Why Recruiting Rankings Matter To PJ FLeck and the Gophers

The data that I have compiled indicates the Gophers are entrenched firmly in 5th place in B1G West behind Wisconsin, Iowa, Northwestern, and Nebraska in order of strength.

How they finish commensurate with their average recruiting composite score, national recruiting ranking, and total score. The anomaly is Nebraska (Illinois somewhat)in spite of having the highest level of recruiting. Nebraska could not overtake Wisconsin in both the conference & overall standings.

Iowa on the other hand seem to excel with a lot lower level talent than Nebraska and Wisconsin.



Starting with 2015, 247Sports have started sharing College Football Team Talent Composite which show the talent level of the entire roster for 2015, 2016, & 2017. I have compiled the data for the B1G East & West:





I have paired the data for the average composite scores and average total points for each B1G team against their average conference and overall standings for 2015-2017.

The results are compelling that roster talent level significantly influences how teams finish in the standings.

Maryland and Nebraska under performed while Wisconsin, Iowa, and Penn State over performed.

Look at Michigan's Roster Talent Level (click on "Ratings" to order highest to lowest Star/Composite) - https://247sports.com/Team/Michigan-71/Roster

Look at Northwestern's (click on "Ratings" to order highest to lowest Star/Composite) - https://247sports.com/Team/Northwestern-Wildcats-Football-77/Roster

Compare their Roster Talent Level against the Gophers' (click on "Ratings" to order highest to lowest Star/Composite) - https://247sports.com/Team/Minnesota-Golden-Gophers-Football-75/Roster

It is not too difficult to imagine how they can be shut out and outplayed at the end of the season.

Recruiting Ranking does matter to a great extend whether we want to admit it or not.



Interestingly, if you averaged all the recruiting rankings from 2011 to 2017 the Gophers come out in 6th place overall.

If you add the 2018 class, PJ Fleck's Year 1 the Gophers jumped to 4th place. The potential is very exciting if Fleck can sustain this level of recruiting.

PJ Fleck's 2018 1st full class already eclipses Jerry Kill's/Tray Claey's best recruiting class (2016) with an average composite score of 0.8609 versus 0.8427.

The Gopher's 30th Rank Recruiting Class is based primarily on the total points which is determined by the number of recruits and the average composites scores. The Gophers 206.02 total points is achieved with 26 signees and an average composite score of 0.8609 (or 86.09).



I throw caution into the wind. Nebraska (187.05 pts, 87.33 composite, 14 recruits), Wisconsin (191.71, 86.38), and Iowa (193.96, 86.28, 18) have higher composite averages and achieved their ratings with fewer recruits.

These are all comparative numbers that only would mean something if the recruits performed as rated.

It will take three or four years before we can see if PJ Fleck can achieved the heights of GOpher Football we have not seen in 50+ years. The one thing we have to keep in mind is that the competition are also improving.

Great analysis. Recruiting does matter. It’s only by exception that a team outperforms their multi-year recruiting rankings in terms of on the field results that we aspire to like conference titles, winning big games and national title contention. A great start will be consecutive classes in the 30s of rankings instead of the 50s+.

Another good article on recruiting rankings. It also has good links

https://www.foxsports.com/college-f...-gary-derrick-brown-demetris-robertson-020116

Ranking in the 30s isn't going to be good enough in the long run. It will improve.

diehard said:

Ranking in the 30s isn't going to be good enough in the long run. It will improve.

Click to expand...

It's good enough for now in my opinion. I am more focused on coaching and seeing improvement in our defense. Last year we looked bad against the best teams in the big ten. Can the offense get better? That is the key. We already know with Winfield back the defense is already better. Period.

I would change the title of the thread... I read it expecting PJ Fleck to be giving opinions on recruiting rankings.

So have all of the teams you are comparing against the Gophers completed their classes for 2018? I personally don't know. If not the Gophers have the potential to move up or down in this analysis once we are looking at actual completed classes. (apples to apples)

Tlsbhansen said:

So have all of the teams you are comparing against the Gophers completed their classes for 2018? I personally don't know. If not the Gophers have the potential to move up or down in this analysis once we are looking at actual completed classes. (apples to apples)

Click to expand...

It is hard to tell as some of them don't sign up 25 players typically. Iowa (18), Wisconsin (19), and Nebraska (14) are right behind the GOphers. I can see Scott Frost doing addition by subtraction and may sign more than the current players already signed.

https://247sports.com/Season/2018-Football/CompositeTeamRankings?Conference=Big-Ten

diehard said:

Ranking in the 30s isn't going to be good enough in the long run. It will improve.

