No one listens to what I am about to say. I say it so much that it actually bores me, so I can only imagine what you guys feel reading it.
Bottom line: Simply averaging recruiting talent classes over four years and ranking then based on this average can predict the outcome over a season for a team between 60-70% of the time.
For BCS title games this method predicts the outcome about 87% of the time since 2005. 2005 isn't an arbitrary number, it is the first year that one can produce data for a four year average starting at 2002, which is as far back as I can get rivals data. The only year that it didn't predict the outcome was 2005. Texas should have lost to USC.
Using this formula and only predicting based on talent, UT goes 7-5 (possibly 8-4 as there is a game on the schedule against a team with an identical 4 year recruiting average as UT, so it is a wash if I stick to my system).
What is even more interesting is what accounts for the other 30-40% of the teams who fall more than 1 game above (or below) their predicted outcome. You begin to find coaches like Petrino, Spurrier, Kiff, Dooley and Jones. Yes, our Butch Jones.
What I mean is that Petrino, Spurrier and Jones have a definite history of getting more out of their talent than other coaches. Dooley and Kiff are both under performers at a rate of several games a year.
In fact, if you look at Jones' history at Cincy, you find that he over performed every year besides his first year. Jones over performed by an average of about 3 games a year. His first year, where he only won 4 games, was exactly what his recruiting average would have predicted. He did that by beating two teams he should not have beaten, and losing to two teams he should not have lost to.
I don't expect to see Jones over perform his first year, but I do expect he meets the 7-5 mark.
