 |
|
No, folks need to stop trying to excuse MU's recruiting
Posted on: February 14, 2019 at 11:13:35 CT
ScottsdaleTiger MU
Posts:
12586
Member For:
25.24 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
First, the creation of a fictional recruit is an old, old trick. I recall Sports Illustrated story on it, albeit in basketball, when I used to subscribe and read it religiously, i.e. before the days of the internet, boards, etc.
Secondly, a lot of different inputs can go into ranking a recruit. Certainly, some rankings take into consideration who's recruiting a kid, etc. That's why I like Phil Steele's rankings. They're a composite of the rankings of most of the well recognized recruiting gurus and services.
Thirdly, reasonable people need to recognize that predicting the future, i.e. the performance of high school kids three and four years down the road is far from an exact science, as is predicting the future in a lot of things, i.e. the political pundits, pollsters, etc on election outcomes and financial types on the future performance of financial markets. There are simply a lot of intervening factors that can impact how a 16 to 18 year old improves by the time he's 20 to 22.
Fourthly, it's clear that while there are exceptions if someone has a choice the clear preference is to have a higher rated recruiting class, rather than a lower one.
Yes, sometimes lower ones pan out better than higher ones, but more often than not . . . (i.e. when was the last time Mizzou won a conference championship in football).
Fifthly, folks also need to recognize there may be only a very small marginal difference between recruits of different star ratings. I would suggest the best way to think about recruits is to mentally put every one of the roughly 1,500 recruits signed each by P5 programs on a continuum, from the worst prospect on the left to the best on the right. The difference between two kids who are next to each other will be very, very small. In other words all kids with the same star rankings are not equal.
Finally, there are intervening factors that can impact how a 16-18 year old kid develops. Some kids are as big, fast and quick as they will ever be at 15, some not till they're 21 or older. And yes, coaching, training, development can make a difference in determining how close a kid comes to reaching his potential. But there are limits to what it can do.
Bottom line, take a poll about whether the board would rather have a top 10 rated classes or a 25 to 35 rated class.
Secondly, a lot of different inputs can go into ranking a recruit. Certainly, some rankings take into consideration who's recruiting a kid, etc. That's why I like Phil Steele's rankings. They're a composite of the rankings of most of the well recognized recruiting gurus and services.
Thirdly, reasonable people need to recognize that predicting the future, i.e. the performance of high school kids three and four years down the road is far from an exact science, as is predicting the future in a lot of things, i.e. the political pundits, pollsters, etc on election outcomes and financial types on the future performance of financial markets. There are simply a lot of intervening factors that can impact how a 16 to 18 year old improves by the time he's 20 to 22.
Fourthly, it's clear that while there are exceptions if someone has a choice the clear preference is to have a higher rated recruiting class, rather than a lower one.
Yes, sometimes lower ones pan out better than higher ones, but more often than not . . . (i.e. when was the last time Mizzou won a conference championship in football).
Fifthly, folks also need to recognize there may be only a very small marginal difference between recruits of different star ratings. I would suggest the best way to think about recruits is to mentally put every one of the roughly 1,500 recruits signed each by P5 programs on a continuum, from the worst prospect on the left to the best on the right. The difference between two kids who are next to each other will be very, very small. In other words all kids with the same star rankings are not equal.
Finally, there are intervening factors that can impact how a 16-18 year old kid develops. Some kids are as big, fast and quick as they will ever be at 15, some not till they're 21 or older. And yes, coaching, training, development can make a difference in determining how close a kid comes to reaching his potential. But there are limits to what it can do.
Bottom line, take a poll about whether the board would rather have a top 10 rated classes or a 25 to 35 rated class.
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
- 
No, folks need to stop trying to excuse MU's recruiting - ScottsdaleTiger MU - 2/14 11:13:35