Click to expand...

In the B1G, Wisc has consistently made it work. MSU has consistently had results that out performed its class rankings as well. You can also argue that IA has consistently had results that outperformed its recruiting class rankings, with 8 or more wins in six of the last 10 seasons.

Consistency in coaching staff and its ability to develop players for the program is the key. Don't see why that wouldn't apply to this staff.

diehard said:

Ranking in the 30s isn't going to be good enough in the long run. It will improve.

Click to expand...

Correct. It is a good start, but Big Ten title contention will require moderately better results.

Actually ranking in the 30s has worked for Wisc. We’ve traditionally been in the 50s so moving to the 30s would be a significant shift to a different tier of talent. Of course that talent will need to be coached. “Coaching up” recruiting classes ranking in the 50s isn’t going to get the results we want - data shows it’s almost impossible to sustain high performance with that level of talent.

Actually ranking in the 30s has worked for Wisc. We’ve traditionally been in the 50s so moving to the 30s would be a significant shift to a different tier of talent. Of course that talent will need to be coached. “Coaching up” recruiting classes ranking in the 50s isn’t going to get the results we want - data shows it’s almost impossible to sustain high performance with that level of talent.

hungan1 said:

Recruiting Ranking does matter to a great extend whether we want to admit it or not.

Click to expand...

If only, IF ONLY, we could recruit as well as Nebraska ... then maybe we too would have a chance to finish the season at 4-8.

Oh wait a second .... let's throw that data away, because it doesn't support the agenda we're trying to ram through.


No thanks.

Somewhere along the way after all the hard recruiting is done, you have to coach the team as Brewster had found out.

I think Nebraska can recruit by reputation, but there seem to be a disconnect between the type of players they recruit and their revolving systems. They went thru a coaching carousel like the Gophers: Frank Solich 1998-2003, Bill Callahan 2004-2007, Bo Pellini 2008-2014, MIke Riley 2015-2017, and now Scott Frost.

Iowa on the other hand have coaching stability and system: Hayden Fry 1979-1998 and then Kirk Ferentz 1999-Present. They routed a talent laden tOSU team with lower rated players. I wouldn't be surprised if they coached and developed three star players into four and five stars.

hungan1 said:

Somewhere along the way after all the hard recruiting is done, you have to coach the team as Brewster had found out.

I think Nebraska can recruit by reputation, but there seem to be a disconnect between the type of players they recruit and their revolving systems. They went thru a coaching carousel like the Gophers: Frank Solich 1998-2003, Bill Callahan 2004-2007, Bo Pellini 2008-2014, MIke Riley 2015-2017, and now Scott Frost.

Iowa on the other hand have coaching stability and system: Hayden Fry 1979-1998 and then Kirk Ferentz 1999-Present. They routed a talent laden tOSU team with lower rated players. I wouldn't be surprised if they coached and developed three star players into four and five stars.

Click to expand...

Sure -- whatever.

Give me Iowa's "coaching stability and system of turning '3-star' players into '5-star' players". I'd take a season like Iowa's 2015 season, any year. Where do I sign up?


Much prefer that to "sign players who have really high college fantasy football numbers, and hope they work well at Minnesota and win games".

It boils down to whether PJ Fleck & his staff can coach, develop players, and make their system work. It will help the program if he decides to stay for the long haul.

Being able to beat Wisconsin with regularity will be a plus.

hungan1 said:

It boils down to whether PJ Fleck & his staff can coach, develop players, and make their system work.

Click to expand...

If that had been the title of the post, I would have agreed hands down and left it at that.


But you were trying to imply that winning at college fantasy football ensures a good record. It does not, as Nebraska well knows.

MnplsGopher said:

If only, IF ONLY, we could recruit as well as Nebraska ... then maybe we too would have a chance to finish the season at 4-8.

Oh wait a second .... let's throw that data away, because it doesn't support the agenda we're trying to ram through.


No thanks.

Click to expand...

You need to go back to take an intro to stats class, there are always outliers in data and nothing is a perfect 1 to 1 correlation. Why are you throwing away a massive amount of data, oh right because it doesn't support the agenda you are trying to ram through.

