Rivals camp because of injury and was given a 4 star out of HS. But many here think he has 5 star potential.

 

[packer2012]

Even though Rivals is considered the main recruiting source, I also look at some of the other recruiting services to see where these players rate as a whole. The problem sometimes with Rivals is some of their player rankings are based on highschool players attending their Rivals Spring Camps where they evaluate these players. Problem is, not all of these players attend these regional camps. So a potential 5 star player coming out of highschool could potentially be knocked down to a 4 star if Rivals doesn't see that kid in person and look at his talents first hand. That isn't always the case, but a player can only help himself by attending the camp. But sometimes things like injuries prevent it. I know this happened with QB Hansen of Oklahoma. He didn't attend the Rivals camp because of injury and was given a 4 star out of HS. But many here think he has 5 star potential.

Not busting on you Sooners...... but, you so eliquently stated the case about Rivals. You did not state with clarity..... Rivals wants the kid's money for the camp..... or they won't give the best rating. Let's be fair and accurate. Sooners.... you were being nice and professional. I am just telling it like it is. You want the rating of "5 star" for the kid....... pay the fee for the camp..... or multiple camps!

 

[REDEYE]

It is what it is

 

[ChrisParadise]

Yeah. Star ratings are not exact and the different services no doubt cate to fanbases that buy their product by inflating stars of commits to those schools but Justice Hansen was not singled out by rivals. He's 4 star by every service. 5 star by none.

 

[GoSooners]

Not busting on you Sooners...... but, you so eliquently stated the case about Rivals. You did not state with clarity..... Rivals wants the kid's money for the camp..... or they won't give the best rating. Let's be fair and accurate. Sooners.... you were being nice and professional. I am just telling it like it is. You want the rating of "5 star" for the kid....... pay the fee for the camp..... or multiple camps!

The Rivals Regional Camps are free for the elite athletes. And I'm pretty sure that it takes an invite to even attend them. But it's no skin off the player. He just needs to attend, if he's able to.

 

[GoSooners]

Yeah. Star ratings are not exact and the different services no doubt cate to fanbases that buy their product by inflating stars of commits to those schools but Justice Hansen was not singled out by rivals. He's 4 star by every service. 5 star by none.

The biggest reason for that rating was because he was never able to tryout for any of these recruiting services because he was injured in his senior season in HS and didn't recover in time for the football camps.

 

[rolltide]

So a potential 5 star player coming out of highschool could potentially be knocked down to a 4 star if Rivals doesn't see that kid in person and look at his talents first hand.

well isn't that sorta what you want? why would you pay for a rivals subscription to see their ratings based on unseen potential? so, yeah, absolutely i want rivals to save the "5 stars" for kids they absolutely believe to be a 5-star not only because of their tape but because of seeing them live. and really it doesn't kill a team's overall rating if they have 2 or 3 kids that end up being 1-star off each, i'm just saying you absolutely cannot sustain a title challenging program with a barely top 20 recruiting class. what Oregon has done is exceptional as their 5-year recruiting avg was 21 vs a #5 BCS average. remarkable really. Only TCU, Wisconsin, and Kansas State differentials are higher because their recruiting was quite low so of course there is more room to overachieve.... Wisc was 50th, TCU 57th, and KState 56th in recruiting. Along with Okie State those are the ONLY power 5 programs to have a 5-year BCS finishing average more than 7 places above their recruiting average. That's it, and of course 3 of them are in one conference so you can then cherry pick Wisconsin and Oregon as the only non Big12 schools to consistently finish much higher than their recruiting avg. so, people can ignore recruiting rankings all they want but it's the best predictor for future success.

the job kelly and helfrich have done sustaining a top 5 program while recruiting at a 20th place level is really remarkable but also unsustainable

 

[rolltide]

