forums

Blue Chip Ratio - Death

OriginalGatorHater said:
Only complete morons think the blue chip ratio doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

Blue Chip Ratio fa sho matters, but so do coaching.

As a comparison, from 02-05 Miami recruited a total of 83 players. 52 of them were blue chips (approx 63% of the class). From 2002 - 2007, our wins total dropped every year despite being the most talented (on paper).
02: 12-1
03: 11-2
04: 9-3
05: 9-3
06: 7-6

Since Shannon, we’ve recruited well enough to finish at least a perennial top 20 team in the AP. We went from elite recruiting to good recruiting & no doubt that had everything to do w the ***** being in our armor dampening our NFLU monicker. What’s really damaged that monicker is the coaching & development here. Once upon a time we trotted blue chip after blue chip under Coker’s watch, and it did chit for us. We’ve always out-recruited the Coastal division, and we have 1 title to show for it. We’ve out recruited WSU, WVA, Wisc (3x), USCe, & Cal to only have 1 bowl victory since 2004.

We’ve done less with more for a while, and I’m not convinced if we had another 65% blue chip ratio that we would be top 10 now. We gotta get our recruiting game up but we GOTS to get our coaching & development game up.
 
Advertisement
Forget talk about the ACCCG or playoffs and what it takes to get to that point. We need better players to win the coastal?
 
DTP said:
DING DING DING!!!! Here's your winner. Not sure how anyone thinks Miami is going to be able to sign top 5 classes when they haven't been to 30 on the field in 15 years.

Miami has played far below their talent level according to recruiting rankings. They may not be recruiting at an "elite" level but they are consistently recruiting at a "very good" level. The results on the field have not matched the results on signing day. Miami doesn't need to sign a top 5 class every year to win 10 games and the garbage *** coastal division. Let's start doing that more than once every twenty years and then we can work on becoming an "elite" recruiting program.

The current roster has the highest blue chip ratio of any team since Shannon was here. Teams with close to 50% blue chip players should not be going 7-6.
Click to expand...

Simple. Coaching.
 
Dwinstitles said:
But but but x's and o's

Everyone knows **** well Wisky ND and UF will be bowing out of that list and will lose. LSU has done a **** good job keeping up with Saban leaving. They fell off a bit but kept his recruiting principles in place and they are still relevant because of it
Click to expand...

Clemson absolutely embarrassed teams (AL, OSU) on that list with more blue chip players. AL has 29 more. It’s coaching. ****, we’re far more talented than Wisky and we can’t even pinch them into submission on game day. Coaching.

OU was NOT loaded with Blue Chip players when Stoops beat FSU. Oregon was less talented than FSU across the board when they won the NC. Clemson was less talented than the OSU team they embarrassed.

Coaching.
 
B67AC6B9-1B7C-47A5-A3CD-C22FEF1DA739.webp
 
MrMachete said:
Clemson absolutely embarrassed teams (AL, OSU) on that list with more blue chip players. AL has 29 more. It’s coaching. ****, we’re far more talented than Wisky and we can’t even pinch them into submission on game day. Coaching.

OU was NOT loaded with Blue Chip players when Stoops beat FSU. Oregon was less talented than FSU across the board when they won the NC. Clemson was less talented than the OSU team they embarrassed.

Coaching.
Click to expand...
Lets not act like Clemson wasnt getting elite recruits.....they by far were landing special kids for like ten plus years. I hate when people bring up Clemson like they werent bagging with the bezt of them from Spiller Watkins and way more kids that performed in the NFL as well.
 
Take a look at the top 10 finishes over the last 3-5 seasons.
DMoney said:
Agreed. I was shocked when I looked at the recruiting rankings for some of the Coastal teams. We start two 4* OL and last I checked that's more than the rest of the league combined.
Click to expand...

We are far more talented than anyone in the Coastal. Far more.
 
Advertisement
MrMachete said:
Take a look at the top 10 finishes over the last 3-5 seasons.


We are far more talented than anyone in the Coastal. Far more.
Click to expand...


Our four year recruiting is only slightly better than UNCs over the last four years.
 
Dwinstitles said:
Lets not act like Clemson wasnt getting elite recruits.....they by far were landing special kids for like ten plus years. I hate when people bring up Clemson like they werent bagging with the bezt of them from Spiller Watkins and way more kids that performed in the NFL as well.
Click to expand...