As the linked article below outlines, recruiting results do provide a reasonable baseline for on-the-field performance expectations. There will always be outliers, but the large data set - across multiple years and viewed nationally - shows that recruiting matters. The Big Ten East is the stronger side and the caliber of talent consistently recruited is much better, along with coaching, facilities and resources. Nebraska has underperformed.

https://www.footballstudyhall.com/2...-matters-why-the-sites-get-the-rankings-right

There is a lot to be excited about the 2018 recruiting class. Comparing it to Kill's/C;ey's best recruiting class (2016) that brought the likes of Carter Coughlin. Tyler JOhnson, Thomas Barber, and Antoine Winfield, PJ Fleck's 2018 class is oozing with a lot of talent and potential. Even the guys toward the bottom of the list like Ahanotu (with NFL legacy), Sori_Marin, Grant Norton, CJ Smith, and Josh Aune looke pretty solid. I look forward to their development.

Antoine Winfield was rated a low three star.

Ski U Master said:

You need to go back to take an intro to stats class, there are always outliers in data and nothing is a perfect 1 to 1 correlation. Why are you throwing away a massive amount of data, oh right because it doesn't support the agenda you are trying to ram through.

Click to expand...

Exactly. But Mnpls and several others will never believe they are wrong, when it can be easily proved that they are.

hungan1 said:

Being able to beat Wisconsin with regularity will be a plus.

Click to expand...

Slow down there...maybe we should beat them once first!

I know. Take PJ Fleck baby steps!

GopherWeatherGuy said:

Exactly. But Mnpls and several others will never believe they are wrong, when it can be easily proved that they are.

Click to expand...

Of course - outliers explain all.

When I look at the table the OP published on average recruiting ranking vs conference record/place from 2011-2019, I see only 8 of the 49 places (16%) were filled with the team the rankings would have predicted. Seems pretty conclusive to me.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

GopherWeatherGuy said:

Exactly. But Mnpls and several others will never believe they are wrong, when it can be easily proved that they are.

Click to expand...

Pot, meet kettle.

Spoofin said:

Of course - outliers explain all.

When I look at the table the OP published on average recruiting ranking vs conference record/place from 2011-2019, I see only 8 of the 49 places (16%) were filled with the team the rankings would have predicted. Seems pretty conclusive to me.

View attachment 5311


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Yes very conclusive. It's an average over time, not a 1:1 weekly or even yearly correlation. The yearly correlation is around .75. Something that has been explained time and again on here.

Talent with no coaching will not succeed.

Coaching with no talent will not succeed.

To succeed, you need talent and coaching. Now, you can argue the ratio - is the formula for success 70% talent and 30% coaching; 80% talent and 20% coaching; 60% talent and 40% coaching? But you need both.

You could take the #1 recruiting class in the country, make me the head coach, and the team is probably not going to do that well. You can take the #100 recruiting class in the country, make Saban the head coach, and the team is probably not going to do that well.

The real question is, if you take the #30 recruiting class in the country, and make PJ Fleck the head coach, how well is the team going to do? Stay tuned.

GopherWeatherGuy said:

Yes very conclusive. It's an average over time, not a 1:1 weekly or even yearly correlation. The yearly correlation is around .75. Something that has been explained time and again on here.

Click to expand...

Nobody has ever argued talent doesn’t matter.
Some people rightly suggest coaching plays a part.
Top programs tend to have the best talent and the best coaches.

Pompous Elitist said:

Nobody has ever argued talent doesn’t matter.
Some people rightly suggest coaching plays a part.
Top programs tend to have the best talent and the best coaches.

Click to expand...

Never argued that. However, talent is still the #1 factor.

short ornery norwegian said:

Talent with no coaching will not succeed.

Coaching with no talent will not succeed.

To succeed, you need talent and coaching. Now, you can argue the ratio - is the formula for success 70% talent and 30% coaching; 80% talent and 20% coaching; 60% talent and 40% coaching? But you need both.

You could take the #1 recruiting class in the country, make me the head coach, and the team is probably not going to do that well. You can take the #100 recruiting class in the country, make Saban the head coach, and the team is probably not going to do that well.

The real question is, if you take the #30 recruiting class in the country, and make PJ Fleck the head coach, how well is the team going to do? Stay tuned.

Click to expand...

Hey SON, if you ever land a HC job at a school with the #1 recruiting class hire some really good coordinators and let them run stuff. You can kiss babies, talk to the press, and raise money for new facilities. You would probably do OK.

Sent from my LG-H820 using Tapatalk

GopherWeatherGuy said:

Yes very conclusive. It's an average over time, not a 1:1 weekly or even yearly correlation. The yearly correlation is around .75. Something that has been explained time and again on here.

Click to expand...

He doesn't seem to want to believe anything you say about recruiting rankings.