Seems like that would be a pretty difficult thing to square with the anti-gambling initiatives the NCAA has (nominally) put in place. Might be smarter and easier to just let gambling grow their viewer base and benefit indirectly.
Big Ten Media Days 2018
Deleted member 631370
D
Guest
Taking a look at our 2019 schedule, it's historically weak.....so maybe you're right. Akron, Eastern Michigan, and UConn in the non-conference, and we avoid both Ohio State and Penn State in conference play.
The problem is, teams that are traditionally very beatable -- Purdue and Minnesota, for example -- are recruiting at a higher level than us, and the likes of Nebraska are going to get much better very soon. The conference as a whole is becoming a real beast.
But, one game at a time. As a lifelong Penn State fan (and current PSU grad student), I'm sure glad people didn't give up on Franklin after a pair of 7-5 seasons. Amazing what that 2016 blocked FG against Ohio State did for that program's trajectory. We need a similar win this year or next to propel us forward (not similar in the sense that it's Ohio State, but similar in the sense that it's a trajectory-changing win).
If you average the star rating of our recruits we are actually ahead of those schools for 2019 and very close to MSU and Nebraska.
Regardless, let’s let this recruiting class finish out before we judge it.
Your argument is based on a belief that 1) there's a direct correlation between recruiting rankings and on-field performance, and 2) that recruit rankings accurately reflect the potential of the athlete. Both of those are false. See B. Williams. Also, take a look at our recruit rankings in the four years previous to our last outright B1G title. How accurately predictive were they?
I did not listen to him much when he was the Bears coach, but now, I cannot get enough of him. He needs to be in front of the cameras more, in my opinion. He needs to get on local high school TV shows all over Illinois, if there is such a thing.
Virtue4
Alum
I attended the Luncheon yesterday. It was great to hear from Dana Howard (he got the loudest laughs and reaction from the audience) as he is one of my all time favorites.
Lovie spoke well, though I felt he was still in the recruiting pitch mode cause he brought up how the facilities are improving and the process a bunch.
And the biggest surprise, Harbaugh wore a sport coat, albeit a tan sport coat with khaki pants.
Lovie spoke well, though I felt he was still in the recruiting pitch mode cause he brought up how the facilities are improving and the process a bunch.
And the biggest surprise, Harbaugh wore a sport coat, albeit a tan sport coat with khaki pants.
Point 1) They do. Check out the teams that are consistently on the national stage and check their recruiting rankings for the last decade or so. Spoiler alert, they’re ranked really high on their conferences and overall.
2) finding a few exceptions to the rule doesn’t change the rule. 4+5 Star guys performing at a really high level is more likely than 3 star guys.
Lord help me I’ve turned into obelix.
Dren1
- Glenview, IL
Not to speak for another poster, but I think the reference was to the thought that Purdue and Minnesota are recruiting at a higher level so they will be tough to beat on the field. IMO, the difference in recruiting rankings between us and teams like these are negligible and can hopefully be overcome with superior coaching (which I hope we have).
Ha!
1) They don't. We agree. There's certainly a strong correlation, but not a direct correlation, which is what I said. And that was exactly my point. If there were a direct correlation between recruiting and on-field performance, Illinois would have ZERO B1G titles. Direct correlation is not equal to a general rule, it is equal to a law.
2) I didn't articulate my point to VI well, which was in part what Dren said. In large groups the folks at the top and the bottom stand out, and everyone in the middle is a muddle. As it relates to current recruitment rankings, we're in that muddle with about nine other B1G teams. In a "game of inches" little things can make a big difference in how that muddle shakes out. Little things like having one of your lowest ranked recruits become an All American. That kind of thing can flip the board. Our muddled ranking may be WAY under-rated. So declaring that we're losing ground to other muddlers for being higher in the quintile is overreacting.[Note: we don't know if BW was luck or genius...we should find out if there's another diamond with the incoming freshman this year.]
TL;DR - Lightening strikes. I think we'll out-perform our recruiting rankings on-field. Go Illini.
I studied #1 this past winter, using the last 10 years of info in the Big 10. Generally, over that time, recruiting rankings have been a very good predictor of on field performance. The two exceptions I noted were Wisconsin and Northwestern, who generally out performed their recruiting rankings. Iowa slightly out performed their rankings too, but not by nearly as much as the other two.
Ironically, I'd view the Illinois/Lovie model as having the best chance for success if they followed program like Iowa, NU and K State. That is to say....keep a good coach in place for a long period of time and let them build slowly. However, once built, program success is sustained over the long haul.
