About those recruiting rankings....

[razorjack12]

During this season - when Ole Miss and Miss State stood atop the SEC standings - many of you brayed about how the success of the Mississippi schools was proof positive that recruiting rankings were irrelevant.

Well.

Since that time, both Mississippi schools have combined for 5 losses.

And Missouri, which is in the bottom half of recruiting rankings, got decimated by 29 points in the SEC Championship Game.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Since 1992, there have been 23 SEC Title games.  Teams from the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings have only made the title game 7 times.  Thats 23 years X 2 teams per year = 46 chances to make the title game.

IN other words, while teams in the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings constitute 50% of the teams in the conference...these teams have only made the SEC Championship Game 15% of the time.

And those "lower half" teams which did make the Title game are 0-7 in those games.

ZERO AND SEVEN.

The average margin of defeat in those 7 games was 23 points per game.

Because, you know, recruiting rankings don't matter....

[JansterZ71]

If you did this research yourself congrats. 

[3kgthog]

We had the best shot at bucking this trend, IMO. Then Reggie freaking Fish fumbling a punt and us allowing a blocked punt happened. We had Florida beaten only to choke it away and lose by 10.

Where would Nutt be today if he hadn't lost that game? We'll never know what would've happened to our program with an SEC title. In fact, it may be a very long time before we even get back to Atlanta. We've got a road to hoe that's twice as hard as 2006.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

During this season - when Ole Miss and Miss State stood atop the SEC standings - many of you brayed about how the success of the Mississippi schools was proof positive that recruiting rankings were irrelevant.

Well.

Since that time, both Mississippi schools have combined for 5 losses.

And Missouri, which is in the bottom half of recruiting rankings, got decimated by 29 points in the SEC Championship Game.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Since 1992, there have been 23 SEC Title games.  Teams from the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings have only made the title game 7 times.  Thats 23 years X 2 teams per year = 46 chances to make the title game.

IN other words, while teams in the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings constitute 50% of the teams in the conference...these teams have only made the SEC Championship Game 15% of the time.

And those "lower half" teams which did make the Title game are 0-7 in those games.

ZERO AND SEVEN.

The average margin of defeat in those 7 games was 23 points per game.

Because, you know, recruiting rankings don't matter....

Effective, quality recruiting to man your particular system obviously matters. So does player development, coaching, the difficulty of schedule that you play and the ability to dissect opponents, detect their weaknesses and game plan in such a way as to take advantage of those weaknesses. But even with all of those other factors at play, the team with the better players who perform consistently at the highest level over the course of any season is the team who normally wins the most games.

[JaketheSnake]

You won't hear many ppl say recruiting rankings don't matter... But you will hear logical people sayinf that they are not the be all end all of football success...  There are no trophies for recruiting

[sigpooie]

You also won't see this information used to show that the top 4 of those teams had the most NCAA violations and two of them have the most in NCAA history. So the only difference I see from top to bottom is ethics. 

[razorbacker3]

Just saw an article on one of the recruiting services fronts where it said of the 4 teams in the championship playoff, three of those teams were ranked 1-2-3 in recruiting in 2010-2013. Couldn't read the rest(not subscriber) but got the idea, since the article was stating the importance of recruiting.

[Inhogswetrust]

During this season - when Ole Miss and Miss State stood atop the SEC standings - many of you brayed about how the success of the Mississippi schools was proof positive that recruiting rankings were irrelevant.

Well.

Since that time, both Mississippi schools have combined for 5 losses.

And Missouri, which is in the bottom half of recruiting rankings, got decimated by 29 points in the SEC Championship Game.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Since 1992, there have been 23 SEC Title games.  Teams from the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings have only made the title game 7 times.  Thats 23 years X 2 teams per year = 46 chances to make the title game.

IN other words, while teams in the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings constitute 50% of the teams in the conference...these teams have only made the SEC Championship Game 15% of the time.

And those "lower half" teams which did make the Title game are 0-7 in those games.

ZERO AND SEVEN.

