Unexpected Recruiting Observation

[vamosjackets]

Something @dressedcheeseside said in the Fall Camp thread I believe in a discussion with @33jacket got me thinking. 33j was saying that with CPJ here the recruiting ranking on offense is never going to be very accurate, and then DCS said that the main question he asks in recruiting is "are we getting our first targets". The logic of DCS seems strong on that point, but I'm not sure it has worked out that way empirically. Here are some cases.

Our starting WR's: Jeune and Stewart - both late additions to their classes, not our first targets. Meanwhile, Christian Philpott and Harland Howell were early targets. Camp was also a late offer while Dolphus was early.

Our QB's: MJ was a fairly early target though perhaps not the earliest in his class. Taquan was an early target, but as an athlete unlikely to end up at QB. Lucas and Jay were both very late additions. Meanwhile, I can't remember the recruit's name, but he was all the rage as our primary QB target early. He ended up committing to Tennessee and then decommitting (rumor was that he was let go by the UTenn factory) and ended up at somewhere like UAB and I haven't heard anything from him. The guy we lost to Arkansas (Duwop or something another) - hasn't amounted to much, and there are several others I can think of (but can't recall names) who never made an impact wherever they went.

OL: Will Bryan was definitely a first choice. Jahaziel and Cooper were very late additions. Parker Braun, I remember was a strange recruiting story and it's hard to make out what really happened there - only he, his family, and the coaches know the true and complete story. Our most credible recruiting analyst on this sight (Eric) had said that the coaches weren't sure about Parker at first because of a size question (he seemed on the small side his junior year or something like that), but then we came around and offered him a little later and thank the good Lord he accepted. That would've been an all-time miss for GT if he hadn't. I don't remember Andrew Marshall's recruitment very well - he may have been a first choice. Shamire was definitely a first choice. Going back, I think I remember Shaq being a camp offer or something like that, so I wouldn't call that a first choice or late addition. Burden was a late addition.

BB: Mills was a first choice. All the others were late - Howard (seems like the eventual heir apparent), Benson, Quaide, Mason.

AB: Lynch was very late. Qua was early I think. JJ Green was early as was Jarrett and Gantt. Cottrell was a camp offer so not early nor late.

I've got to run. I'll try to come back and do defense unless somebody beats me to it (feel free, also feel free to improve the above data). But, from this, I don't think the early offer logic holds true (does the evidence point to the converse?). What conclusions do you all think can be reasonably drawn from this?

 

[TampaGT]

Something @dressedcheeseside said in the Fall Camp thread I believe in a discussion with @33jacket got me thinking. 33j was saying that with CPJ here the recruiting ranking on offense is never going to be very accurate, and then DCS said that the main question he asks in recruiting is "are we getting our first targets". The logic of DCS seems strong on that point, but I'm not sure it has worked out that way empirically. Here are some cases.

Our starting WR's: Jeune and Stewart - both late additions to their classes, not our first targets. Meanwhile, Christian Philpott and Harland Howell were early targets. Camp was also a late offer while Dolphus was early.

Our QB's: MJ was a fairly early target though perhaps not the earliest in his class. Taquan was an early target, but as an athlete unlikely to end up at QB. Lucas and Jay were both very late additions. Meanwhile, I can't remember the recruit's name, but he was all the rage as our primary QB target early. He ended up committing to Tennessee and then decommitting (rumor was that he was let go by the UTenn factory) and ended up at somewhere like UAB and I haven't heard anything from him. The guy we lost to Arkansas (Duwop or something another) - hasn't amounted to much, and there are several others I can think of (but can't recall names) who never made an impact wherever they went.

OL: Will Bryan was definitely a first choice. Jahaziel and Cooper were very late additions. Parker Braun, I remember was a strange recruiting story and it's hard to make out what really happened there - only he, his family, and the coaches know the true and complete story. Our most credible recruiting analyst on this sight (Eric) had said that the coaches weren't sure about Parker at first because of a size question (he seemed on the small side his junior year or something like that), but then we came around and offered him a little later and thank the good Lord he accepted. That would've been an all-time miss for GT if he hadn't. I don't remember Andrew Marshall's recruitment very well - he may have been a first choice. Shamire was definitely a first choice. Going back, I think I remember Shaq being a camp offer or something like that, so I wouldn't call that a first choice or late addition. Burden was a late addition.

BB: Mills was a first choice. All the others were late - Howard (seems like the eventual heir apparent), Benson, Quaide, Mason.