Not quite true. Before 1994, NU's first title, Nebraska was very volatile in classes. The 1987-1994 classes averaged 18th. After they won a few titles, they did experience the typical success boost. (EDIT: these rankings are a composite of, per the article link: ESPN, Scout, Rivals, 247Sports, Emfinger, Lemming, SuperPrep, Prep Star, Blue Chip Report, and the National Recruiting Advisor.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF HUSKER RECRUITING RANKINGS

we talked about this a few months back but the Huskers are finishing exactly where you'd expect them to. their 5-year recruiting avg was 21.8 and 5-year BCS average was 22.0 .... pretty damn spot on. if you want to be top 10 you have to start by closing that gap from recruiting 22nd to at least recruiting 15th. either that or hope to hell you're the 1 program per conference that can overcome the recruiting gap

 

[GoSooners]

RT, I didn't say I disagreed with how Rivals rates their players. I'm just saying that I like getting a second and third opinion by other recruiting services of where the kid rates with them. Usually it's fairly close between the services, but not always. I agree about Oregon. They've done an exceptional job considering they average out as the #17 ranked class for a 5 year period. When you can make 2 title games without making the top 10, that's saying something. But how much farther they can go I don't know.

 

[rolltide]

RT, I didn't say I disagreed with how Rivals rates their players. I'm just saying that I like getting a second and third opinion by other recruiting services of where the kid rates with them. Usually it's fairly close between the services, but not always. I agree about Oregon. They've done an exceptional job considering they average out as the #17 ranked class for a 5 year period. When you can make 2 title games without making the top 10, that's saying something. But how much farther they can go I don't know.

yeah no doubt. the one i really don't even look at anymore is scout. they really seem to put no effort into their ratings and the amount of misses they have is ridiculous. while Rivals values 7-on-7 camps scout values offers. a guy with no offer and zero stars suddenly becomes a 2 or 3 star since pitt is desperate because they have no dlineman and offers a kid that was ready to sign with robert morris or duquesne. their ratings are almost purely based on tape and offers. if a scout 3-star committed to usf drops that school and signs with fsu he's a 5-star overnight.

anyway their original founder from when they were great (pre-2004 or so) just came back last year so I expect them to be back in line with the others. hell, even that guy said their product sucked so when he came back last Feb the first thing he did was recruit out some of the original Rivals creators. I haven't looked at it much this year since i'm a Rivals (or ESPN) whore but I'll take a peek closer to NSD

 

[ChrisParadise]

The biggest reason for that rating was because he was never able to tryout for any of these recruiting services because he was injured in his senior season in HS and didn't recover in time for the football camps.

See its just the opposite with UT commits. Last year Jalen Hurd only played 1 game of his senior year and moved up from a 4 to a 5 star. This year khalil Mckenzie didn't play at all because some transfer issue and he moved up to #9 overall on Rivals. Of course Tennessee and Alabama fans are the two biggest spenders for premium content from recruiting services so im not surprised. Hurd played like a 5 star as a freshman and I'll boldly predict mckenzie will next year as well.

 

[rivercitybirdie]

very interesting discussion... thank you.....

i've always wondered about recruiting amongst schools beyond the perennial top 10 recruiters (USC, Alabama, LSU, florida, FSU, texas, ohio state etc.).....

does michigan state actually get better talent than minnesota or iowa? or cinncinnati? .... i always get the feeling that beyond the very top guys it's a bit of a cloud but not really sure.

i always thought that oregon doesn't quite get the talent of say USC....... they pick off some elite talent from california (armstead) and then some depth from cali/texas but it doesn't seem to be wall-to-wall 4 and 5 star guys.

one thing that's interesting. i read the book about orgeron sp? at ole miss. and he says something that i've heard other people say about SEC.. it's the DLINE that is the difference maker for SEC. and i tend to agree........ other positions like safety there are probably mid to high 100's if not 1000's of proper-sized really good athletes coming out of HS each year. and that goes for almost all positions... and for some reason i would differentiate OLINE and DLINE. seems like caucasian guys do very well at Oline but not at the DLINE (definitely some high profile exceptions but that's what they are - exceptions)

 

[GoSooners]

See its just the opposite with UT commits. Last year Jalen Hurd only played 1 game of his senior year and moved up from a 4 to a 5 star. This year khalil Mckenzie didn't play at all because some transfer issue and he moved up to #9 overall on Rivals. Of course Tennessee and Alabama fans are the two biggest spenders for premium content from recruiting services so im not surprised. Hurd played like a 5 star as a freshman and I'll boldly predict mckenzie will next year as well.

