Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
How 'Should' Tech Do in Recruiting Rank - Analysis
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BCJacket" data-source="post: 501494" data-attributes="member: 2332"><p><u>The nittier grittier:</u></p><p></p><p>I did not make this GT-centric in any way. I ran the numbers and tried not to look at the data until I was done, but to be fair, I am obviously biased. This is not peer-review quality research. Just a project for fun. So, the methodology, data, etc are what they are. There may well be mistakes in the data transcription and analysis. But the model results do correlate strongly with the real world observations. Take it for what it's worth.</p><p></p><p>The data I analyzed:</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Total athletics revenue 2017*; Moderate/strong positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = .6722</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">School enrollment; weak/moderate positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC =0.2596</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">US News College Rank** (Academic proxy) weak <em>negative</em> correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC =-0.1638</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">APR Ranking; no correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = 0.076315507 (Excluded)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Football Home Attendance; strong positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = 0.77037528</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Stadium Capacity; strong positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = 0.771508046</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Fandom" Ratio***; moderate positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC =0.39206026</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Public vs Private****</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Conference*****</li> </ul><p>The model results have a strong positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = 0.8312. ie my model outperforms the underlying data to predict what a schools recruiting rank "should be".</p><p></p><p>The Results Ordered by differential (Over performers at top, under performers at bottom)</p><p></p><p>[ATTACH=full]4616[/ATTACH]</p><p></p><p>*Athletics department revenue from publicly reported info or the best estimate I could find for private Schools. Total athletic department revenue, so Football expenditures would probably be a better data point, but I could not find a good source for that data.</p><p></p><p>**Both the USnews and APR data sets are a very imperfect measure of the impact of academics on the Football team. Lots of really great schools also have strong Football programs, but the players aren't majoring in the intensive high rated majors. Big schools, like ND, Michigan, UF are able to game the rankings, team GPA, APR, etc, by having the players make great progress towards graduating... in 'recreational studies'. Couldn't find a source for better data, maybe football team average SAT score? I expected academics to be more of a negative, but it seems Academics are a plus for many recruits (maybe not the 3-and-done crowd, but they're a tiny minority and not coming here to play school.) Plenty of smart 4*s out there for us to go get.</p><p></p><p>*** "Fandom"- Ratio of student body to football attendance. Proxy for schools that have large/small fanbases relative to alumni. The correlation isn't that strong, but including it in the model helped correct for some outliers on attendance #s- ND, TCU, and Clemson (surprisingly to me) are outliers to the high side. Minnesota, Cal and Illinois are outlying under performers. Private schools and big Southern State U's tend to over perform. Big Northern and Western public schools under perform. GT is smack dab average on attendance relative to our enrollment size. On par with FSU, UF, UT and tOSU. That isn't what you'd think from the narrative that we have a crappy fan base. Our big Southeast State U neighbors skew the perception. You could argue we should outperform, not be average, given that we are a public Southern school in Atlanta. But we also have a disproportionate grad student population relative to total enrollment. Many of those will stay loyal to their undergrad teams (or are international and don't care about gridiron).</p><p></p><p>**** Public vs Private - Can't really quantify this, for a correlation as it's a binary facotr. But Private schools averaged 9 places higher than predicted all else equal. Adjusting for this bias made the model more accurate.</p><p></p><p>***** Conference adjustment, didn't include this at first, but the Big Ten schools way under perform (...except Maryland <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite12" alt="o_O" title="Er... what? o_O" loading="lazy" data-shortname="o_O" />?) and the Pac 12 Overperform. Adjusting for this bias made the model more accurate.</p><p></p><p>This is also not considering whether recruiting rankings are an accurate assessment of talent. They do strongly correlate with on field success. But I personally don't believe the 'rankings' are causative. I think both correlate to a third factor, which is overall program strength.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BCJacket, post: 501494, member: 2332"] [U]The nittier grittier:[/U] I did not make this GT-centric in any way. I ran the numbers and tried not to look at the data until I was done, but to be fair, I am obviously biased. This is not peer-review quality research. Just a project for fun. So, the methodology, data, etc are what they are. There may well be mistakes in the data transcription and analysis. But the model results do correlate strongly with the real world observations. Take it for what it's worth. The data I analyzed: [LIST] [*]Total athletics revenue 2017*; Moderate/strong positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = .6722 [*]School enrollment; weak/moderate positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC =0.2596 [*]US News College Rank** (Academic proxy) weak [I]negative[/I] correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC =-0.1638 [*]APR Ranking; no correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = 0.076315507 (Excluded) [*]Football Home Attendance; strong positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = 0.77037528 [*]Stadium Capacity; strong positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = 0.771508046 [*]"Fandom" Ratio***; moderate positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC =0.39206026 [*]Public vs Private**** [*]Conference***** [/LIST] The model results have a strong positive correlation with recruiting ranking, PCC = 0.8312. ie my model outperforms the underlying data to predict what a schools recruiting rank "should be". The Results Ordered by differential (Over performers at top, under performers at bottom) [ATTACH=full]4616[/ATTACH] *Athletics department revenue from publicly reported info or the best estimate I could find for private Schools. Total athletic department revenue, so Football expenditures would probably be a better data point, but I could not find a good source for that data. **Both the USnews and APR data sets are a very imperfect measure of the impact of academics on the Football team. Lots of really great schools also have strong Football programs, but the players aren't majoring in the intensive high rated majors. Big schools, like ND, Michigan, UF are able to game the rankings, team GPA, APR, etc, by having the players make great progress towards graduating... in 'recreational studies'. Couldn't find a source for better data, maybe football team average SAT score? I expected academics to be more of a negative, but it seems Academics are a plus for many recruits (maybe not the 3-and-done crowd, but they're a tiny minority and not coming here to play school.) Plenty of smart 4*s out there for us to go get. *** "Fandom"- Ratio of student body to football attendance. Proxy for schools that have large/small fanbases relative to alumni. The correlation isn't that strong, but including it in the model helped correct for some outliers on attendance #s- ND, TCU, and Clemson (surprisingly to me) are outliers to the high side. Minnesota, Cal and Illinois are outlying under performers. Private schools and big Southern State U's tend to over perform. Big Northern and Western public schools under perform. GT is smack dab average on attendance relative to our enrollment size. On par with FSU, UF, UT and tOSU. That isn't what you'd think from the narrative that we have a crappy fan base. Our big Southeast State U neighbors skew the perception. You could argue we should outperform, not be average, given that we are a public Southern school in Atlanta. But we also have a disproportionate grad student population relative to total enrollment. Many of those will stay loyal to their undergrad teams (or are international and don't care about gridiron). **** Public vs Private - Can't really quantify this, for a correlation as it's a binary facotr. But Private schools averaged 9 places higher than predicted all else equal. Adjusting for this bias made the model more accurate. ***** Conference adjustment, didn't include this at first, but the Big Ten schools way under perform (...except Maryland o_O?) and the Pac 12 Overperform. Adjusting for this bias made the model more accurate. This is also not considering whether recruiting rankings are an accurate assessment of talent. They do strongly correlate with on field success. But I personally don't believe the 'rankings' are causative. I think both correlate to a third factor, which is overall program strength. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What's the good word?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
How 'Should' Tech Do in Recruiting Rank - Analysis
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top