What method is more effective?

#51
#51
I think a lot of Tennessee fans dont like Butch's recruiting tactics b/c UT hasn't been accustomed to competing and recruiting at a high level in a long time (7-8) years. When in reality all the major schools do it. Some UT fans need to get used to it b/c these recruiting tactics arent changing as long as UT is recruiting at an elite level. To touch base on in-state recruiting, it's not building a fence around the state for all players, its an expression for the elite talent in the state. This year isn't a great year for in-state prospects, so I don't get the people that get all worked up when an in-state player commits somewhere else. Butch and crew knows what they are doing...
 
#52
#52
Darth_Shiveman said:
What evidence do you have that get guys like Thomas, wolf, Hall, Kendrick late in the process though?
Click to expand...

The list of Dobbs, Williams, Roberson, wiesman, ect proves that guys will flip to us late

After we have had the benefit of seeing how their senior year has progressed and it's obvious that this practice is a lot more success with less misses
 
Last edited:
#53
#53
Darth_Shiveman said:
I wouldn't completely throw out ESPN's recruiting analyses just because they're unpopular around here. They have just as many hits and misses as the rest of the sites. Also, I think a later date might be better. Bruin is arguing that senior film should be seen for a complete evaluation, so why not pick a date closer to the end of the HS football season?

Other than that, I'd be interested to see this as well.
Click to expand...

He can pick whatever criteria he wants to see, but I flat out deny 2013 proves what can and can't be done. We have zero clue how that class would have looked had Butch recruited them over a full year.
 
#54
#54
Dust10 said:
He can pick whatever criteria he wants to see, but I flat out deny 2013 proves what can and can't be done. We have zero clue how that class would have looked had Butch recruited them over a full year.
Click to expand...

Especially since some of those guys were committed to Butch at Cincy and many others they had been actively pursuing for quite some time to come be a part of their class at Cincy.

But without the 2013 class his argument kind of falls apart, so...
 
#55
#55
Darth_Shiveman said:
Especially since some of those guys were committed to Butch at Cincy and many others they had been actively pursuing for quite some time to come be a part of their class at Cincy.

But without the 2013 class his argument kind of falls apart, so...
Click to expand...

Acually the argument is even stronger

Smith and Kendrick were both dd commits so I need to remove them

Also Johnson, bransiel, and brown would be removed.

That makes the success rate even worse
 
#56
#56
BruinVol said:
Option 1 has yielded.


Players:
Smith
Kendrick
Hall
Mosely was flipped fairly early in the process
Wolf/thomas fit here for some although scout rated them highly


Raulerson
Blanc
Creamer
Oliver
Bryant
Kid from knoxville that is a Mtsu

And 7-10 kids that were ask to look around


That's approximately 6/22 in the success rate.
Click to expand...

Needed to edit this because a few are DD commits

Hall and mosely are the clear cut successes of early commits even though Moseley was flipped


Wolf and Thomas are debatable but I will include them

That's 4/16 or 25% success rate
 
Last edited:
#57
#57
BruinVol said:
Option 2 has yielded

Players:
Dobbs
Mosely(we did flip him but he did commit fairly early in the process)
Foreman
Mixon
Bynum
Wiesman
Roberson
Vickers
Williams
Bransiel


All kids that have contributed at a high rate

These kids didn't help.


Johnson
Jenkins
Brown
Click to expand...


If we remove the 2013 class this list shows a success rate of 4/4 or 100%


My math says 25% is nowhere close to as good as 100%
 
#58
#58
BruinVol said:
Acually the argument is even stronger

Smith and Kendrick were both dd commits so I need to remove them

Also Johnson, bransiel, and brown would be removed.

That makes the success rate even worse
Click to expand...

BruinVol said:
To edit this because a few are DD commits

Hall and mosely are the clear cut successes is early commits even thoughtlessly was flipped


Wolf and Thomas are debatable but I will include them

That's 4/16 or 25% success rate
Click to expand...
It also makes your counterpoint method consist of:

Robertson.



Not exactly an adequate sample size. Sure, you can say it's a 100% success rate, but I'd argue that 4>1.

edit: 2/2 of two counting williams.
 
#60
#60
BruinVol said:
If we remove the 2013 class this list shows a success rate of 4/4 or 100%


My math says 25% is nowhere close to as good as 100%
Click to expand...

