You guys that lean so heavily on recruiting rankings - you do realize that they determine these rankings in part based on who is offering the players, right? Meaning if USC, Alabama, georgia, and Ohio State (to pick a few) all want a kid who is a 3* then he will likely be elevated to a 4*.
So it’s sort of self fulfilling isn’t it? If you go to Miami to coach and recruit you will be seen as a good recruiter. The Jackson State thing is a little different. There’s a non football motivating factor involved with the HBCU scenario. Generally speaking the schools recruit themselves more so than any given coach does when you’re talking broad talent.
Where the coach comes in is evaluating players that he thinks he and his staff can develop to be successful under whatever system they’ve decided to implement. So then they should be judged by 1) do they really know what they need, and 2) can they get those guys.
So the next question - do you want to need the same guys that everyone else needs? Or do you want to need something different, that can help you achieve #2?
This is important to understand.
Recruiting sites do change their rankings of players based on who offers recruits.
It is very different than basketball recruiting where the Top couple hundred players all play against each other so it is somewhat easier to evaluate.
Recruiting is very important - but i'd argue that proper evaluation is even more important. The 5 star types are relatively easy to point out, but below that the talent levels are not so different that it is quite so easy to see.
I think where fans get lost in recruiting is the comparing of recruiting class rankings. Is the #25 class really that much better than the #35 or #40 class, i'd argue it is not.
IMO, I think there is little program talent difference between the #5 ACC recruiting class and the #10 recruiting class. I don't believe the program with the #5 recruiting class is likely to simply line up on the field and 'out talent' the #10. I think the overall levels of talent are too close for that.
At the very highest levels - the Top 10 type classes I do think there is a talent differential there were many times they can line up and simply out talent teams. But below that it is more about talent evaluation and talent development.
I'm also in the camp where I think it will be very difficult to ever recruit at a Top 25 level consistently at GT. Alot of that is simply due to the fact that in 40 years of following the program it has never consistently had Top 25 classes. It may have a Top 25 class once every 7-10 years, but it hasn't been at a rate any better than that. That leads me to believe that the ceiling at GT for 'recruiting rankings' is more based on the school than the coach. I think there are internal reasons why GT seldom recruits at a Top 25 level and i'm not convinced some of those issues are ever going to change in any significant way.
GT is always going to be located in Atlanta (which can be both a positive and a negative)
GT is never going to be as large as most P5 schools (its undergrad enrollment is in the bottom quintile - 12 smallest among P5 schools).
GT is never going to have the broad based academic choices most state P5 schools have which gives you fewer options to present to recruits that they might want to major in.
GT is always going to be more at the top end of the academic spectrum in terms of requirements to get in, which means its pool of recruits is always going to be somewhat smaller.
GT is likely to never be better than avg at fanbase/alumni financial support among P5 schools (even that would be a major change from now where GT is well below P5 avg in support).
Items 3 and 4 are the most important of those and item 3 is probably the most important of all. If the recruit does not want to major in a math and science based major there are few options for them.
Having talked to multiple assts at GT over the years in both FB and MBB I can also say that #4 plays a role as well. One asst told me once they would create a database of soph. When they would get the first official transcripts, usually at the end of their Jr year, they usually deleted 40-50% of the names in the database because they didn't have the academic classes/grades that they felt were needed for the recruit to succeed at GT.
In recruiting at GT, test scores are almost never the issue - it is their HS Classes. What have the recruits taken, what kind of grades have they gotten.
GT does not need the recruits to be future rocket scientists, they are going to get alot of academic help when they get here, but they have to have shown at least some desire to take some tough classes or they likely won't make it.
Ultimately to be successful at GT I think the program needs to recruit at the Top 25-40 level consistently (and also be really good at talent evaluation) and then be really good at talent development and pre/gameday coaching.
