Welcome Guest! Create an Account login email: password: remember me: BASKETBALLFOOTBALLMESSAGE BOARDCHATLINKS site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp Message Board BobcatAttack.com Message Board Ohio Football Recruiting Topic:  Recruiting rankings Topic:  Recruiting rankings Author Message L.C. General User Member Since: 8/31/2005 Location: United States Post Count: 10,470 Status: Offline     Recruiting rankings    Posted: 12/31/2018 5:40:45 PM  While I have commented before that the recruiting rankings aren't strongly correlated to on the field results, here is some historical data: Average Rating of players by 247Sports, Composite: 2010 78.48, 101.59 points, 12th in MAC 2011 74.46, 67.8 points, 6th in MAC 2012 78.13, 116.72 points, 5th in MAC 2013 77.17, 96.79 points, 10th in MAC 2014 76.52, 105.12 points, 6th in MAC 2015 78.10, 128.68 points, 5th in MAC 2016 77.88, 109.82 points, 8th in MAC 2017 78.81, 120.83 points, 8th in MAC 2018 78.63, 110.84 points, 10th in MAC 2019 81.08, 142.11 points, 4th in MAC Another measure that I use sometimes, because it isn't subject to grade inflation is the average number of other offers that players had: 2010 .91 2011 2.62 2012 2.64 2013 2.17 2014 2.28 2015 2.31 2016 3.18 2017 4.95 2018 2.65 2019 5.31 By either measure, this was an outstanding class, the best one yet. Note that some classes look better on paper than they end up being, such as 2015, which had several players not end up being eligible. “We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus Back to Top bobcatgrad General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Nagoya, Japan Post Count: 313 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/1/2019 1:14:57 AM  Very interesting. Thanks for compiling that data. Back to Top L.C. General User Member Since: 8/31/2005 Location: United States Post Count: 10,470 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/1/2019 11:24:48 AM  Whether you are an optimist or a pessimist, this data can be spun to fit your view of the world. Which of these is the correct interpretation, or are all of them correct? Or, is something else the real story? 1. Solich's greatest failing is in recruiting, and his classes are normally middle to bottom of the MAC. 2. Athens has been difficult to recruit to, so it has taken a far longer time that you would expect to get recruiting to improve 3. Solich has built a reputation for treating players well, and fairly, and coaching them up, but also seeing that they get an education, and as a result, recruiting has slowly improved. 3. Starting with the opening of the IPF, recruiting began to improve. 4. The IPF didn't make that much difference in recruiting. 5. Starting with the announcement of the Academic Center, recruiting began to improve. 6. This was a good class, but long term, the Academic Center will have little impact on recruiting. 7. Despite working with bottom half of the MAC quality recruits, Solich was a good enough coach to compete for the top of the MAC. 8. Solich is a better judge of recruits than the recruiting services, so, even though the classes were rated poorly, they actually were good, which is why Ohio was able to compete for the top of the MAC. 9. While Ohio wasn't able to win a MACC with bottom of the MAC talent, if they continue recruiting at the level of this year, they surely will. 10. Even though this class was ranked a little better, it's still not the best in the MAC, so there is no MACC in Ohio's future. 11. Ohio's 2017 and 2019 classes are special, based on competitive offers, and they will lead Ohio to new highs. 12. This data is all irrelevant, and means nothing. It's only value is giving us something pointless to argue about in the off season. Happy New Year, everyone. ;) Last Edited: 1/1/2019 11:25:20 AM by L.C. “We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus Back to Top OhioCatFan General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 14,320 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/1/2019 11:29:44 AM  I liked 3 (both of them), 8, 9 and 11. The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA "It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right." Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org Back to Top oldkatz General User Member Since: 12/22/2004 Post Count: 1,431 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/1/2019 2:19:06 PM  You are indeed a great asset to BA, L.C. "All my inside sources tell me I have no inside sources." Salvatore "money bucks" Mafiosiano. Back to Top TWT General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Alexandria, VA Post Count: 5,090 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/2/2019 12:36:56 AM  From the fan perspective, I noticed a different level of athlete on the field around 2007-2008. It was independent of any trends in recruiting classes so I would attribute it to development, particularly the staff's reputation to develop lineman. While the staff might not have dominated the overall MAC rankings it has done a nice job compared to MAC competition with regard to in-state lineman recruiting. L.C. I would look at the offers of the lineman signed at Ohio compared to BG, Kent, Miami and Akron since 2005. The program was built on a consistent line edge and physical play. Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended 2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round 2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl 2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086 Back to Top Doc Bobcat General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Post Count: 4,242 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/2/2019 12:08:48 PM  Uncle Wes wrote: From the fan perspective, I noticed a different level of athlete on the field around 2007-2008. It was independent of any trends in recruiting classes so I would attribute it to development, particularly the staff's reputation to develop lineman. While the staff might not have dominated the overall MAC rankings it has done a nice job compared to MAC competition with regard to in-state lineman recruiting. L.C. I would look at the offers of the lineman signed at Ohio compared to BG, Kent, Miami and Akron since 2005. The program was built on a consistent line edge and physical play. Yeah I can remember recruiting classes of the late 90s where we would draft 6’6”-240 pound offensive tackles and hope they would “grow into” a decent OL. Back to Top BillyTheCat General User Member Since: 10/6/2012 Post Count: 9,946 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/2/2019 11:28:52 PM  Doc Bobcat wrote: Uncle Wes wrote: From the fan perspective, I noticed a different level of athlete on the field around 2007-2008. It was independent of any trends in recruiting classes so I would attribute it to development, particularly the staff's reputation to develop lineman. While the staff might not have dominated the overall MAC rankings it has done a nice job compared to MAC competition with regard to in-state lineman recruiting. L.C. I would look at the offers of the lineman signed at Ohio compared to BG, Kent, Miami and Akron since 2005. The program was built on a consistent line edge and physical play. Yeah I can remember recruiting classes of the late 90s where we would draft 6’6”-240 pound offensive tackles and hope they would “grow into” a decent OL. I’d like you to find me how many 6’6” OL types Jim Grobe ever signed!. And you do not “draft” players in college Back to Top L.C. General User Member Since: 8/31/2005 Location: United States Post Count: 10,470 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/3/2019 10:32:36 AM  As I pointed out in another thread, this group of offensive linemen is far lighter than recent classes. Excluding JUCO players: 2015: Pleasants, Grimes 305,319 avg=312 2016: Fernandez, Trotter, Notestine, Beadle 300,309,323,320, avg=313 2017: Tusha, Jackson, Meservy, Kitrell 305,285,280,280 avg=288 2018: Ramer, Danneker, Gilliland 300,315,305 avg=308 2019: Vannest, Ambergey, Atkinson, Oakes, Aronokhale 295,280,273,260,275 avg=277 It also averages about 1.5 inches shorter than recent classes(height in inches): 2015: Pleasants, Grimes 78,77 avg=77.5 2016: Fernandez, Trotter, Notestine, Beadle 76,77,76,77 avg=76.5 2017: Tusha, Jackson, Meservy, Kitrell 77,76,76,76 avg=76.25 2018: Ramer, Danneker, Gilliland 77,76,78 avg=77.0 2019: Vannest, Ambergey, Atkinson, Oakes, Aronokhale 77,77,75,74,75 avg=75.6 On the other hand, they are rated much higher 2015: Pleasants, Grimes .7815,.7631 avg=.7724 2016: Fernandez, Trotter, Notestine, Beadle .791,.804,.779,.760 avg=.784 2017: Tusha, Jackson, Meservy, Kitrell .803,.790,.753,.815 avg=.788 2018: Ramer, Danneker, Gilliland .790,.780,.780 avg=.783 2019: Vannest, Ambergey, Atkinson, Oakes, Aronokhale .793,.827,.84,.76,.831 avg=.810 And they had more other offers: 2015: Pleasants, Grimes 2,1 avg= 1.0 2016: Fernandez, Trotter, Notestine, Beadle 10,1,1,0 avg=3.0 2017: Tusha, Jackson, Meservy, Kitrell 9,4,0,4 avg=4.25 2018: Ramer, Danneker, Gilliland 2,2,0 avg=1.3 2019: Vannest, Ambergey, Atkinson, Oakes, Aronokhale 6,13,1,0,5 avg=5.0 What does it all mean? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ I guess it means we'll just have to wait and see how they actually play. “We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus Back to Top Casper71 General User Member Since: 12/1/2006 Post Count: 2,984 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/3/2019 9:43:32 PM  As always, great info from LC. My view is the same one I have had for quite a few years now. This staff has not been able to recruit enough good players and get them on the field at the same time to win a MACC in 14 years. I believe this was the year that could have been. Just a few more points and we beat UC, NIU and Miami. That would have made this a really really special year. Instead, it was one more good/very good one! Back to Top ytownbobcat General User Member Since: 8/7/2006 Post Count: 1,253 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/4/2019 1:06:03 AM  I assume the academic center is helping too. Back to Top L.C. General User Member Since: 8/31/2005 Location: United States Post Count: 10,470 Status: Offline     RE: Recruiting rankings    Posted: 1/4/2019 11:02:37 AM  Casper71 wrote: As always, great info from LC. My view is the same one I have had for quite a few years now. This staff has not been able to recruit enough good players and get them on the field at the same time to win a MACC in 14 years. I believe this was the year that could have been. Just a few more points and we beat UC, NIU and Miami. That would have made this a really really special year. Instead, it was one more good/very good one! This year, Casper, they did have the recruiting class you have long wanted. It's almost all 3-star players, and players with lots of other offers. So, now they showed it can be done, they need to repeat it next year, and the year after, and we can see the program continue to improve from here. “We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ― Epictetus Back to Top Showing Replies:   1 - 12  of 12 Posts Jump to Page:   1 View Other 'Ohio Football Recruiting' Topics                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               WHO'S ONLINE There are 399 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com 399 Guests 0 Registered Users There are no other users looking at this page.

Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties