Raw Data on Recruiting

[Boaty1]

There are always special circumstances when Tech wins a recruiting battle with Bama. Just like there are special circumstances when someone like Calvin Johnson decides he wants to put education on an equal plane with an NFL career.

Well, a kid wanting to play qb and us beating out a school that wanted him at db is a pretty case. Lol.

 

[Boaty1]

But this would also mean that Gailey had a stacked roster when he came in. Much better than CPJ. Why couldn’t Gailey win with all that talent? I really have my opinion but would love to hear other views

Good question. Gailey did better when he had his own less heralded recruits. Although the center piece for his best teams was a generational talent in Calvin.

 

[Boaty1]

Oh the irony.....boaty ignores any data that doesn't fit his narrative.

Lol. You think I really have a vendetta against CPJ don’t you? I’ve acknowledged on numerous occasions the man can flat out coach.

 

[Boaty1]

You expect facts to get in the way of their narrative? Surely you just.

At least 3 of the previous 9 classes before CPJ were top 20 classes yet CPJ’s top class was 39th in 11 seasons. Like i said earlier. You are one of my favorite posters. Thanks for your thoughts.

 

[alagold]

Odd that CCG had such a steep learning curve. Reports at the time said one of the reasons he was chosen was that he was from Georgia, "everyone" remembered his career in Americus (I believe it was) and he had friends who were high school coaches all over the state. Recruiting was going to be his strong suit as oft repeated in the AJC.

Two possible ways to look at this. High school connections and pro coaching experience don't guarantee anything, or, there is no ready made template for recruiting at Tech.

At an alumni meeting I personally asked Gailey what his biggest surprise has been at Tech right after hire.He told me--"all the recruiting rules and controls".He had NOT dealt with that stuff at D-1 level in forever.
Wiz may have the same problem.

 

[alagold]

There's been a lot of debate over the years in regards to our recruiting. Some have argued that Paul Johnson hurt recruiting, others have argued that he did more with less, some have even argued that he improved recruiting. A couple of years ago I decided to look at the data, and frankly, what I found surprised me. I compiled all the data from 2002-2018, using rivals as a source, since they predate some of the other services and have long been considered an industry standard. Using ESPN, 247, or others would most likely produce similar results, but for the purpose of this exercise, I opted to use Rivals. For purposes of comparing the coaches, I added classes 2002-2007 to CCG, and 2009-2018 to CPJ. I left the 2008 class out of each coaches data sets, as the coaching change impacted the cycle. Of note, however, that class was ranked 49th, so it sits in line with both coaches average class.

I'd also like to put the following caveats out there. We cannot know if CCG would have sustained recruiting success similar to 2007 going forward. Before the change, the 2008 class was in line with more normal GT recruiting on a "good" cycle. If memory serves me correctly, we were ranked in the low 40's/high 30's when CCG was fired. I have no data to support this assertion, however.

I'd also like to point out that I was not a fan of firing CCG, and I was initially opposed to the hire of CPJ. I have since come to love him and what he did for GT. That being said, let's take a look at the raw data.

Since 2002, GT has averaged a recruiting class rank of 51.5. Where do our coaches fall on this scale? CCG classes averaged 50.8, and CPJ classes averaged 52.1. This average takes into account CCGs monster 2007 class and also penalizes CPJ for the disastrous (ranking wise) 2013 class. The argument that CPJ has been a poorer recruiter than CCG can be viewed as valid if you use this as your only data point.

