Jump to content

Question for Stat Tiger

au_bsci_04

By au_bsci_04
in AU Recruiting Forum

Recommended Posts

TigerProwl24 Veteran

TigerProwl24 0

Posted
Posted

Ok then give me time. I can only type with one hand so it may take a while.

Its ok. Take your time. We're fairly patient and reasonable around here but just for argument sake, can you not use your toes on the other foot? Oh, and try to get it to us by 5:00 or else you might be tarred and feathered next time we see you on the shuttle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites




AUnCullman Founding Father

AUnCullman 601

Posted
Posted

Stat, do you have any information you can put together to show the correlation between winning a nation championship and recruiting (i.e. the success in recruiting the year of, the following year, and so on...)? I think it would be interesting to see exactly when a team receives the biggest benefit. TIA

Not Stat but it will help.

And I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ellitor Founding Father

ellitor 33,102

Posted
Posted

Here is the full layout with records for each year for each team.

Year Champion

Class after champions NC 2 3 4 5

2000- OU

2001 Record 13-0 11-2 12-2 12-2 12-1

Scout

overall - NA 2 3 7 5

player avg. - NA 5 3 2 12

Rivals

overall - NA 7 4 8 3

player avg. - NA 2* 6 2 6

2001- Miami

2002 Record 12-0 12-1 11-2 9-3 9-3

Scout

overall 4 6 3 12 14

player avg. 1* 8 5 6 10

Rivals

overall 8 5 5 7 14

player avg. 5 5 9 2 15

2002- Ohio State

2003 Record 14-0 11-2 8-4 10-2 12-1

Scout

overall 25 11 7 13 16

player avg. 5 12 7 7 5

Rivals

overall 41 9 12 12 15

player avg. 11 11 9 8 4

2003- LSU

2004 Record 12-1 9-3 11-2 11-2 13-0

Scout

overall 2 19 7 5 7

player avg. 4 8 9 3 11

Rivals

overall 2 22 7 4 11

player avg. 6 4 12 3 9

2004- USC

2005 Record 13-0 12-1 11-2 11-2 12-1

Scout

overall 6 1 2 9 9

player avg. 1 1 1 3 1

Rivals

overall 1 1 2 8 4

player avg. 1 2 1 2 2

2005- Texas

2006 Record 13-0 10-3 10-3 12-1 13-1

Scout

overall 3 3 16 7 3

player avg. 3 4 6 6 2

Rivals

overall 5 5 14 5 3

player avg. 9 5 10 3 2

2006- Florida

2007 Record 13-1 9-4 13-1 13-1

Sciout

overall 1 12 22 1

player avg. 2 7 3 3

Rivals

overall 1 3 11 2

player avg. 2 4 1 3

2007- LSU

2008 Record 12-2 7-5 9-4

Scout

overall 7 3 7

player avg. 11 5 12

Rivals

overall 11 2 6

player avg. 9 6 6

2008- Florida

2009 Record 13-1 13-1

Scout

overall 22 1

player avg. 8 3

Rivals

overall 2 2

player avg. 6 3

2009- Alabama

2010 Record 14-0

Scout

overall 4

player avg. 10

Rivals

overall 5

player avg. 4

Scout averages

Class after championship NC 2 3 4 5

overall rank avg. 8.2 7.1 8.4 7.7 9

per player avg. 5 5.9 6.8 4.3 6.8

Rivals averages

overall rank avg. 8.4 6.2 7.6 6.6 8.3

per player avg. 5.9 4.7 6.8 3.3 6.3

Notes:

NC=national champion.

ESPN rankings were not used because they only go back to 2006 and do not have a per player ranking.

Player average and per player average are in terms on stars per player.

*=Miami and OU were not technically 1 and 2 in star player average in Scout. They were 2 and 5 but were calculated as 1 and 2 for the data because the other 3 teams were new to D-! and only had 1 or 2 recruits. http://recruiting.sc...=9&c=14&yr=2002

Conclusions:

1. USC should have never EVER lost a game.

2. If you want to win a national championship you better be no more than 1 state away from the big 4 recruiting states...ie Florida, Texas, California, and Georgia. Ohio state is the only school to win the title in the BCS era and not be no more than 1 state away from the big 4 states in recruiting.

3. The south is the best area for high school football. It's not just media hype. Again Ohio State is the only exception. You may say Oklahoma but remember OU has Texas and Texas is in the South.

