Illinois Football Recruiting Thread

Captain 'Paign
Phoenix, AZ
Don't have to be a statistician to know that that metric is terribly flawed.
Yeah. Robert wrote a post showing how the Top 22 players ranked by composite ranking and then inserted the current class plus transfers (using their composite rankings as HS seniors), and the vast majority of the guys in the Top 10 were from this class. That's impressive. Also, consider the high quality of transfers we got between Ford, Petitbon, Eifler who will be playing, etc. Add those guys in an the average ranking for the class is around 89 (would have been 90 if Jeff Thomas had stayed with us), or right between Nebraska and Michigan level. That's impressive. That's not even including the ratings bump for Coleman.
 
Don't have to be a statistician to know that that metric is terribly flawed.
Rankings are not terribly flawed. Look at the top ranked teams recruiting rankings. If you want to be the best you need to recruit the best and a large number to compensate for injuries, transfers and players not meeting expectations.
 
Rankings are not terribly flawed. Look at the top ranked teams recruiting rankings. If you want to be the best you need to recruit the best and a large number to compensate for injuries, transfers and players not meeting expectations.
We're only 3 rides short of the maximum for the roster, so your argument about needing to recruit a larger number can't change all too much. You're also clearly not looking at the quality of recruits that we have, as our class ranking is sorely hurt by volume.

If you sort 247's class rankings by the average rating of each teams recruit rather than their scoring system that takes class size into account, we rank 29th in the nation and 7th in the B1G behind Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Michigan State. Now you might be thinking that doing this would be a change for a lot of schools, but of the top 30 schools by average recruit rating, 28 of them are also in the top 30 in class rank. The only other one that jumps into the top 30? Arizona State, who holds the 30th place in average recruit rating despite having a class ranking of just 31!

In fact, if you look at the difference in 247 class rank vs. average recruit rating, we move up 34 places. Among the top 100 teams by 247 class rank, the next biggest jump by sorting by average is 19 places (Fresno State, going from a 100 class rank to 81st in average rating).

So tell me again how this isn't an excellent class for us?
 
We're only 3 rides short of the maximum for the roster, so your argument about needing to recruit a larger number can't change all too much. You're also clearly not looking at the quality of recruits that we have, as our class ranking is sorely hurt by volume.

If you sort 247's class rankings by the average rating of each teams recruit rather than their scoring system that takes class size into account, we rank 29th in the nation and 7th in the B1G behind Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Michigan State. Now you might be thinking that doing this would be a change for a lot of schools, but of the top 30 schools by average recruit rating, 28 of them are also in the top 30 in class rank. The only other one that jumps into the top 30? Arizona State, who holds the 30th place in average recruit rating despite having a class ranking of just 31!

In fact, if you look at the difference in 247 class rank vs. average recruit rating, we move up 34 places. Among the top 100 teams by 247 class rank, the next biggest jump by sorting by average is 19 places (Fresno State, going from a 100 class rank to 81st in average rating).

So tell me again how this isn't an excellent class for us?
I love facts so freaking much.
 
We're only 3 rides short of the maximum for the roster, so your argument about needing to recruit a larger number can't change all too much. You're also clearly not looking at the quality of recruits that we have, as our class ranking is sorely hurt by volume.

If you sort 247's class rankings by the average rating of each teams recruit rather than their scoring system that takes class size into account, we rank 29th in the nation and 7th in the B1G behind Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Michigan State. Now you might be thinking that doing this would be a change for a lot of schools, but of the top 30 schools by average recruit rating, 28 of them are also in the top 30 in class rank. The only other one that jumps into the top 30? Arizona State, who holds the 30th place in average recruit rating despite having a class ranking of just 31!

In fact, if you look at the difference in 247 class rank vs. average recruit rating, we move up 34 places. Among the top 100 teams by 247 class rank, the next biggest jump by sorting by average is 19 places (Fresno State, going from a 100 class rank to 81st in average rating).

So tell me again how this isn't an excellent class for us?
Phenomenal post that could have ended after the first sentence. If you have $5, you cannot walk in to a store and buy something that costs $10. If you have 19 available scholarships and you bring in 3 transfer students, you cannot sign 27 HS seniors ala Nick Saban. Nothing about that should be confusing to anyone.
 
Yeah. Robert wrote a post showing how the Top 22 players ranked by composite ranking and then inserted the current class plus transfers (using their composite rankings as HS seniors), and the vast majority of the guys in the Top 10 were from this class. That's impressive. Also, consider the high quality of transfers we got between Ford, Petitbon, Eifler who will be playing, etc. Add those guys in an the average ranking for the class is around 89 (would have been 90 if Jeff Thomas had stayed with us), or right between Nebraska and Michigan level. That's impressive. That's not even including the ratings bump for Coleman.
Sir I appreciate your effort here. But I have found that no matter how hard you try and explain this, someone is still going to come back eventually and say 64th in the composite rankings or 14th in the B1G. It is clear the team is getting much more talented. And we really do not need numbers to prove it. Difference makers!
 
We're only 3 rides short of the maximum for the roster, so your argument about needing to recruit a larger number can't change all too much. You're also clearly not looking at the quality of recruits that we have, as our class ranking is sorely hurt by volume.