Last edited:
Recruiting rankings are very strongly correlative, but the recruiting rankings difference between us and schools like NW, Minny and Purdue is super marginal either way. We're arguably even ahead of those schools, but factors like coaching and experience and depth and health will overwhelm those small margins.
Agreed. Excellent example is Purdue under Brohm in year 0. His roster was arguably slightly worse than Lovie's in his year 0, yet they win 7 games including a bowl game.
There is definitely a correlation between the number of 4 and 5 star recruits that come to your school and your level of success.
There is an argument to be made that the difference between various 3 star players is negligible because there is just no way for scouts to thoroughly assess all of these players. Therefore, a recruiting class graded on 247 as an 87 versus a class graded as an 84 probably isn't much different - which is right where Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, NW, Purdue are all recruiting.
As an aside, 247 does seem to be more brazenly giving "bumps" to players committed to teams in power five conferences, which I think improved our 2018 rankings some.
Just adding up the Rivals points of the previous four recruiting classes, here's what you get:
Minnesota - 5461
Illinois - 5211
Northwestern - 5188
Purdue - 4590
And yet we're 0 for our last 8 against those schools.
Minnesota - 5461
Illinois - 5211
Northwestern - 5188
Purdue - 4590
And yet we're 0 for our last 8 against those schools.
Deleted member 654622
D
Guest
So this statistic is evidence that recruiting rankings don't mean squat
No, it is evidence that when the differences are marginal (MSU, as a non-elite reference point, is 7299), other factors come into play. And 8 games isn't much of a sample size anyway. We won 4 of our previous 6 under Cubit and Beckman. And of course those previous years involved different recruiting classes.
The point is, recruiting rankings are why Ohio State are always big favorites against us and why we're always big favorites against bad MAC schools. But for lower-middle-class Power Five schools, you're pretty much splitting hairs on talent, and thus other things loom large in getting from 3-9 to 7-5. The best way to do it is to recruit well enough to make it not splitting hairs, but alas.
What Second and Chalmers said, agree.
Two things....Ohio State's Rivals total over those same 4 years is 11,502. Also, Jeff Brohm is one heck of a good college football coach.
Let's see how they do this year. They lost a ton, especially on defense.
Deleted member 631370
D
Guest
On the aggregate, the correlation is fairly strong. "Direct correlation"? No. But a strong one nonetheless.
Of course, coaching matters as well. And it's why you'll have guys like Mark D'Antonio win at a high level without a top-10 class. It's also why you'll have a guy like Charlie Strong bring in a top-5 class at Texas and do nothing with it.
I have no idea if Lovie Smith is the kind of coach who will overcome mediocre recruiting. I'm not actually making an argument that his coaching will fail, but the evidence accumulated thus far indicates that we're not going to out-talent our competition.
Last edited by a moderator:
Deleted member 631370
D
Guest
Yes.
It's no secret why Zook won big early, and couldn't win more than 6 games later in his tenure. In his early classes, he loaded up solid 4* talent across the board, threw in a 5* difference-maker here and there, and got some really good 3* kids. Not the case later on. And below the top-20 or so when most teams have rosters comprised overwhelmingly of 3* kids, the talent difference is often very marginal......it comes down to coaching, execution, and stuff like the favorability of the schedule. Not exactly Zook's strong suits.
Ohio State, Penn State, and Michigan are getting almost nothing but 4* kids and above. Penn State, for example, has 11 HS kids committed in their 2019 class. 10 of the 11 are either 5* or 4*. Even their 3* kid is top-500. The result is that those programs are going to be in the title hunt every year. Below them, you'll have Wisconsin and maybe schools like Nebraska and Michigan State recruiting well. Below that, it becomes a contest to see who can do more with their mostly-3* recruiting class. And it increasingly becomes a crapshoot distinguishing between a kid ranked #700 and a kid ranked #1000.
Joel Goodson
- respect my decision™
Like Lebowski said, "That's just an opinion, man." Well, several of them. Ostensibly, experts all. Nevertheless, let's see what transpires.
A comparison of the cumulative "recruiting points" over the past 4 seasons for Minnesota, Illinois, Northwestern, and Purdue is bound to be less than accurate if you're trying to assess the current strength of a roster. Adding up those points (based on an annual snapshot in time) doesn't account for players subsequently transferring out of a program or into a program. On the one hand, some of the highest-ranked Illini recruits in 2015 and 2016 (such as Gabe Megginson, Ke'Shawn Vaughn, and Zarrion Holcombe) are no longer with the team. On the other hand, Jeff Brohm enhanced the strength of his roster by adding a number of productive transfer players and junior college players after he became the coach at Purdue.