AB: Lynch was very late. Qua was early I think. JJ Green was early as was Jarrett and Gantt. Cottrell was a camp offer so not early nor late.

I've got to run. I'll try to come back and do defense unless somebody beats me to it (feel free, also feel free to improve the above data). But, from this, I don't think the early offer logic holds true (does the evidence point to the converse?). What conclusions do you all think can be reasonably drawn from this?

JJ Green was a transfer

 

[Boomergump]

Something @dressedcheeseside said in the Fall Camp thread I believe in a discussion with @33jacket got me thinking. 33j was saying that with CPJ here the recruiting ranking on offense is never going to be very accurate, and then DCS said that the main question he asks in recruiting is "are we getting our first targets". The logic of DCS seems strong on that point, but I'm not sure it has worked out that way empirically. Here are some cases.

Our starting WR's: Jeune and Stewart - both late additions to their classes, not our first targets. Meanwhile, Christian Philpott and Harland Howell were early targets. Camp was also a late offer while Dolphus was early.

Our QB's: MJ was a fairly early target though perhaps not the earliest in his class. Taquan was an early target, but as an athlete unlikely to end up at QB. Lucas and Jay were both very late additions. Meanwhile, I can't remember the recruit's name, but he was all the rage as our primary QB target early. He ended up committing to Tennessee and then decommitting (rumor was that he was let go by the UTenn factory) and ended up at somewhere like UAB and I haven't heard anything from him. The guy we lost to Arkansas (Duwop or something another) - hasn't amounted to much, and there are several others I can think of (but can't recall names) who never made an impact wherever they went.

OL: Will Bryan was definitely a first choice. Jahaziel and Cooper were very late additions. Parker Braun, I remember was a strange recruiting story and it's hard to make out what really happened there - only he, his family, and the coaches know the true and complete story. Our most credible recruiting analyst on this sight (Eric) had said that the coaches weren't sure about Parker at first because of a size question (he seemed on the small side his junior year or something like that), but then we came around and offered him a little later and thank the good Lord he accepted. That would've been an all-time miss for GT if he hadn't. I don't remember Andrew Marshall's recruitment very well - he may have been a first choice. Shamire was definitely a first choice. Going back, I think I remember Shaq being a camp offer or something like that, so I wouldn't call that a first choice or late addition. Burden was a late addition.

BB: Mills was a first choice. All the others were late - Howard (seems like the eventual heir apparent), Benson, Quaide, Mason.

AB: Lynch was very late. Qua was early I think. JJ Green was early as was Jarrett and Gantt. Cottrell was a camp offer so not early nor late.

I've got to run. I'll try to come back and do defense unless somebody beats me to it (feel free, also feel free to improve the above data). But, from this, I don't think the early offer logic holds true (does the evidence point to the converse?). What conclusions do you all think can be reasonably drawn from this?

I think the baseline conclusion that you draw from this is that recruiting is difficult and predicting performance of 18 year olds three years down the road very challenging. With that said, playing "opposite George" (sorry for the Seinfeld reference) is probably not a good strategy. If we follow your well written post to its logical conclusion, as recruiters we would rank our prospective players and then intentionally offer the ones at the bottom of the list first. I am not sure how much deliberate "gamesmanship" or "strategery" goes into signing recruiting classes, but I wouldn't put it past our team to intentionally hold off on a recruit to avoid tipping off the factories, who seem to poach us with regularity.

I am pretty sure Calvin Johnson was an early target. Cherry picking I know, but I am sure there are a BUNCH of top of the list players who did well here.

Bottom line: your research seems to indicate we are good at finding diamonds in the rough.

 

[OldJacketFan]

JJ Green was a transfer

Yes he was but Tech offered him early in HS

 

[jgtengineer]

Just because you don't hear about them until they commit, does not mean they aren't high up on the board.

Stewart was definitely a late addition but that was because at the time we were full on receivers.

 

[Bule]

This is an interesting observation but late additions are not always because they are at the bottom of the list as others have pointed out. Sometimes they are late bloomers. Sometimes we get info on them from a coach later in the process. Sometimes we know about them but keep them on the downlow until near signing day so a bunch of scummy poachers don't come barelling in and try to steal them. Some of them are committed to other schools so we wait to offer them for various reasons.