The average margin of defeat in those 7 games was 23 points per game.

Because, you know, recruiting rankings don't matter....

Good grief can we at least get through the bowl season before this debate raises it's ugly head again.

[Hogarusa]

You won't hear many ppl say recruiting rankings don't matter... But you will hear logical people sayinf that they are not the be all end all of football success...  There are no trophies for recruiting

Actually there are.  They are just named conference champions and national champions.  Teams dont win those with ranking averaging outside the top 15

[hawgdawg63]

During this season - when Ole Miss and Miss State stood atop the SEC standings - many of you brayed about how the success of the Mississippi schools was proof positive that recruiting rankings were irrelevant.

Well.

Since that time, both Mississippi schools have combined for 5 losses.

And Missouri, which is in the bottom half of recruiting rankings, got decimated by 29 points in the SEC Championship Game.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Since 1992, there have been 23 SEC Title games.  Teams from the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings have only made the title game 7 times.  That's 23 years X 2 teams per year = 46 chances to make the title game.

IN other words, while teams in the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings constitute 50% of the teams in the conference...these teams have only made the SEC Championship Game 15% of the time.

And those "lower half" teams which did make the Title game are 0-7 in those games.

ZERO AND SEVEN.

The average margin of defeat in those 7 games was 23 points per game.

Because, you know, recruiting rankings don't matter....

Man didn't you know that in today's United States facts and evidence don't count. If enough get together and protest the support goes to the non fact group. Just watch TV and you will see it everywhere. So why should here be any different. 

[greghog]

You won't hear many ppl say recruiting rankings don't matter... But you will hear logical people sayinf that they are not the be all end all of football success...  There are no trophies for recruiting

You are correct.  They matter.  But they are not a "science."  There is no question that the top few teams have much better recruits than rest.  Some of those kids will be bust, some of the 2 stars will be home runs, but overall, the more high ranking players you have, the more good players you will have.

Where I question the rankings is the difference between say the 15th rank team and the 20th.  Usually there is only a small difference in the overall "score" and since the scores are very subjective, I don't think there is really any difference.  Again, not saying the top few schools (in the rankings) aren't clearly getting better players, they are.  But whether you finish 6th or 10th in the SEC probably is a wash.

[Wildhog]

Which is why Arkansas needs coaches that can get the most out of the talent we've got.  Our defensive staff certainly does that.

[luke hawg]

I think recruiting matters but I don't believe there is a huge difference between the talent between the number 5 and 15th ranked class. I think recruiting is 50 percent of it but getting a championship requires great coaching.

[Rolltide4ever]

Below is data from the NCAA data warehouse web site. It shows all the SEC schools from the most wins to the least number of wins. I was surprised that Arkansas is above Florida ( by 1 win ) and above Missouri and South Carolina. Arkansas is right in the middle of the SEC in number of wins. That ain't to bad Arkansas fans.

Rank      Team    Win      Loss    Tie      Games     PCT             PF          PA        Delta
6       Alabama    850      324      43       1217      0.716        29624     13963  15661
9   Tennessee     810      367      54       1231     0.68           27682     16431  11251
10   Georgia       777      410      54       1241     0.648         26720      17498  9222
11  Louisiana St  762      400      47       1209     0.65           26152     16099   10053
12  Auburn (AL)   742     420      47       1209     0.633         25328     17181   8147
18  Texas A&M     709     461      48       1218     0.602        26312     17854    8458
21  Arkansas        691     479      40       1210     0.588        24981      18416    6565
22   Florida          690      400      40       1130    0.628        25244      16613     8631
31   Missouri        662      534      53       1249    0.551        24307       21051   3256
36   Mississippi     645      500      35       1180    0.561        23185       19452   3733
50   Kentucky       588      598      44       1230    0.496        22545       20366   2179
55 Vanderbilt (TN) 585      591     50       1226    0.498        23006       20488   2518
57  South Carolina 583      552     44      1179      0.513       20967       19749   1218
73  Mississippi St.  532      557     39      1128      0.489       20282         19234    1048

[redeye]

Below is data from the NCAA data warehouse web site. It shows all the SEC schools from the most wins to the least number of wins. I was surprised that Arkansas is above Florida ( by 1 win ) and above Missouri and South Carolina. Arkansas is right in the middle of the SEC in number of wins. That ain't to bad Arkansas fans.