Correlations:

1. There is not consistent evidence to correlate winning a national title with the quality of players that sign 1 season/2nd recruiting class after winning the championship being better than the players signed the same year as winning the Championship. A factor in this could be that the idea of building at least a 2 year relationship with recruits is important does appear to be true.

2. There appears to be a some correlation between winning the championship and signing a better overall class the following year. This point combined with point 1 would seem to indicate the better overall class comes from key players graduating or turning pro more than quality of players coming in. More players are needed thus overall numbers are better.

3. The most interesting correlation to me is that the most dramatic increase in quality of player signed in both Scout and Rivals is in class 4 after winning the national title. For Auburn that class 2014 according to the data. If you have any questions or further explanation needed feel free to post them here or PM me. I hope you enjoy. Now I am finally going to eat. lol

In retrospect for Auburn classes NC through 5 would be as follows.

NC 2 3 4 5

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUBuilderman Mentor

AUBuilderman 0

Posted
Posted

That is really cool. It seems kinda odd to me that year 3 after would be a jump though.

Recruiting is about creating relationships.  The coaches are recruiting a lot of sophmores and juniors now.  Not to mention, it is usually around this time that HS players start getting involved in where they want to play football at the next level. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TigerProwl24 Veteran

TigerProwl24 0

Posted
Posted

Ellitor, great job man and thanks for putting in the time it took to lay this out for us. I know it took a while to gather all the numbers and type it out. This layout isn't hard to understand at all like you said it would be and it's very interesting. AUsome work and War Eagle! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUtiger635 Apprentice

AUtiger635 0

Posted
Posted

Great job, thanks for posting! Seems to me like there's room for more statistical analysis in college football, I'd love to see more stuff like this (or do it myself) in the future...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ellitor Founding Father

ellitor 33,102

Posted
Posted

Great job, thanks for posting! Seems to me like there's room for more statistical analysis in college football, I'd love to see more stuff like this (or do it myself) in the future...

Well there are simple stats i have said I wish they would use more to evaluate DBs on all levels to get a better indication of how good they are...times thrown to, completion percentage allowed, and yards per catch allowed...oh and touchdown catches allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yodalooney Apprentice

yodalooney 0

Posted
Posted

Conclusions:

1. USC should have never EVER lost a game.

2. If you want to win a national championship you better be no more than 1 state away from the big 3 recruiting states...ie Florida, Texas, California. Ohio state is the only school to win the title in the BCS era and not be no more than a state away from the big 3 states in recruiting.

3. The south is the best area for high school football. It's not just media hype. Again Ohio State is the only exception. You may say Oklahoma but remember OU has Texas and Texas is in the South.

-Points 2 and 3 mean Auburn has a HUGE statistical advantage over Oregon on predicting the national championship game.

As for point 2 being a huge advantage for Auburn, isn't Oregon just north of California?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ellitor Founding Father

ellitor 33,102

Posted
Posted

Conclusions:

1. USC should have never EVER lost a game.

2. If you want to win a national championship you better be no more than 1 state away from the big 3 recruiting states...ie Florida, Texas, California. Ohio state is the only school to win the title in the BCS era and not be no more than a state away from the big 3 states in recruiting.

3. The south is the best area for high school football. It's not just media hype. Again Ohio State is the only exception. You may say Oklahoma but remember OU has Texas and Texas is in the South.

-Points 2 and 3 mean Auburn has a HUGE statistical advantage over Oregon on predicting the national championship game.

As for point 2 being a huge advantage for Auburn, isn't Oregon just north of California?

Very true. I always get mixed up between Oregon and Washington geographically in relation to Cali. That said. I believe most of the good football is in South Cali so that in itself may be a pseudo 2 states away so it should say point 3 gives Auburn an advantage over Oregon....Also Tennessee in '98 won it being 2 states away from Florida but they do border Georgia which is aeguably #4 for recruiting high school talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aucpe Founding Father

aucpe 0

Posted
Posted

Ok then give me time. I can only type with one hand so it may take a while.

I'm not going to ask what you have open in your other browser that's causing this...  ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ShugFan Mentor

ShugFan 0

Posted
Posted

Ok then give me time. I can only type with one hand so it may take a while.

I'm not going to ask what you have open in your other browser that's causing this...   ;)

:laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ellitor Founding Father

ellitor 33,102

Posted
Posted

Ok then give me time. I can only type with one hand so it may take a while.

I'm not going to ask what you have open in your other browser that's causing this...   ;)

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: I knew someone would go there....I have mild cerebral palsy and can't type with my right hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...