However, you need to understand that recruiting rankings are done using a "total points" system that rewards larger recruiting classes and penalizes smaller classes. To get a full baseline score, you can count the points for 20 recruits. After 20, your 20 highest count and "hide" your lowest scoring recruits. This is why large recruiting classes tend to be ranked the highest, and smaller classes rank lowest. For instance, the 2013 class ranked 84th had 14 commitments in it. Similarly, 2016, 2012, 2006, & 2002 had 18, 17, 16, & 15 commitments. Each of those years were ranked in the 50's or higher. So, for context, how many years did we rank higher than 50 with "full" classes of 20 or more? 3 times. 2018 (53 & 21), 2004 (56 & 24), & 2003 (50 & 21).
View attachment 4636
What I find to be a better indicator of class composition is the average star per recruit. In this, CPJ has a decided advantage. In the 10 years accredited to him, his recruits have averaged 2.92 stars out of 5. CCG averaged 2.7. Only one CCG class averaged better than 3 stars: 2007 at 3.3. CPJ has had 4 years with averages of 3.0 or greater. As you can see in the chart below, CPJ has done a better job of staying at or above the trendline than CCG did.

View attachment 4637

Lastly, in the stat that I think best sums up the difference in the recruiting of CCG and CPJ, is number of 4* vs 2* recruits. While I think we can all agree that many 2* recruits are hidden gems, as many times as not they never perform as well as higher rated recruits. In the 6 years accredited to CCG, he had 53 2* recruits to the 33 in ten years CPJ recruited. Conversely, CCG had 15 4* recruits in 6 years vs 18 in 10 years for CPJ. If each coaches recruiting was compared to a baseball hitter, CCG was the slugger who struck out a lot and CPJ is the line drive hitter who gets consistent singles and doubles.

View attachment 4639

So, what do we derive from this data? It depends on what's most important to you. If you want to win recruiting rankings, the CCG was slightly better and trending up. CPJ stayed consistent with GTs recruiting history ranking wise, but improved our per recruit average.

Ultimately, I think we need to realize that unless we change our financial situation, and begin to fund football on par with expectations, then we will most likely remain mired at our current level regardless of the coach brought in. I just figured I'd show you guys the numbers, and let you make of them what you will.

Augusta,
Thanks for work up.
To make it more complex I had previously gone back in the PJ classes from '11-'16 and found he was LOSING about 33% of his recruits before they used up eligibility for WHATEVER reason. (transfer, hurt, flunk, kicked off, etc) So some of his best recruits Marshall, Mills went out the door. On the flip side--some of his best players were low rated -PJ Davis, Gotsis etc.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Well, a kid wanting to play qb and us beating out a school that wanted him at db is a pretty case. Lol.

Sure. Wonder if we have any examples of non-special cases?

 

[SteamWhistle]

I think the biggest plus in recruiting we will get is now we have more to choose from. The pool might not be better but it certainly is larger, like it or not the Option was not popular with 17-18 year olds. Is Georgia Tech gonna get 5 Star RB and WR? Not right away, and maybe never, but I do think we will see the offense recruit better, like the defense has since around the time Roof arrived.

 

[SteamWhistle]

Also, I hate to Double post but...
I love the info, do you think you could arrange one with Offesne and Defesnee separated?

 

[Techster]

There's been a lot of debate over the years in regards to our recruiting. Some have argued that Paul Johnson hurt recruiting, others have argued that he did more with less, some have even argued that he improved recruiting. A couple of years ago I decided to look at the data, and frankly, what I found surprised me. I compiled all the data from 2002-2018, using rivals as a source, since they predate some of the other services and have long been considered an industry standard. Using ESPN, 247, or others would most likely produce similar results, but for the purpose of this exercise, I opted to use Rivals. For purposes of comparing the coaches, I added classes 2002-2007 to CCG, and 2009-2018 to CPJ. I left the 2008 class out of each coaches data sets, as the coaching change impacted the cycle. Of note, however, that class was ranked 49th, so it sits in line with both coaches average class.

I'd also like to put the following caveats out there. We cannot know if CCG would have sustained recruiting success similar to 2007 going forward. Before the change, the 2008 class was in line with more normal GT recruiting on a "good" cycle. If memory serves me correctly, we were ranked in the low 40's/high 30's when CCG was fired. I have no data to support this assertion, however.

I'd also like to point out that I was not a fan of firing CCG, and I was initially opposed to the hire of CPJ. I have since come to love him and what he did for GT. That being said, let's take a look at the raw data.