Rank      Team    Win      Loss    Tie      Games     PCT             PF          PA        Delta
6       Alabama    850      324      43       1217      0.716        29624     13963  15661
9   Tennessee     810      367      54       1231     0.68           27682     16431  11251
10   Georgia       777      410      54       1241     0.648         26720      17498  9222
11  Louisiana St  762      400      47       1209     0.65           26152     16099   10053
12  Auburn (AL)   742     420      47       1209     0.633         25328     17181   8147
18  Texas A&M     709     461      48       1218     0.602        26312     17854    8458
21  Arkansas        691     479      40       1210     0.588        24981      18416    6565
22   Florida          690      400      40       1130    0.628        25244      16613     8631
31   Missouri        662      534      53       1249    0.551        24307       21051   3256
36   Mississippi     645      500      35       1180    0.561        23185       19452   3733
50   Kentucky       588      598      44       1230    0.496        22545       20366   2179
55 Vanderbilt (TN) 585      591     50       1226    0.498        23006       20488   2518
57  South Carolina 583      552     44      1179      0.513       20967       19749   1218
73  Mississippi St.  532      557     39      1128      0.489       20282         19234    1048

Thanks for the kind words.  It would really be interesting to see that list when Arkansas joined the SEC.  Florida wouldn't have been close back then, but I believe they've been close to passing us for a few years now.

Missouri and South Carolina were never on the same level as Arkansas until recently, so they're not surprising.

The recruiting data mentioned by the OP has been recycled so many times around here that I'm surprised anyone cares.  It's not the shocker the OP likely thinks it is.  We all know that recruiting rankings matter to the extent mentioned, but it's still impressive when a school not in the Big 6 does well with less.  The day is coming when a school outside the Big 6 will win the SEC and I don't think it'll be Texas A&M.

[Rolltide4ever]

 Let me check the web site and see if I can pull up the data for Arkansas from
1992 to the present. I do not know if it will do that, but shoot it want hurt to
look and see.
WPS !!  Please beat the longhorns in the Texas Bowl. I have 2 tickets for me and my son to go to the game. That's what he wants to do while he is out of school for Christmas.
  So I was left scrambling for 2 tickets and a hotel room, but thanks be to the internet.
It took us about 5 minutes to book the room and get 2 tickets about the 35 yard line.

[razorjack12]

Let me check the web site and see if I can pull up the data for Arkansas from
1992 to the present. I do not know if it will do that, but shoot it want hurt to
look and see.
WPS !!  Please beat the longhorns in the Texas Bowl. I have 2 tickets for me and my son to go to the game. That's what he wants to do while he is out of school for Christmas.
  So I was left scrambling for 2 tickets and a hotel room, but thanks be to the internet.
It took us about 5 minutes to book the room and get 2 tickets about the 35 yard line.

The best way to do this is just to compile the conference W-L record of every SEC team since 1992.

I once posted standings through 2012 I believe.  Maybe 2013.

[Rolltide4ever]

  The best I could do was to go under the " Opponents " part of the web site
and in that section you can choose what date thru this date you want to see the
data for.

http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia_team_index.php

From 1992 until 2014 Arkansas

    Win        Loss      Tie        Pct.         PF           PA         Delta       
    151       126        2        0.54480   7406       6467         939 

For Florida from 1992 until 2014

     Win        Loss      Tie        Pct.         PF           PA         Delta   
     219         74         1      0.74660     9910       5452      4458 

For Alabama from 1992 until 2014

    Win        Loss      Tie        Pct.         PF           PA         Delta 
     181        90          0      0.66790    8222       4723      3499   

[arlhog]

no secret here.   you gotta have the horses to run with the big boys.   You might beat bama or another  big program some, but to play with them consistently you gotta have the players to match their talent.  If you don't believe it look at our overall records against bama  and texas.  They have consistently gotten better talent.   It looks like we've made significant strides in this area lately.   