 

[Jacketman1]

Something @dressedcheeseside said in the Fall Camp thread I believe in a discussion with @33jacket got me thinking. 33j was saying that with CPJ here the recruiting ranking on offense is never going to be very accurate, and then DCS said that the main question he asks in recruiting is "are we getting our first targets". The logic of DCS seems strong on that point, but I'm not sure it has worked out that way empirically. Here are some cases.

Our starting WR's: Jeune and Stewart - both late additions to their classes, not our first targets. Meanwhile, Christian Philpott and Harland Howell were early targets. Camp was also a late offer while Dolphus was early.

Our QB's: MJ was a fairly early target though perhaps not the earliest in his class. Taquan was an early target, but as an athlete unlikely to end up at QB. Lucas and Jay were both very late additions. Meanwhile, I can't remember the recruit's name, but he was all the rage as our primary QB target early. He ended up committing to Tennessee and then decommitting (rumor was that he was let go by the UTenn factory) and ended up at somewhere like UAB and I haven't heard anything from him. The guy we lost to Arkansas (Duwop or something another) - hasn't amounted to much, and there are several others I can think of (but can't recall names) who never made an impact wherever they went.

OL: Will Bryan was definitely a first choice. Jahaziel and Cooper were very late additions. Parker Braun, I remember was a strange recruiting story and it's hard to make out what really happened there - only he, his family, and the coaches know the true and complete story. Our most credible recruiting analyst on this sight (Eric) had said that the coaches weren't sure about Parker at first because of a size question (he seemed on the small side his junior year or something like that), but then we came around and offered him a little later and thank the good Lord he accepted. That would've been an all-time miss for GT if he hadn't. I don't remember Andrew Marshall's recruitment very well - he may have been a first choice. Shamire was definitely a first choice. Going back, I think I remember Shaq being a camp offer or something like that, so I wouldn't call that a first choice or late addition. Burden was a late addition.

BB: Mills was a first choice. All the others were late - Howard (seems like the eventual heir apparent), Benson, Quaide, Mason.

AB: Lynch was very late. Qua was early I think. JJ Green was early as was Jarrett and Gantt. Cottrell was a camp offer so not early nor late.

I've got to run. I'll try to come back and do defense unless somebody beats me to it (feel free, also feel free to improve the above data). But, from this, I don't think the early offer logic holds true (does the evidence point to the converse?). What conclusions do you all think can be reasonably drawn from this?

Taddaryl Marshall was the QB that committed to Tennessee then got let go. He ended up going to Samford and is now a WR.

 

[redmule]

I suspect that some of the ones that went elsewhere and bombed out might have been really good players in the TO and CPJ knew it. Instead they went to a traditional offense and weren't good enough to make the cut.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

Something @dressedcheeseside said in the Fall Camp thread I believe in a discussion with @33jacket got me thinking. 33j was saying that with CPJ here the recruiting ranking on offense is never going to be very accurate, and then DCS said that the main question he asks in recruiting is "are we getting our first targets". The logic of DCS seems strong on that point, but I'm not sure it has worked out that way empirically. Here are some cases.

Our starting WR's: Jeune and Stewart - both late additions to their classes, not our first targets. Meanwhile, Christian Philpott and Harland Howell were early targets. Camp was also a late offer while Dolphus was early.

Our QB's: MJ was a fairly early target though perhaps not the earliest in his class. Taquan was an early target, but as an athlete unlikely to end up at QB. Lucas and Jay were both very late additions. Meanwhile, I can't remember the recruit's name, but he was all the rage as our primary QB target early. He ended up committing to Tennessee and then decommitting (rumor was that he was let go by the UTenn factory) and ended up at somewhere like UAB and I haven't heard anything from him. The guy we lost to Arkansas (Duwop or something another) - hasn't amounted to much, and there are several others I can think of (but can't recall names) who never made an impact wherever they went.

OL: Will Bryan was definitely a first choice. Jahaziel and Cooper were very late additions. Parker Braun, I remember was a strange recruiting story and it's hard to make out what really happened there - only he, his family, and the coaches know the true and complete story. Our most credible recruiting analyst on this sight (Eric) had said that the coaches weren't sure about Parker at first because of a size question (he seemed on the small side his junior year or something like that), but then we came around and offered him a little later and thank the good Lord he accepted. That would've been an all-time miss for GT if he hadn't. I don't remember Andrew Marshall's recruitment very well - he may have been a first choice. Shamire was definitely a first choice. Going back, I think I remember Shaq being a camp offer or something like that, so I wouldn't call that a first choice or late addition. Burden was a late addition.