Dude - their recruiting rankings over the last 10 years and their BCR speak themselves. Swinney did more with his talent than C.U.M, Saban, Richt/Smart, Stoops..ect. They DOMINATED teams with far more “talent...” they finally forced their way into the college championship playoff by beating Jimbo Fisher‘s FSU team that had more blue chip players - then dominated Saban last year.

Up until recently, Dabo Swinney never out recruited either one of those coaches.
 
MrMachete said:
Is Swinney doing much more with less - compared to OSU, UGA, Auburn, OU...? How have we faired in comparison to Wisky?

What’s so hard to figure out?
Click to expand...

Correct. Coaching probably separates team #1 from team #5.

But recruiting success obviously separates team #1 from teams #15-130.

I mean, the data is glaringly obvious.
 
ALLoverCANE said:
Correct. Coaching probably separates team #1 from team #5.

But recruiting success obviously separates team #1 from teams #15-130.

I mean, the data is glaringly obvious.
Click to expand...

Again - we know we need more talent in order to compete with BAMA. But, this notion that we need more talent in order to place within the top 15, or consistently win the ******* COASTAL, is ridiculous. The data is glaringly obvious. We’re getting dominated by Wisconsin!

Every final poll says so. We have the talent to finish better. It isn’t hard to figure out. Our issue is our coaching. Coach better, win more games, attract more talent.
 
Advertisement
DMoney said:
We have a blue chip ratio over 50%. Only 16 teams are in that category.

We have played below our recruiting ranking for 15 years.
Click to expand...

but but but the talent. The blue chips. The stars. The draft. We have no talent on the OL. We need to be more like Clemson with the 0 OL they've had drafted in the last 5 years. How can we compete when we've only had 5 OL drafted in that same span?
 
Go Canes!! said:
Go down this list and count how may teams are outperforming their recruiting rankings over the last four years.

Hint: There are virtually none.

Clemson and Wisconsin are the only outliers. They both have a couple of things in common: Coaching continuity and a culture of players developing, then staying four and even five years.

www.sbnation.com

Updated 4-year recruiting rankings for all 130: SEC dominates

UGA’s nearly tied Bama as the SEC’s gap grows. Meanwhile, A&M’s 2019 class ranks sixth-best in the SEC, but would have led two other power conferences.
www.sbnation.com www.sbnation.com
Click to expand...
I would add Notre Dame (1 5*), Auburn (3 5*), and Florida (1 5*). That's half the list. What sets the others apart are the number of 5*s they've gotten.

If you look at the top 25, signing 30 - 40 4*s is not particularly unusually. And you will find many (USEw, Michigan, Texas A&M) that have under achieved.

The message, it takes both talent and coaching.
 
MrMachete said:
Again - we know we need more talent in order to compete with BAMA. But, this notion that we need more talent in order to place within the top 15, or consistently win the ******* COASTAL, is ridiculous. The data is glaringly obvious. We’re getting dominated by Wisconsin!

Every final poll says so. We have the talent to finish better. It isn’t hard to figure out. Our issue is our coaching. Coach better, win more games, attract more talent.
Click to expand...

Um, OK? I 100% agree with that.

(Although the Wisconsin statement is weird because their presence on that list indicates they dominate a lot of teams that are more talented than they are.)

But you posted a table of 10 teams, which didn't include Miami. How does that table relate to the argument that UM is underperforming its talent level? That table is not supporting evidence for your main point. An example of good supporting evidence would be a ranking of all teams by 4/5 stars, which would've listed Miami ahead of teams it regularly loses to.

Anyways, no need to respond since I agree with you. I think you just did a poor job of using data to make your point. (But if you want to respond and dispute that, feel free, of course. I just doubt you care to discuss that.)
 
Dwinstitles said:
Lets not act like Clemson wasnt getting elite recruits.....they by far were landing special kids for like ten plus years. I hate when people bring up Clemson like they werent bagging with the bezt of them from Spiller Watkins and way more kids that performed in the NFL as well.
Click to expand...

LOL, anybody that uses Clemson as an outlier needs their head examined, MF'ers had 3 DLmen go in the first 17 picks.
 
Back
Top