- Please no inappropriate usernames (remember that there may be youngsters in the room)
- Personal attacks on other community members are unacceptable, practice the good manners your mama taught you when engaging with fellow Dawg fans
- Use common sense and respect personal differences in the community: sexual and other inappropriate language or imagery, political rants and belittling the opinions of others will get your posts deleted and result in warnings and/ or banning from the forum
- 3/17/19 UPDATE -- We've updated the permissions for our "Football" and "Commit to the G" recruiting message boards. We aim to be the best free board out there and that has not changed. We do now ask that all of you good people register as a member of our forum in order to see the sugar that is falling from our skies, so to speak.
2018 Blue-Chip Ratio
tfk_fanboy
✭✭✭✭✭ Graduate
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/8/22/17606048/blue-chip-ratio-2018
College football kicks off in one week. But the national champion was likely decided between 28 and 184 weeks earlier, on National Signing Day over the last four years.
Because there is a certain baseline of talent required to win the title.
I track this using my Blue-Chip Ratio statistic. Put simply, teams who win the title sign more four- and five-star recruits than two- and three-stars over the previous four signing classes.
This has been true for about as far back as modern recruiting rankings can be tracked.
It’s easy to think of the stat as the percentage of four- and five-stars signed by a team, out of total signees. Generally, teams whose signees are less than 50 percent blue-chips over the previous four years can’t be considered national title contenders.
Before we look at 2018’s updated rankings, it’s worth it to add a disclaimer:
This metric is quite useful for determining which teams have signed elite talent. It is not the most useful for differentiating between bad and below average teams, or below average and average. Some teams simply do not have much of a shot of signing elite prospects and instead try to find diamonds in the rough. That’s a strategy that can produce wins and conference titles, though perhaps not Playoff rings.
I think coaching and development are extremely important in college football. But talent acquisition is by far the most important element when trying to compete for the sport’s biggest prize. By NCAA rule, coaches get just 20 hours per week with their players. Only so much development can be done.
This year, we have 13 teams in the club.
2018 Blue-Chip Ratio Teams
Team Blue-Chips
Alabama 77%
Ohio State 76%
USC 71%
Georgia 69%
Florida State 67%
LSU 63%
Auburn 62%
Clemson 61%
Michigan 57%
Texas 55%
Oklahoma 53%
Penn State 53%
Notre Dame 51%
Comments
"This is what I wrote about Georgia in last year’s Blue-Chip Ratio post:
Kirby Smart inherited a good Georgia roster from Mark Richt, but his first two classes are humming at 74 percent, while Richt’s final two were at 53. It’s not yet known if Smart can coach, but Georgia’s talent is being upgraded.
Turns out, Smart seems able to coach pretty well. And he signed the No. 1 class in the nation in 2018. His last two classes are right on par with those of Saban and Meyer."
"Miami, Texas A&M, Florida, and Washington could be next up.
If these schools finish out with strong 2019 classes, they could join the club, thanks to good signing work in the 2016-18 classes.
Miami is at 46 percent and has a poor 2015 class (23 percent) cycling off the books next year.
Texas A&M is at 44 percent and could sign a top-five 2019 class.
Florida is at 42 percent, and the poor 2015 class (24 percent) will be coming off the books. With a strong class this year, UF could get back above 50 percent.
Washington is at 40 percent and will have the poor 2015 class (21 percent) coming off the books.
I can’t see anyone else making the jump in the next year or two."
Do all recruits count? What data do you use for this?
All signees count. Transfers and walk-ons do not. Transfers are not governed by recruit rules, are not rated and, though they’re important to every team, are rarely consequential enough to turn a non-contender into a contender. Walk-ons are almost never rated. Sticking with signees helps to standardize the process.
I use the 247Sports Composite, which blends the three major recruiting rankings by 247Sports, Rivals, and ESPN. It formerly used Scout as well, but 247Sports bought Scout, and its rankings no longer exist.
I manually curate it each year because publishers of some of the team sites erroneously list walk-ons under enrollees or signees. Removing non-scholarship players is by far the most time consuming element. Also, older classes are fraught with errors. For data in this current decade, it has improved, but more than a handful of team site publishers still lump in zero-star walk-ons with the others.
I also do not remove signees who fail to qualify academically or who are denied admission due to off-field reasons, because it’s difficult to track, with so many signees on so many teams.
Otherwise, if the school used a Letter of Intent on them during or after Signing Day, they count.
I'm really surprised by USC tbh
Great topic. Insightful as can be. Eye opening.
So was I
LSU game away just got scarier to me
Agreed. I have said multiple times that is the game I have circled more than any other. And I am surprised how far behind Florida is in talent. I expected it to be closer
I love these kind of stat driven topics
Then perhaps you should (if you haven't already?) look up the Podcast "The Chapel Bell Curve" - it is an all things UGA Georgia Bulldogs football podcast based solely on stats, and stat driven topics by two UGA "nerdy" types.
never heard of but I def. will be looking into a few episodes. Thanks!
@tfk_fanboy for you sir http://www.chapelbellcurve.com/
just downloaded most recent episode. Will listen to after my afternoon meetings
This shows both important points about our roster when compared to Bama's.
1. We're close in numbers, but not quite there yet.
2. Our best talent ratio wise is less experienced than Bama's, they've simply had longer for their roster to mature.
We're 2 years away from where The Gumps are right now if we have great classes in 2019/2020, which we seem on track for.
Really like this post. Wonder if you saw any 2015 numbers that were very good that are coming off the books which could drop a 2018 team either close to or below 50%.
I'm looking at Michigan who could be bumped. Using 24/7, Harbaugh has 8 guys at 4/5 stars and 12 x 3* for 2019. His 2015 class was 6 x 4/5 star and 8 x 4/5 star. 2019 could get worse for Harbaugh if he underperforms. And if Chris Hinton decides to flip...
I don't believe any other team is in danger of dropping out.