BB: Mills was a first choice. All the others were late - Howard (seems like the eventual heir apparent), Benson, Quaide, Mason.

AB: Lynch was very late. Qua was early I think. JJ Green was early as was Jarrett and Gantt. Cottrell was a camp offer so not early nor late.

I've got to run. I'll try to come back and do defense unless somebody beats me to it (feel free, also feel free to improve the above data). But, from this, I don't think the early offer logic holds true (does the evidence point to the converse?). What conclusions do you all think can be reasonably drawn from this?

Yeah, I thought Damon Mitchell was a huge loss. Looked like the perfect QB on paper. Didn't last at quarterback at Arkansas. Almost immediately got moved to WR and then later to RB with paltry numbers. Just read he will finish up his eligibility at Rutgers. He was from NJ, so makes sense I guess. I would predict a Patrick Skov endiing.

 

[Jean-Baptiste Rochambeau]

I suspect that some of the ones that went elsewhere and bombed out might have been really good players in the TO and CPJ knew it. Instead they went to a traditional offense and weren't good enough to make the cut.

Well you know a lot when you are 17 or 18, and your dad, and Uncle Bill are telling you that that you are a first round draft pick.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

Kids blow up their senior year and some digress for various reasons. Like CPJ is fond of saying: "They all look good in shorts". I read an article years ago in Parade magazine. They looked back on their All American list five years later. For every one that went to the NFL, there were many that never played a down, didn't start, or a had a mediocre career. These were all can't miss types.

 

[lv20gt]

I really don't buy in to this "recruiting rankings mean nothing to us because of our offense". We still want largely the same thing from our running backs and WRs. At QB the skills we want are still highly valued by most schools. It may be that some want them for DB but they are still highly valued, and most of the dual threat QBs we'd love to have. OL is where the most difference is but even then what we want is still highly value at almost any place. A guy might be get a bump if he has a major weakness in pass blocking, but it's usually what negatives we can overlook that make the bigger difference rather than it being a whole set of different skills we're looking at. And the difference is often not nearly as big as people make it out to be.

It also goes back to people strawmanning against the star system. The star system isn't about declaring "can't miss" guys. It's something more akin to assigning probability of success. And it's true that the higher star recruits have a higher probability of making all american teams/making the NFL/making the pro-bowl, etc etc. It's just the sheer numbers of lower rated guys that make the raw numbers look misleading.

Also, does anyone think that if we went from 2.8 average stars, or whatever our average star rating is since Johnson has been here, to 3.8 over the next 10 year that we wouldn't see a higher average win rate? The next time we get a 4 star player is anyone going to post that star ratings don't matter? At the end of the day this boils down to us trying to hype our higher rated recruits while also claiming most of the lower rate ones are diamonds in the rough. Just like every fanbase.

 

[strong90]

I suspect that some of the ones that went elsewhere and bombed out might have been really good players in the TO and CPJ knew it. Instead they went to a traditional offense and weren't good enough to make the cut.

Respectfully disagree. We have exceptional D1 athletes. If they didn't cut it at State U, they likely wouldn't make it here either. We offer lots of kids who don't pan out. So does everyone else.

 

[cuttysark]

I remember that several of our last or late additions to the class have really done well: Adam Gotsis; Zach Laskey; Clinton Lynch; and Brad Stewart come to mind.

 

[northgajacket]

Just because you don't hear about them until they commit, does not mean they aren't high up on the board.

Stewart was definitely a late addition but that was because at the time we were full on receivers.

That and Stewart was not really on anyone's radar. He was committed to Yale before signing with Tech.

 

[cuttysark]

Stewart also has the longest thread of any post on GT Swarm.

 

[vamosjackets]

I think the baseline conclusion that you draw from this is that recruiting is difficult and predicting performance of 18 year olds three years down the road very challenging. With that said, playing "opposite George" (sorry for the Seinfeld reference) is probably not a good strategy. If we follow your well written post to its logical conclusion, as recruiters we would rank our prospective players and then intentionally offer the ones at the bottom of the list first. I am not sure how much deliberate "gamesmanship" or "strategery" goes into signing recruiting classes, but I wouldn't put it past our team to intentionally hold off on a recruit to avoid tipping off the factories, who seem to poach us with regularity.

I am pretty sure Calvin Johnson was an early target. Cherry picking I know, but I am sure there are a BUNCH of top of the list players who did well here.