Since 2002, GT has averaged a recruiting class rank of 51.5. Where do our coaches fall on this scale? CCG classes averaged 50.8, and CPJ classes averaged 52.1. This average takes into account CCGs monster 2007 class and also penalizes CPJ for the disastrous (ranking wise) 2013 class. The argument that CPJ has been a poorer recruiter than CCG can be viewed as valid if you use this as your only data point.

However, you need to understand that recruiting rankings are done using a "total points" system that rewards larger recruiting classes and penalizes smaller classes. To get a full baseline score, you can count the points for 20 recruits. After 20, your 20 highest count and "hide" your lowest scoring recruits. This is why large recruiting classes tend to be ranked the highest, and smaller classes rank lowest. For instance, the 2013 class ranked 84th had 14 commitments in it. Similarly, 2016, 2012, 2006, & 2002 had 18, 17, 16, & 15 commitments. Each of those years were ranked in the 50's or higher. So, for context, how many years did we rank higher than 50 with "full" classes of 20 or more? 3 times. 2018 (53 & 21), 2004 (56 & 24), & 2003 (50 & 21).
View attachment 4636
What I find to be a better indicator of class composition is the average star per recruit. In this, CPJ has a decided advantage. In the 10 years accredited to him, his recruits have averaged 2.92 stars out of 5. CCG averaged 2.7. Only one CCG class averaged better than 3 stars: 2007 at 3.3. CPJ has had 4 years with averages of 3.0 or greater. As you can see in the chart below, CPJ has done a better job of staying at or above the trendline than CCG did.

View attachment 4637

Lastly, in the stat that I think best sums up the difference in the recruiting of CCG and CPJ, is number of 4* vs 2* recruits. While I think we can all agree that many 2* recruits are hidden gems, as many times as not they never perform as well as higher rated recruits. In the 6 years accredited to CCG, he had 53 2* recruits to the 33 in ten years CPJ recruited. Conversely, CCG had 15 4* recruits in 6 years vs 18 in 10 years for CPJ. If each coaches recruiting was compared to a baseball hitter, CCG was the slugger who struck out a lot and CPJ is the line drive hitter who gets consistent singles and doubles.

View attachment 4639

So, what do we derive from this data? It depends on what's most important to you. If you want to win recruiting rankings, the CCG was slightly better and trending up. CPJ stayed consistent with GTs recruiting history ranking wise, but improved our per recruit average.

Ultimately, I think we need to realize that unless we change our financial situation, and begin to fund football on par with expectations, then we will most likely remain mired at our current level regardless of the coach brought in. I just figured I'd show you guys the numbers, and let you make of them what you will.

One thing I would caution about the recruiting rankings is that when Chan Gailey first started, recruiting services were still in the nascent stages. Those "2 star" recruits weren't as bad as their rankings. Recruiting services just didn't have the staff they do now to review tape. Let's be real, CPJ was the beneficiary of the "GT bump" many times. How many times did we sign recruits in the last month that were 2 stars, but miraculously ended up 3 stars.

Also, some of the 2 stars in that 2004 class? Gary Guyton, Andrew Gardner, Jamal Lewis. That class also had Calvin Johnson, Mike Cox, Darrell Robertson, Darryl Richards. All of them were All-ACC and future NFL players.

 

[stylee]

I think the biggest plus in recruiting we will get is now we have more to choose from. The pool might not be better but it certainly is larger, like it or not the Option was not popular with 17-18 year olds. Is Georgia Tech gonna get 5 Star RB and WR? Not right away, and maybe never, but I do think we will see the offense recruit better, like the defense has since around the time Roof arrived.

Do you think offensive performance will improve? Do you think the better recruits you are confident will arrive will outperform, say, the 2014 offense (#3 OFEI)?

If your answer is “yes” or “maybe” please point to any historical reference that backs that up

 

[Boaty1]

At an alumni meeting I personally asked Gailey what his biggest surprise has been at Tech right after hire.He told me--"all the recruiting rules and controls".He had NOT dealt with that stuff at D-1 level in forever.
Wiz may have the same problem.