Are we still talking about flips, because we've already established that Mixon was not a flip and Moseley hardly counts since september is not "late in the process"
 
#61
#61
Darth_Shiveman said:
Are we still talking about flips, because we've already established that Mixon was not a flip and Moseley hardly counts since september is not "late in the process"
Click to expand...

Those weren't included . In fact I used mosely on the your side in option 1


Hall is the only single recruit that fits my criteria for being a success. 1/13 for me.

I added Moseley wolf and Thomas's just for you. Still only 25%
 
Last edited:
#62
#62
Here is the amount of work I'm willing to put in on this topic. Using Rivals 3 star rankings only for classes 2014 and 2015. Category 1: committed before November 1. Category 2: committed post November 1. Then I think we can break each player down in 3 ways 1) obvious success 2) obvious bust and 3) undetermined.

Category 1:

Obvious Success: Coleman Thomas, Ethan Wolf, Chance Hall, Emmanuel Moseley, Aaron Medley

Obvious Bust: Kyle Oliver, Treyvon Paulk

Undetermined: Gavin Bryant, Neiko Creamer, Ray Raulerson, Micah Abernathy, Stephen Griffin, Riley Lovingood, Darrell Miller, Quay Picou, Austin Smith, and Tommy Townsend

Category 2:

Obvious Success: Jashon Roberton, Owen Williams

Obvious Bust: N/A

Undetermined: Elliot Berry, Jakob Johnson, Charles Mosley, and John Kelly.
 
#63
#63
BruinVol said:
Those weren't included . In fact I used mosely on the your side of option 1


Hall is the only single recruit that fits my criteria for being a success. 1/13 for me.

I added Moseley wolf and Thomas's just for you. Still only 25%
Click to expand...

You're still leaving off Austin Smith and Stephen Griffin.

So by my math that gives option one a total of 8 good contributors brought in and option two a total of 2 brought in. So basically, option one has brought in 4X the raw number of contributors.

Also, this is all completely disregarding the fact that recruiting does not happen in a vacuum and the number of lowly ranked players who will delay commitment until late of flip late in the process will remain sufficient every year.
 
#64
#64
There's not only one way. Recruiting is about relationships and how they need to be nurtured should be customized to the recruit and/or his family.

I think every team has a recruiting board that needs to be pretty realistic with options A, B, C and D. A commitment is non-binding and I think a lot of fringe players commit early to get a spot and then hang on. The 5 star guys don't have to commit early and unless they are just worn down from the process, they're always going to have a spot on signing day. Evaluation of talent and relationship building are important skills to have on a staff. This early commitment stuff really started with JoePa back in the 90's. It was typical to have more drama on NSD with way more flipping, surprise silent commitments, etc. than there seems to be today. A lot of that has to do with the rules that have been put in place to protect the kids and keep coaches from camping out in their driveway.

Your D option may commit in August and get recruited over in January when an A guy makes a decision or dominoes start falling with other teams and revisions to boards.
 
Last edited:
#65
#65
Darth_Shiveman said:
You're still leaving off Austin Smith and Stephen Griffin.

So by my math that gives option one a total of 8 good contributors brought in and option two a total of 2 brought in. So basically, option one has brought in 4X the raw number of contributors.

Also, this is all completely disregarding the fact that recruiting does not happen in a vacuum and the number of lowly ranked players who will delay commitment until late of flip late in the process will remain sufficient every year.
Click to expand...

Smith and Griffith both had elite power 5 offers


Darth,

It's simple we use option 1 much more than we do option 2.

Option 1 has had a much less success rate than option 2.


We can debate how much the difference is but there is no arguing which one has had a better rate of success
 
#66
#66
I think a recruit who really likes TN would be willing to wait till Oct/Nov before making a final decision. Still have 2-2.5 months till NSD. They would learn over time how UT recruits and if UT was not filling up with borderline SEC talent in June then those recruits would not be so worried about securing a spot. 2017 looks to be starting off with UT being very selective and waiting to do more evaluation. Hopefully that holds up long term.
 
#67
#67
BruinVol said:
Smith and Griffith both has elite power 5 offers


Darth,

It's simple we use option 1 much more than we do option 2.

Option 1 has had a much less success rate than option 2.


