Bobcat Attack - Ohio Football Recruiting

Ohio Football Recruiting Topic

Topic: Recruiting numbers

Page: 1 of 1

mail

person

L.C.

12/22/2014 7:42 PM

For those that say "Ohio needs to offer better players", I took a look at the offers for 2015. I know this isn't all the offers Ohio made, but using the data from 247Sports, Ohio offered:
5-Star - 1 (got none)
4-Star - 5 (got none)
3-Star - 67 (got 3)
2-Star - 12 (got 3)
NR - 23 (got 10)

My assumption is that all of the offers were made to guys that they considered to be Casper's "3-Star" types, but when the recruiting services evaluated them, they considered some to be better than that, and others to be worse.

Who did the players Ohio didn't get go to?
P5 Conferences: 62 players
ACC - 9 players
B1G - 21 players
Big 12 - 4 players
SEC - 7 players
PAC 12 - 1 player
Notre Dame - 1 player

G5 Conferences 23 players
AAC - 8
CUSA - 2
Sunbelt - 3
MWC - 1
MAC - 9

Now for the flip side - what conferences did players choose Ohio over?
P5 Conferences: 6 offers
ACC - 2 Offers
B1G - 3 Offers
Big 12 - none
SEC - 1 Offer
PAC 12 - none
Notre Dame - none

G5 Conferences 23 players
AAC - 6 offers
CUSA - 4 offers
Sunbelt - 2 offers
MWC - 2 offers
MAC - 30 offers

Put another way:
Of 65 players that had P5 offers, 3 chose Ohio, or 5%.
Of 11 players that had AAC offers, 3 chose Ohio, or 27%
Of 5 players that had CUSA offers, 3 chose Ohio, or 60%
Of 5 players that had Sunbelt offers, 2 chose Ohio, or 40%
Of 3 players that had MWC offers, 2 chose Ohio, or 67%
of 23 players that had MAC offers, 14 chose Ohio, or 52%

mail

person

L.C.

12/22/2014 8:06 PM

How did Ohio fare against individual MAC schools, and against UC?
Akron 100% - won 5 (Ball, T. Williams, Stevens-McKenzie, Pleasants, McKnight) lost none
EMU 100% - won 5 (Ball, Fair, Rangolam, Glasco, M. Williams) lost none
Buffalo 100% - won 2 (McKnight, Croutch), lost none
Kent 100% - won 2 (Ball, Fair), lost none
Ball State 100% - won 1 (T. Williams), lost none
Toledo 86% - won 6 (T. Williams, Cloud, McKnight, Alders, Pleasants, Fair) lost 1 (McKinley-Lewis)
WMU 80% - won 4 (Howell, Ball, Alders, Stevens-McKenzie) lost 1 (Bellamy)
BG 67% - won 4 (Ball, Cloud, Stevens-McKenzie, McKnight) lost 2 (Lautenan, Bobo Jones)
Miami 20% - won 1 (Hagen), lost 4 (Leever, Bahl, Allen, Murrer)
NIU 0% - won none, lost 1 (Tears)
CMU, UMass had no common offers

UC 43% - won 3 (Hagen, Howell, Ball) lost 4 (Neal, Bates, Copeland, Jenkinson)
plus, if Austin gets a 25 on the ACT, they may win on him as well, bringing it to 50%

Last Edited: 12/22/2014 8:12:49 PM by L.C.

mail

person

Monroe Slavin

12/22/2014 8:56 PM

Chalk up another MAC title then!

mail

person

Bcat2

12/22/2014 9:01 PM

L.C. wrote:expand_more

Thanks,
Impressive work.

mail

TWT

12/22/2014 9:44 PM

The most impressive stat is our recruiting performance against UC which is widely believed to be one of the best G5 recruiting programs. We are more successful recruiting Florida and that is a key state to do well in for an aspiring program that isn't among the elite picking up 4 star/5 star recruits. Most AAC and ACC programs have to do well in Florida. The number that is least important is our win rate against Miami. It doesn't mean anything because they have a new staff which generates excitement, more opportunity for playing time. Often in MAC recruiting wars multiple schools throw their hat into the ring but there is a clear favorite that gets the player. I've read that if Ohio's on a guy lessor MAC programs know its legit talent so they offer. You can bet though guys offered by UC are guys we really wanted and UC wouldn't be throwing out a cursory offer to poach our recruits as the better recruiting program. MAC schools do like to swarm a decent recruit and try to lure them with playing time or coaching style as most are desperate for a good recruiting class.

mail

person

Casper71

12/23/2014 10:42 AM

L.C., I know you don't have unlimited time to run your numbers but it would be interesting to see if the good WMU classes of the past few years include getting more than 3% of those 3-star guys from P5 teams. Or, is WMU just getting those "low" 3-star guys?

My gut is telling me we need more success getting kids with P5 offers (and where WMU has probably had better success). Beating EMU for a recruit 100% of the time probably won't get it done over the long term.

Just curious...

mail

person

L.C.

12/23/2014 1:41 PM

Casper71 wrote:expand_more

I did a quick look at WMU's 2015 class using data from Rivals. They show 28 recruits, of whom 7 are 3-star. They show a total of a total of 64 other offers to the 28 players, or 2.3 per player. That is probably low because Rivals no doubt has missed some offers. Ohio, by contrast, has 18 players, and 54 other offers, or 3.0 per player. I suspect that the numbers, if accurate, would be very close.

In terms of P5 offers, 6 of the 28 have P5 offers (21%), which compares to 3 of 18 for Ohio (17%), so I'd call that pretty close.

Of their seven 3-star players, 3 of them have no P5 offers, one has an offer from BC, one has an offer from Mississippi State, one has offers from Illinois and Iowa State, and one has offers from Illinois, Indiana, and Purdue. I'd say, yes, they seem to fit into the low three-star category.

Interestingly, based on offers, their gem is Goulbourne, a 2-star recruit who has twelve P5 offers and a ten G5 offers. At the other extreme they have 14 players that show no other offers.

To me the classes look pretty comparable. At the low end, Ohio has only 2 players with no other offers (Hale, Maxwell), but at the high end, Ohio has no one with offers like Goulbourne.

Last Edited: 12/23/2014 1:43:36 PM by L.C.

mail

person

OUBobcat13

12/23/2014 2:19 PM

L.C. wrote:expand_more

Casper71 wrote:expand_more

If things continue on their current path for WMU, their coxswain isn't going to be recruiting to Kalamazoo until 2020...

mail

person

OUs LONG Driver

12/23/2014 4:47 PM

The other thing to keep in mind when comparing recruiting classes is WMU cannot sign 28 guys on Signing day. They either are having guys sign/enroll early to count against last years class or they can't take every verbal in the class. They had the same thing last year which means some of these guys this year never make it to WMU or some of their highly heralded class last year are gone.

The recruiting services don't stop adding points at 25 guys so this inflates their ratings beyond what they really should be. This is common practice for a lot of P5 schools but makes comparing recruiting classes somewhat difficult. Some classes will have over 30 guys in them.

WMU undeniably is doing well in recruiting and stomped us this year so you have to give them credit. However, most would agree oversigning is a somewhat dirty practice. I, for one, am glad we don't go that route.

mail

person

L.C.

12/23/2014 8:03 PM

OK, I crossed the data from all four services.
1. For 28 players, WMU has 90 offers, or 3.21 offers each, which is slightly higher than Ohio's 3.0. They do have a few playes with quite a lot of other offers (Goulbourne 22, French 11, McMullen 10). Ohio's top 3 have 8, 7, and 6 respectively.

2. They also beat Ohio on 2 recruits, not just the one I listed above. The other one was McMullen.

3. They are still at 6 recruits with P5 offers, or 21%, slightly higher than Ohio's 17%.

4. In terms of stars, WMU ranks much higher. They have 20 of their 28 recruits (71%) ranked 3 stars by at least one service, compared to 10/18 for Ohio (56%).

5. In terms of P5 offers:
Goulbourne has 12
Tranquil has 3
French has 2
Tucker has 2
Assoua has 1
Spencer has 1

For Ohio, Hagen, Howell, and McKnight each have 1.

6. In terms of players with no other offers, Ohio has 2 (11%), while WMU has 8 (29%). Interestingly, four of their players with no other offers are 3-star players by at least one service (Ricci, Horton, Wassink, Watson).

7. Schools they beat regularly:
Toledo 10 times
EMU 7 times
CMU 6 times
Akron 6 times
Ball St 5 times
BG 4 times
UC 4 times
NIU 3 times
Buffalo 3 times
Illinois 3 times

Conclusion: WMU has more players with P5 offers, particularly with multiple P5 offers, so they have more of the middle 3-star players than Ohio has. On the other hand, they also have more mystery players than Ohio as well. On the whole there is not as much difference as some people think.

mail

person

Casper71

12/23/2014 9:06 PM

Thanks again, L.C. that is great stuff. My guess is some of those WMU no offer/no rating guys end up walk-ons if the "better" recruits actually sign. Also strange that some 3-star guys of theirs have no offers...maybe grade issues? Those may not show either.

As someone said and I really believe, at the G5 level it is just damn hard to compare recruits. So, we really just have to see if the performance on the field is better the next two years than it was the last three.

mail

person

L.C.

12/23/2014 11:31 PM

Casper71 wrote:expand_more

That's a good possibility. Sometimes Ohio has gotten a really high quality recruit that for unknown reasons has no other offer, and it turns out he doesn't qualify. Of course, sometimes they do qualify.

Also, if they have some potential non-qualifiers, that would also explain going over 25 recruits.

I still want to go back and apply this method to the whole MAC, but idk when I will find time.

Last Edited: 12/24/2014 6:57:34 AM by L.C.

mail

person

L.C.

12/24/2014 10:45 AM

Casper71 wrote:expand_more

As someone said and I really believe, at the G5 level it is just damn hard to compare recruits....[/QUOTE]
I believe that it is, primarily because, when the services deign to rate a G5 recruit at all, I don't think they put as much effort into it. Their revenue comes from P5 fans, so they support P5 fans with service. That's why I fall back to using offers. That way you don't have to worry about inflation, changing standards, rushed evaluations, etc.

Prior to 2010 Ohio was typically under 1 competing offer each, but this year is the highest yet, at 3, which isn't far from WMU. I'd like to know where some others are, like Toledo, BG, and NIU. Maybe over the holidays I can at least do those schools. I'd also like to know where those schools have been over the last decade as well, but that will take longer.

[QUOTE=Casper71]... So, we really just have to see if the performance on the field is better the next two years than it was the last three.

Yes, that's the test. I think this staff has done an excellent job of finding and identifying hidden/unknown talent to get the program this far. Now they are starting to have more known talent, players that other teams wanted, and I look forward to seeing the results.

Last Edited: 12/24/2014 2:21:35 PM by L.C.

mail

Paul Graham

12/24/2014 2:36 PM

OUBobcat13 wrote:expand_more

If things continue on their current path for WMU, their coxswain isn't going to be recruiting to Kalamazoo until 2020...

A quick Google search confirms this is the first use of "coxswain" on BA since at least the site crash.