And this is exactly my point. We had recruiting rolling under O’Leary and hired a guy that was not prepared for the job and had a huge learning curve and are using his time learning the recruiting game at GT as the standard. That is a problem.

 

[takethepoints]

There are absolutely zero facts to show that CPJ was "doing quite well" as you say in recruiting. You may justify his poor recruiting by pointing to the changing landscape of college football but no one should say he was "doing quite well" in recruiting.

See my earlier post on this subject. We actually compare quite well with similar schools when it come to our recruiting. I think you would like to see better results - wouldn't we all? - but so far there is precious little evidence that Tech can deliver those without years of effort and boatloads of money.

 

[Techster]

Do you think offensive performance will improve? Do you think the better recruits you are confident will arrive will outperform, say, the 2014 offense (#3 OFEI)?

If your answer is “yes” or “maybe” please point to any historical reference that backs that up

Whether the system was at fault or not, one of the things that plagued GT under CPJ was terrible defenses...and at times, complete lack of defense.

Here's the question (something I posed in another thread): If the next guy comes in and has great defenses (DFEI of 20's) but only above average offenses (OFEI 30-40's) and averages a win or two more every year, would that still make everyone happy?

IMO, it's not the Clemsons and the UGA's I worry about anymore. The spending gap on the college level has made it a tier of the elites, and everyone else. GT is in the "everyone else" category. I just want GT to be the elites of the "everyone else" and win a competitive share against the Clemsons and the UGAs. Being the elite team of the Coastal division is a real possibility and IMO that's what the next coach can realistically strive for. In CPJ's defense, he was probably thisclose to getting GT there.

 

[takethepoints]

And this is exactly my point. We had recruiting rolling under O’Leary and hired a guy that was not prepared for the job and had a huge learning curve and are using his time learning the recruiting game at GT as the standard. That is a problem.

Well … that and the NCAA standards. If George had had to contend with just progress to graduation his recruiting at Tech would have been much more constrained. Then add in the rising admission standards, small range of majors, no grey-shirting (not that George did that) and there you are.

 

[takethepoints]

Here's the question (something I posed in another thread): If the next guy comes in and has great defenses (DFEI of 20's) but only above average offenses (OFEI 30-40's) and averages a win or two more every year, would that still make everyone happy? .

Ah, Sorta like Chan. And, no, I wouldn't be at all happy with that.

 

[Techster]

Ah, Sorta like Chan. And, no, I wouldn't be at all happy with that.

Interesting.

I would be happy with a win or two more each year and sacrifice a less potent offense. You know what one more win in the ACC (against Pitt) does for GT this year? Makes us Coastal Champions and we get to go bowling somewhere besides Detroit.

In the end, I just want to win more regardless if we do it on offense or defense.

 

[takethepoints]

Interesting.

I would be happy with a win or two more each year and sacrifice a less potent offense. You know what one more win in the ACC (against Pitt) does for GT this year? Makes us Coastal Champions and we get to go bowling somewhere besides Detroit.

In the end, I just want to win more regardless if we do it on offense or defense.

Me too. Problem = getting a shutdown D against today's offenses is very difficult at schools with much fewer recruiting challenges then we have.

 

[LibertyTurns]

Oh, how I wish these "special circumstances" would happen more often. But, I also wish for world peace.

Everything good that happens to the program is a “special circumstance”. It's usually dominated by the other half of the equation sucking. To many the only way this program ever does good is when everyone or everything else completely sucks. We may accept mediocrity but we’re completely enamored with downplaying success.

 

[stylee]

@Techster , why do you think we’ve been so consistently mediocre-to-bad on defense for the last 11 years? Is it just bad luck with hiring the wrong DC four times in a row (personally I like what Woody’s defense does and think we can get better with him, but the initial results weren’t great)? Something systematic about how CPJ runs practice?