[Inhogswetrust]

Below is data from the NCAA data warehouse web site. It shows all the SEC schools from the most wins to the least number of wins. I was surprised that Arkansas is above Florida ( by 1 win ) and above Missouri and South Carolina. Arkansas is right in the middle of the SEC in number of wins. That ain't to bad Arkansas fans.

Rank      Team    Win      Loss    Tie      Games     PCT             PF          PA        Delta
6       Alabama    850      324      43       1217      0.716        29624     13963  15661
9   Tennessee     810      367      54       1231     0.68           27682     16431  11251
10   Georgia       777      410      54       1241     0.648         26720      17498  9222
11  Louisiana St  762      400      47       1209     0.65           26152     16099   10053
12  Auburn (AL)   742     420      47       1209     0.633         25328     17181   8147
18  Texas A&M     709     461      48       1218     0.602        26312     17854    8458
21  Arkansas        691     479      40       1210     0.588        24981      18416    6565
22   Florida          690      400      40       1130    0.628        25244      16613     8631
31   Missouri        662      534      53       1249    0.551        24307       21051   3256
36   Mississippi     645      500      35       1180    0.561        23185       19452   3733
50   Kentucky       588      598      44       1230    0.496        22545       20366   2179
55 Vanderbilt (TN) 585      591     50       1226    0.498        23006       20488   2518
57  South Carolina 583      552     44      1179      0.513       20967       19749   1218
73  Mississippi St.  532      557     39      1128      0.489       20282         19234    1048

Florida's win total has not been consistent from year to year just like ours. There's has been much better since after Galen Hall's time there. Despite their recruiting advantage due to the state they are in they have had some bad coaches. Florida hasn't aways had such a big population to recruit from. The population there didn't start to boom until after WWII and specifically in the 1950's till today. WWII, the advent of modern air conditioning, better/easier transportation and demographics were big contributing factors.

[jimmur74]

During this season - when Ole Miss and Miss State stood atop the SEC standings - many of you brayed about how the success of the Mississippi schools was proof positive that recruiting rankings were irrelevant.

Well.

Since that time, both Mississippi schools have combined for 5 losses.

And Missouri, which is in the bottom half of recruiting rankings, got decimated by 29 points in the SEC Championship Game.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Since 1992, there have been 23 SEC Title games.  Teams from the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings have only made the title game 7 times.  Thats 23 years X 2 teams per year = 46 chances to make the title game.

IN other words, while teams in the bottom half of the SEC recruiting rankings constitute 50% of the teams in the conference...these teams have only made the SEC Championship Game 15% of the time.

And those "lower half" teams which did make the Title game are 0-7 in those games.

ZERO AND SEVEN.

The average margin of defeat in those 7 games was 23 points per game.

Because, you know, recruiting rankings don't matter....

Ole miss has had some great classes of late.  Sure recruiting matters but so does coaching and execution. Do you think arkansas talent is 17-0 better than LSU?  Or that its 1 point shy of alabama?  Games play out differently and its not all about the talent on the field

[Inhogswetrust]

Ole miss has had some great classes of late.  Sure recruiting matters but so does coaching and execution. Do you think arkansas talent is 17-0 better than LSU?  Or that its 1 point shy of alabama?  Games play out differently and its not all about the talent on the field

Talent can help you win more consistently and much more over the long term of a season AND seasons. Even talented teams can have less than stellar games and get beat but not near as often as less talented ones. Also the schedule has big implications.........ask Mizzou. They are a really good team but do you honestly think they would have made the SEC championship game if they were in the west division?

