The following condensed recruiting rankings were provided to BlueandGold.com by John Romanelli, M.D., graduate of Notre Dame’s Class of 1991. They will continue to serve as BlueandGold.com’s team rankings in an added feature on the home page.
The driving force behind the creation of these rankings was that there was a perception of bias by some recruiting services against Notre Dame. Dr. John Romanelli was unconvinced of the bias, and that appears to be proven as accurate according to this analysis.
Also, the star system seems rather arbitrary - who determines how many stars a player is assigned on Rivals or Scout? Who determines, “there should be 29 5-star players (or whatever the number may be in a given year)?” Does that mean that there is a clear drop-off between no.’s 29 and 30?
So, he came up with what could be a more logical way to do this by dividing players into quartiles: the top 25 get five points, the next 25 (26-50) get four points, the next 25 (51-75) get three points, and the last quartile gets two points assigned to them. For rankings that go above 100 (Rivals 250, ESPN 150, Tom Lemming's 225 to watch, etc), those players will receive one point above 100.
In order to effectively eliminate bias, Dr. Romanelli used as many sources as he could find with published rankings: ESPN Top 150, Scout Top 100, Rivals Top 100/250, Lemming's list to watch. This list will also get updated as new rankings come out. Tom Lemming will have a top 100 in July.
In addition, the USA Today will come out with a first-team (approx 25 guys = five points) and a second-team (four points each) All-American groups. The Army All-American team and ESPN All-American team names about 75 players each, and he will assign two points each for that honor. These will be added when they come out during the year. Parade adds an All-American list in January with 58 names - they get two points for this.
At any rate, looking at the "average points per player" tells you how highly each team's recruits are ranked. USC may not have that many commitments (seven ranked players), but look how high the players are ranked; same with Clemson, although they are not expected to sustain that level of recruiting.
For a player to land in the database, they have to be listed on one of the above lists. Only the number of players who are ranked are listed for each team below.
Here are the current rankings – as of this morning with the Johnson commitment - number of points, and number of recruits that made at least one of the lists:
# College Pts Players: Ranked/Total Avg/Player
1 Oklahoma 82 9/15 9.11
2 Ohio State 76 8/9 9.50
3 Notre Dame 75 15/17 5.00
4 Texas 74 14/20 5.29
5 Georgia 69 12/16 5.75
6 USC 54 7/8 7.71
7 UCLA 51 14/21 3.64
8 Florida State 50 7/12 7.14
9 Clemson 37 5/11 7.40
10 Michigan 34 7/8 4.86
10 Nebraska 34 7/10 4.86
My comments:
1. Looks to me like Oklahoma, Ohio State, USC and Florida State are kicking ass in recruiting this year.
2. Notre dame, Texas, and Georgia are getting numbers but they are second tier players.
3. I can't continue to republish copyrighted stuff. Please subscribe to blueandgold.com if you are an Irish fan.
The driving force behind the creation of these rankings was that there was a perception of bias by some recruiting services against Notre Dame. Dr. John Romanelli was unconvinced of the bias, and that appears to be proven as accurate according to this analysis.
Also, the star system seems rather arbitrary - who determines how many stars a player is assigned on Rivals or Scout? Who determines, “there should be 29 5-star players (or whatever the number may be in a given year)?” Does that mean that there is a clear drop-off between no.’s 29 and 30?
So, he came up with what could be a more logical way to do this by dividing players into quartiles: the top 25 get five points, the next 25 (26-50) get four points, the next 25 (51-75) get three points, and the last quartile gets two points assigned to them. For rankings that go above 100 (Rivals 250, ESPN 150, Tom Lemming's 225 to watch, etc), those players will receive one point above 100.
In order to effectively eliminate bias, Dr. Romanelli used as many sources as he could find with published rankings: ESPN Top 150, Scout Top 100, Rivals Top 100/250, Lemming's list to watch. This list will also get updated as new rankings come out. Tom Lemming will have a top 100 in July.
In addition, the USA Today will come out with a first-team (approx 25 guys = five points) and a second-team (four points each) All-American groups. The Army All-American team and ESPN All-American team names about 75 players each, and he will assign two points each for that honor. These will be added when they come out during the year. Parade adds an All-American list in January with 58 names - they get two points for this.
At any rate, looking at the "average points per player" tells you how highly each team's recruits are ranked. USC may not have that many commitments (seven ranked players), but look how high the players are ranked; same with Clemson, although they are not expected to sustain that level of recruiting.
For a player to land in the database, they have to be listed on one of the above lists. Only the number of players who are ranked are listed for each team below.
Here are the current rankings – as of this morning with the Johnson commitment - number of points, and number of recruits that made at least one of the lists:
# College Pts Players: Ranked/Total Avg/Player
1 Oklahoma 82 9/15 9.11
2 Ohio State 76 8/9 9.50
3 Notre Dame 75 15/17 5.00
4 Texas 74 14/20 5.29
5 Georgia 69 12/16 5.75
6 USC 54 7/8 7.71
7 UCLA 51 14/21 3.64
8 Florida State 50 7/12 7.14
9 Clemson 37 5/11 7.40
10 Michigan 34 7/8 4.86
10 Nebraska 34 7/10 4.86
My comments:
1. Looks to me like Oklahoma, Ohio State, USC and Florida State are kicking ass in recruiting this year.
2. Notre dame, Texas, and Georgia are getting numbers but they are second tier players.
3. I can't continue to republish copyrighted stuff. Please subscribe to blueandgold.com if you are an Irish fan.
