538 Article on Wins vs. Recruiting Ranking (spoiler: CBB does really well)

[Smokehouse]

FiveThirtyEight just posted this article that predicts wins based on recruiting rankings from 2002-2014 and then compares them to actual wins:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/after-signing-day-wisconsin-makes-the-best-of-its-recruits/

I won't copy-and-paste the graphics with all the magnitudes, but of interest to Hog fans:

When you look at just the previous season's results, Arkansas just misses the top-10 as the 12th most overachieving school, meaning BB overachieved based on expectations of the recruits left to him and his first class here.

When you look at wins from 2005-2014, Wisconsin overachieved more than anyone else, and by a pretty wide margin. Most of which, obviously, came during Bielema's tenure there. Wisconsin averages finishing 32 spots higher in the football rankings than the recruiting rankings.


Now, this doesn't provide any evidence in the "are recruiting rankings meaningful?" debate (after all, if you're expected to win two games based on the rankings and you win four, that's a massive over-achievement but still a bad season), but it does show that CBB really knows how to "coach up" his players. On the heels of what most agree is a really solid class, that's exciting.

[Razordiddy]

FiveThirtyEight just posted this article that predicts wins based on recruiting rankings from 2002-2014 and then compares them to actual wins:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/after-signing-day-wisconsin-makes-the-best-of-its-recruits/

I won't copy-and-paste the graphics with all the magnitudes, but of interest to Hog fans:

When you look at just the previous season's results, Arkansas just misses the top-10 as the 12th most overachieving school, meaning BB overachieved based on expectations of the recruits left to him and his first class here.

When you look at wins from 2005-2014, Wisconsin overachieved more than anyone else, and by a pretty wide margin. Most of which, obviously, came during Bielema's tenure there. Wisconsin averages finishing 32 spots higher in the football rankings than the recruiting rankings.


Now, this doesn't provide any evidence in the "are recruiting rankings meaningful?" debate (after all, if you're expected to win two games based on the rankings and you win four, that's a massive over-achievement but still a bad season), but it does show that CBB really knows how to "coach up" his players. On the heels of what most agree is a really solid class, that's exciting.

Cool info!

[CattleCorn]

Awesome post!  +1000 if I could.

[Squints Pallaboarus]

I thought these were pretty interesting.

source: http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/after-signing-day-wisconsin-makes-the-best-of-its-recruits/


[attachment deleted by admin]

[Bubba's Bruisers]

It takes talent and coaching.  Simple concept.

Some have the talent, but not the coaching.  Some vice-versa.  Some with both and some with neither. 

We obviously have the coaching.  Just need to stockpile the talent.

[Bubba's Bruisers]

nm

[duckman]

Nice find...

[RedyorNot]

Nice find. I like that we we're 12th in 2014 with CBB's second class. The seasons to come are going to be fun!

[Squints Pallaboarus]

Thanks! I think it's interesting where Wisconsin falls on the the first graph - from 2005-2014. Obviously coaching goes a long ways, but I think college football is almost like the nature vs. nurture  theory in raising kids. You need naturally gifted players (nature), but if you don't coach them well (nurture), then they may underachieve. Let's hope the trend continues for us!!!

[Hog N Bama]

Movin' on up! :razorback: :razorback: :razorback:

[redeye]

Good stuff in this thread!

[sickboy]

That's a cold spot to be when you're Vandy. I mean... their classes aren't even highly rated by stars. That means they're worse than bad. They are sucking worse than people expected and they were already expected to suck. Ouch.

[Hogpkins]

Very cool. Hope CBB sees that.

[OneTuskOverTheLine™]

That's a cold spot to be when you're Vandy. I mean... their classes aren't even highly rated by stars. That means they're worse than bad. They are sucking worse than people expected and they were already expected to suck. Ouch.

No... When Franklin was there they were out recruiting us... I said it then and I say it now "Stars don't matter" Except when rqanking a team in preseason polls... Glorified beauty contest... What counts is on the field; especially since we have play-off's now...

[Smokehouse]

No... When Franklin was there they were out recruiting us... I said it then and I say it now "Stars don't matter" Except when rqanking a team in preseason polls... Glorified beauty contest... What counts is on the field; especially since we have play-off's now...

As I said in the OP, this really doesn't speak at all to whether stars matter or not. It just shows how certain programs perform in relation to stars. If stars didn't matter then CBB, who appears to outperform his stars to a larger degree than any off his peers, would have won a national title already. I'm really excited to see what he does know that the stars are improving (which I imagine will continue trending upward following something like an 8-9 win season next year with some impressive wins along the way).

To me, the most impressive on that list (other than Bielema) are Ohio State, Alabama, and LSU all slightly outperforming their stars. In that time period their recruiting rankings probably average out somewhere in the 5-10 range, which means to still be outperforming expectations from 2005-2014 they're all three likely averaging a top-5 finish. That's quite a stretch.

[Thepigdoctor]

Really cool article, great find.

Confirms just what we saw on the field last year under CBB. He can do more with less. This was a good class, I expect him to continue signing classes that are at least this good on a regular basis. What happens on the field is a product of a man who has overachieved his entire life.

Even those who don't like him as a person or believe he is the right man for Arkansas are soon going to have to acknowledge that you know what, the man just succeeds. It's a product of who he is, how hard he works, and the level he demands from those around him.

I hope CBB stays at Arkansas until he retires, because I truly believe under him, we can win a national championship, and we can become truly elite. It ain't flashy and that's what is beautiful. You know who we are and what we're gonna do, but you still aren't going to stop us.

[rusvegashog]

Very cool. It's neat when a thread is actually informative and positive.

[TheGrove68]

Mizzou placed pretty high on those list's as well.........and IMO played in a tougher conference than the Wisc.  It looks like the games between GP and BB could be very competitive for years to come.

[DeltaBoy]

Shows me how good of a Coach BB is.

[ChiTown27]

One more thing this doesn't cover is the impact of the 4-5*s that go to these "big brand" schools, and who have always been the alpha males at their high schools, who end up sitting on the bench for two or three years. They might come out of HS as a 5*, but because they've been buried in the depth chart, and they've never really had to put in max effort to be the best on their teams, they sometimes end up going through the motions and not realizing their potential. You can only put 11 men on the field at a time. So, this might help explain how we were able to destroy Texas an LSU this year. Both of those schools are STACKED with 5* talent. One poster said earlier that once you get to the next level (college), those stars go away, and I agree. At that point, it's about coachability, mental prep, strength and conditioning. A guy with something to prove will do those things with more effort than a disheartened 5* kid who doesn't know how to fight for a starting job. Genetics does play a big role, but the fight inside is vital and immeasurable.