If you sort 247's class rankings by the average rating of each teams recruit rather than their scoring system that takes class size into account, we rank 29th in the nation and 7th in the B1G behind Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Michigan State. Now you might be thinking that doing this would be a change for a lot of schools, but of the top 30 schools by average recruit rating, 28 of them are also in the top 30 in class rank. The only other one that jumps into the top 30? Arizona State, who holds the 30th place in average recruit rating despite having a class ranking of just 31!

In fact, if you look at the difference in 247 class rank vs. average recruit rating, we move up 34 places. Among the top 100 teams by 247 class rank, the next biggest jump by sorting by average is 19 places (Fresno State, going from a 100 class rank to 81st in average rating).

So tell me again how this isn't an excellent class for us?
Good research!
 
Someone earlier mentioned Jarcadia Wright would be on board. I haven't heard that anywhere but he would be a solid late-period signing. Adam Sherrif is still out there as well, we've shown interest in him previously. Have to wait and see what happens with Rajae Johnson's eligibility. We most definitely will save at least 1 open spot to be prepared in the event of a change to the status of Khalil Tate. As such, we've essentially put a bow on this thing...and a fine bow it was.
 
Someone earlier mentioned Jarcadia Wright would be on board. I haven't heard that anywhere but he would be a solid late-period signing. Adam Sherrif is still out there as well, we've shown interest in him previously. Have to wait and see what happens with Rajae Johnson's eligibility. We most definitely will save at least 1 open spot to be prepared in the event of a change to the status of Khalil Tate. As such, we've essentially put a bow on this thing...and a fine bow it was.
Sherrif signed to play at Butler Community College.
 
If you sort 247's class rankings by the average rating of each teams recruit rather than their scoring system that takes class size into account, we rank 29th in the nation and 7th in the B1G behind Ohio State, Penn State, Michigan, Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Michigan State. Now you might be thinking that doing this would be a change for a lot of schools, but of the top 30 schools by average recruit rating, 28 of them are also in the top 30 in class rank. The only other one that jumps into the top 30? Arizona State, who holds the 30th place in average recruit rating despite having a class ranking of just 31!
This is somewhat misleading because surely if we had a bigger class our average ranking per recruit would be lower, and we would be ranked lower Nationally and in the B1G. The top schools don't have this problem, but it would be interesting to see where we would rank if you only took the top 15 recruits for all schools. While our class ranking overall may be hurt by volume, the lower volume helps our average rating per recruit. For the record I'm not defending anything Chief2007 is saying.
 
This is somewhat misleading because surely if we had a bigger class our average ranking per recruit would be lower, and we would be ranked lower Nationally and in the B1G. The top schools don't have this problem, but it would be interesting to see where we would rank if you only took the top 15 recruits for all schools. While our class ranking overall may be hurt by volume, the lower volume helps our average rating per recruit. For the record I'm not defending anything Chief2007 is saying.
This is somewhat misleading because surely if we had a bigger class our average ranking per recruit would be lower, and we would be ranked lower Nationally and in the B1G. The top schools don't have this problem, but it would be interesting to see where we would rank if you only took the top 15 recruits for all schools. While our class ranking overall may be hurt by volume, the lower volume helps our average rating per recruit. For the record I'm not defending anything Chief2007 is saying.
247 has a tool you can add players to your class and see what its score is. You add five mid threes and we go up quite a bit in class rankings. But, Boise State at 49th is the next school with three four star guys.
 
So you add 5 mid 3's for us and we go up, but wouldn't you have to take away X number of lower ranked recruits from the teams above us to even out the top 15 for each school? Just saying it's a double edged sword in that low numbers hurts our overall rank but also props up our average rank per recruit. I'm beyond satisfied with this class.
 
Likes: SouthFLILLINI
This is somewhat misleading because surely if we had a bigger class our average ranking per recruit would be lower, and we would be ranked lower Nationally and in the B1G. The top schools don't have this problem, but it would be interesting to see where we would rank if you only took the top 15 recruits for all schools. While our class ranking overall may be hurt by volume, the lower volume helps our average rating per recruit. For the record I'm not defending anything Chief2007 is saying.
It is deceiving to do this because data is being deleted and it’s not randomly being deleted, it’s systematically being deleted. Other programs have years with fewer recruits, it would be more accurate to compare those. but the talent we got is high. Compare the top 10 with this class to the top 10 of classes from the past 10 years. We had multiple recruits that are in the historically greatest recruits in Illini history (since they started ranking recruits).
 
So you add 5 mid 3's for us and we go up, but wouldn't you have to take away X number of lower ranked recruits from the teams above us to even out the top 15 for each school? Just saying it's a double edged sword in that low numbers hurts our overall rank but also props up our average rank per recruit. I'm beyond satisfied with this class.
If we took the top 15 for this class, we would still be 2 short. Just saying. We grabbed 7 top 100 players out of those 13 as well. This is a solid class for us with low numbers available and considering our record since forever. Nothing will improve recruiting more than making a bowl game next season. Nothing.
 
Likes: Dren1
Someone earlier mentioned Jarcadia Wright would be on board. I haven't heard that anywhere but he would be a solid late-period signing. Adam Sherrif is still out there as well, we've shown interest in him previously. Have to wait and see what happens with Rajae Johnson's eligibility. We most definitely will save at least 1 open spot to be prepared in the event of a change to the status of Khalil Tate. As such, we've essentially put a bow on this thing...and a fine bow it was.
Last I was told is that grades are an issue with Wright. Kind of why he fell off everyone’s radar.