Depends what service your looking at. Hurd was a 5 star with 24/7 and Rivals, but only a 4 star with ESPN and Scout. Kahill McKenzie is one of those physical specimens and much sought after defensive linemen that doesn't come around everyday. So I can see why Rivals didn't downgrade him. But Scout had him as a 4 star. Citing Hurd and McKenzie may not have been the best way to make your point in comparing them to Hansen at OU. Unlike Hurd or McKenzie, Hansen isn't anything special physically, which didn't help his cause in missing half of his senior season of HS. OU basically recruited Hansen to fit their offensive system. And i believe he could have excelled in that system. Trouble is Stoops plans on changing that system after firing his OC and hiring Riley. They'll probably be more pass oriented like they were in the Sam Bradford days, and so will favor more of a pocket passer, which doesn't bode quite as well for a duo threat QB like Hansen. Or Trevor Knight for that fact..

 

[GoSooners]

very interesting discussion... thank you.....

i've always wondered about recruiting amongst schools beyond the perennial top 10 recruiters (USC, Alabama, LSU, florida, FSU, texas, ohio state etc.).....

does michigan state actually get better talent than minnesota or iowa? or cinncinnati? .... i always get the feeling that beyond the very top guys it's a bit of a cloud but not really sure.

i always thought that oregon doesn't quite get the talent of say USC....... they pick off some elite talent from california (armstead) and then some depth from cali/texas but it doesn't seem to be wall-to-wall 4 and 5 star guys.

one thing that's interesting. i read the book about orgeron sp? at ole miss. and he says something that i've heard other people say about SEC.. it's the DLINE that is the difference maker for SEC. and i tend to agree........ other positions like safety there are probably mid to high 100's if not 1000's of proper-sized really good athletes coming out of HS each year. and that goes for almost all positions... and for some reason i would differentiate OLINE and DLINE. seems like caucasian guys do very well at Oline but not at the DLINE (definitely some high profile exceptions but that's what they are - exceptions)

Michigan State isn't very special at all when it comes to recruiting. Nebraska recruits better than MSU. So we have to give Dantonio a lot of credit for what all they have been able to do the last few years. Except for the bottom dwellers, all of these Power-5 programs get their share of 4 and sometimes 5 star talent. But none of them can beat the Bluebloods you mentioned in sheer numbers. The difference between these schools is quality depth at nearly every position year after year. Bluebloods very seldom truely rebuild. The difference between a TCU or Michigan State to an Ohio State is if Connor Cook went down for Michigan St or Boykin for TCU they don't have two blue chip QB's waiting to take their place. Now think of that same scenerio for every position on the field, and you get an idea what the difference is between these same old powers that win the NC in football and basketball every season and the regular Joe's who try but never quite get there. TCU was fortunate not to incur a bunch of injuries this season, so they were a strong team down the stretch. Ohio State on the other hand had multiple injuries on both sides of the ball. But because of their quality depth they weren't hurt by it. Meyer now has a plug and play program, which will make them a top 5 program probably about every year going forward. Until somebody steals their thunder with similar talent (maybe Michigan?) they should be able to rule the Big 10 for the next few years.

 

[rolltide]

.

does michigan state actually get better talent than minnesota or iowa? or cinncinnati? ....

6yr recruiting avg... michigan state 33, iowa 44, minnesota 47, cincy 68

so, yeah they outrecruit all of them significantly