We can debate how much the difference is but there is no arguing which one has had a better rate of success
Click to expand...
lol

"hey, remember that basketball game where we won on a last second full court shot?"

"yeah..."

"well, we only shot 30% on three pointers that night..."

"what's your point?"

"we have a much better success rate on full court shots! we should stop shooting threes!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#68
#68
Dust10 said:
Here is the amount of work I'm willing to put in on this topic. Using Rivals 3 star rankings only for classes 2014 and 2015. Category 1: committed before November 1. Category 2: committed post November 1. Then I think we can break each player down in 3 ways 1) obvious success 2) obvious bust and 3) undetermined.

Category 1:

Obvious Success: Coleman Thomas, Ethan Wolf, Chance Hall, Emmanuel Moseley, Aaron Medley

Obvious Bust: Kyle Oliver, Treyvon Paulk

Undetermined: Gavin Bryant, Neiko Creamer, Ray Raulerson, Micah Abernathy, Stephen Griffin, Riley Lovingood, Darrell Miller, Quay Picou, Austin Smith, and Tommy Townsend

Category 2:

Obvious Success: Jashon Roberton, Owen Williams

Obvious Bust: N/A

Undetermined: Elliot Berry, Jakob Johnson, Charles Mosley, and John Kelly.
Click to expand...


Abernathy
Charles mosely
Kelly

Were all too heavily recruited to fit the fringy mold.


I can't include a kicker in any of this as well. They belong in their own class
 
Last edited:
#69
#69
Darth_Shiveman said:
lol

"hey, remember that basketball game where we won on a last second full court shot?"

"yeah..."

"well, we only shot 30% on three pointers that night..."

"what's your point?"

"we have a much better success rate on full court shots! we should stop shooting threes!"
Click to expand...


The point is easy


Be patient in recruiting because fringy kids we have committed late have been much more successful than the same kind of kid we jumped on early.

This method will give us more yield on our scholarships and also avoid any bad PR that might effect us negatively when recruiting elite prospects down the road
 
#70
#70
BruinVol said:
Abernathy
Charles mosely
Kelly

Were all too heavily recruited to for the fringy mold.


I can't include a kicker in any of this as well. They belong in their own class
Click to expand...

Your ways are too subjective to be taken seriously then. At least the way I suggested is completely objective (Rivals 3 star). Exclude the kickers if you want, they never go above a 3 star.
 
#71
#71
Dust10 said:
Your ways are too subjective to be taken seriously then. At least the way I suggested is completely objective (Rivals 3 star). Exclude the kickers if you want, they never go above a 3 star.
Click to expand...

You used rivals?


Again I said 3 star across the board and kids that didn't have elite power 5 offers. Those seem to be the kids we all question around here and they end up being asked to look around at a high rate


That weeds it down pretty far and is more accurate

Jmo
 
Last edited:
#72
#72
BruinVol said:
You used rivals?


Again I said 3 star across the board and kids that didn't have elite power 5 offers.


That weeds it down pretty far and is more accurate

Jmo
Click to expand...

Yes, I said up front I was using Rivals and unwilling to put in more work than that. Maybe someone else is willing to find all the 3 stars across the board.
 
#73
#73
Dust10 said:
Yes, I said up front I was using Rivals and unwilling to put in more work than that. Maybe someone else is willing to find all the 3 stars across the board.
Click to expand...

I am sorry I missed that part.


Even using rivals it's pretty clear where this is heading with which option has a higher rate of success
 
#74
#74
BruinVol said:
The point is easy


Be patient in recruiting because fringy kids we have committed late have been much more successful than the same kind of kid we jumped on early.

This method will give us more yield on our scholarships and also avoid any bad PR that might effect us negatively when recruiting elite prospects down the road
Click to expand...

Counterpoints:

Our only reliable TE the last two years ends up at Bama.

2 of our key OL recruits enroll early at schools that didn't slow play them.

We're 2 men deep at CB after Michael Williams is thrown off the team in 2014

A large number of special teams contributors and players in the two deep of the best team we've had in a decade never enroll.
 
#75
#75
BruinVol said:
I am sorry I missed that part.


Even using rivals it's pretty clear where this is heading with which option has a higher rate of success
Click to expand...

You're assuming that it's impossible for the approach with a lower rate of success to be a more effective overall approach to building a roster.

That's very debatable.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top