[DoctorSusscrofa]

Notice that the examples above try to correlate large groups on the one hand (50%) with very tiny groups SEC CG participants on the other. Such a correlation is misleading. If someone ranks 12th of 14 in recruiting but finishes 5th in results, such a correlation ignores it, because the 14th recruiting ranking team didn't get in or win the CG. Likewise, such a correlation ignores teams that were 3rd in recruiting and 10th in results.

[Mike_e]

Man didn't you know that in today's United States facts and evidence don't count. If enough get together and protest the support goes to the non fact group. Just watch TV and you will see it everywhere. So why should here be any different.

And there you go.  we're a microcosm of the rest of the world.  lol

I guess the thing that bugs me most is that football is a complex game and running a program just multiplies the complexity and some want to pick out just one or two things and say that getting this or that right will fix everything.

[gmarv]

of course recruiting matters, but so does coaching.if how about a run of injuries on the teams best players.why don,t we keep a stat on that?after awhile you have to play the game with the players you have.

[hogsanity]

Recruiting matters. Do you think any coach could take the roster from Ball St, or San Jose st, or 85 other fbs schools and make a January 1 bowl game?  If recruiting does not matter, then those schools should be better than they are.

The people who say recruiting does not matter as much as some like to think it does are either, usually, from a school that is having an abnormally good year, or support a school that rarely ranks high in recruiting.

[DukeOfPork]

And there you go.  we're a microcosm of the rest of the world.  lol

I guess the thing that bugs me most is that football is a complex game and running a program just multiplies the complexity and some want to pick out just one or two things and say that getting this or that right will fix everything.

Low recruiting rankings set your ceiling.

Everything else determines how much you can maximize that potential.

If your recruiting stinks, you will not truly overcome that in the SEC.

[Hoggam's Razor]

There is one thing about recruiting that always gets misunderstood.....
The market for the team being ranked.
There are certain teams that if a player is a really a 3 star recruit he will be upgraded to a 4 star simply because it's Notre Dame et al is recruiting them. 
I remember Mustain's ranking went up when he de-committed to Arkansas and went back down when he re-committed.
If Texas recruits you - you are automatically a star stronger than you probably really are.  Just the way it goes.

[Danny J]

Low recruiting rankings set your ceiling.

Everything else determines how much you can maximize that potential.

If your recruiting stinks, you will not truly overcome that in the SEC.

I agree 100%. I will also add to your last sentence....."If your recruiting stinks, you will not truly overcome that in the SEC on a consistent basis".

[dffhogs]

We had the best shot at bucking this trend, IMO. Then Reggie freaking Fish fumbling a punt and us allowing a blocked punt happened. We had Florida beaten only to choke it away and lose by 10.

Where would Nutt be today if he hadn't lost that game? We'll never know what would've happened to our program with an SEC title. In fact, it may be a very long time before we even get back to Atlanta. We've got a road to hoe that's twice as hard as 2006.

Dont remind me, I was there....

[Theolesnort]

There is one thing about recruiting that always gets misunderstood.....
The market for the team being ranked.
There are certain teams that if a player is a really a 3 star recruit he will be upgraded to a 4 star simply because it's Notre Dame et al is recruiting them. 
I remember Mustain's ranking went up when he de-committed to Arkansas and went back down when he re-committed.
If Texas recruits you - you are automatically a star stronger than you probably really are.  Just the way it goes.

Not all 5* and 4* etc etc recruits are created equal. Some are created by the ranking services for their own gain and purposes. Your Notre Dame example is spot on. They have not recruited near as well as they are given credit for but the Notre Dame fans eat that stuff up and buy subscriptions. The higher entrance requirements have killed them. Lou Holtz knew and he got out ahead of the posse. 5* and 4* players are much much better than 5* and 4* recruits because in many cases they are not the same. The top 7 or 8 teams in the rankings usually are fairly solid but the further out you go generally speaking the more mistake prone the recruiting services are. They are familiar with the top echelon teams players and have rated them more thoroughly while many very good athletes are not looked at very well at all. Some outstanding athletes are not even evaluated at all and wind up with a 2* non evaluation. It happens a lot.