Bottom line: your research seems to indicate we are good at finding diamonds in the rough.

The main conclusion I want to jump to is that you have a higher hit rate with guys who are offered based on their senior year rather than their previous years. This makes sense to me deductively as well as seeing it inductively.

I'm not saying to stop offering guys early - that would be foolish. At the moment I can't think of anything that we should actually change if my conclusion is true. Again, just an interesting observation.

 

[vamosjackets]

I really don't buy in to this "recruiting rankings mean nothing to us because of our offense". We still want largely the same thing from our running backs and WRs. At QB the skills we want are still highly valued by most schools. It may be that some want them for DB but they are still highly valued, and most of the dual threat QBs we'd love to have. OL is where the most difference is but even then what we want is still highly value at almost any place. A guy might be get a bump if he has a major weakness in pass blocking, but it's usually what negatives we can overlook that make the bigger difference rather than it being a whole set of different skills we're looking at. And the difference is often not nearly as big as people make it out to be.

It also goes back to people strawmanning against the star system. The star system isn't about declaring "can't miss" guys. It's something more akin to assigning probability of success. And it's true that the higher star recruits have a higher probability of making all american teams/making the NFL/making the pro-bowl, etc etc. It's just the sheer numbers of lower rated guys that make the raw numbers look misleading.

Also, does anyone think that if we went from 2.8 average stars, or whatever our average star rating is since Johnson has been here, to 3.8 over the next 10 year that we wouldn't see a higher average win rate? The next time we get a 4 star player is anyone going to post that star ratings don't matter? At the end of the day this boils down to us trying to hype our higher rated recruits while also claiming most of the lower rate ones are diamonds in the rough. Just like every fanbase.

That's not what I'm trying to do or say. I don't think recruiting rankings mean nothing to us. I think they mean a little less for our offense mainly because of the QB and OL and to a lesser degree AB position. They would be pretty much the same on WR and BB and the whole defense. And, I'm totally with you on viewing them as a probability of success. I also agree that in general if we had a higher recruiting average it would likely lead to higher win rate.

What I would say to nuance this to our particular situation is that it is unlikely that we can get to the recruiting rankings of factories (not saying we can't be better than we are). All I am saying is that while we are recruiting on the level that we are - mostly 3* with a few 4*'s mixed in - that the guys that we offer and get late (because of senior year evaluation) are more likely to be a hit than guys that we offer earlier in the process (based on younger performances). If we see them compete in camp, that may also be a higher hit rate, but I haven't tried to compile any data on that. I also admit that this is probably still too little data to be certain of the conclusion. It's just a conjecture at this point.

 

[Techster]

CPJ is offering the same 4/5 star guys most factories are offering.

Cam Akers...5 star athlete that ended up at FSU as a RB? We offered early.
DeShaun Watson...5 Star DT QB, went to Clemson, 1st Round NFL pick. We offered early.
Justin Fields...5 star DT QB, this recruiting class. We offered last year.
Michael Barrett...4 Star QB/Ath, this recruiting class. We offered last year.

I could go on and on. All these guys, and others, were offered early...but I think the staff knew they weren't getting them so they moved on. So do you say the guys that we actually signed after we offered those type of players listed above are really our 1st choices or top choices? Our staff offers the same elite guys (not all but a good portion of them) that everyone else does. Obviously, more times than not they do not end up at GT. I think we kid ourselves if we think our staff is getting our top choices. Now, if you said top "realistic" choices? Probably....but I think given a choice between a guy like Deshaun Watson/Jameis Winston (GT was his first offer)/Justin Fields or the guys we ended up with in those classes, I think the staff would have picked the higher rated guys.

 

[Coloradojacket]

So to add
A kid playing in high school playing against 95% of kids who will never play College ball, how do you rate that.
A kid who plays say like here in Colorado, where football ends in mid November because of snow, is no comparison to a kid who plays in Georgia. FYI, there is no football here in Colorado. My son plays high school, trust me.
An 18 year old kid, or 19 as most Seniors in High School are these days, may be done growing or was full grown in the 9th grade. Another may come to college, grow 3 more inches and 35 lbs.
A kid, who is told they are headed for the pro's when they are 16 and the kid who just wants the chance and puts in 150% of the effort. That is why there are lots of 2 stars that play in the super bowl.
A kid who runs a 4.4 40 may look good, but he doesn't have football skills.

I could go on and on.