Friday’s question about coaching or talent may be answered by combining today’s data about the draft and more data about recruiting rankings from 2022-2023. For example, Iowa just had seven players selected—how were those players ranked when they signed?
Rephrasing the question: development or recruiting? I’d bet Nebraska’s classes in 2022-23 were ranked higher than Iowa’s, but far fewer of those players were drafted. Either Nebraska is signing the wrong four-stars, or they are failing to help those players maximize their potential.
Rhule told Hurrdat last week that it takes money to compete with Ohio State and Texas for players. I think long-term success entails competing with Iowa first: coach like the Hawkeyes and Gophers, then recruit like the Ducks and Buckeyes.
One of my long-term projects if I can get the data all scraped together is to get a decent 5-year (or more) sample of recruiting rankings, grab the corresponding all-conference lists for those years and then fold in the draft data. Ideally, I'd like to know the probability that a player with a 247 recruiting ranking of 0.877 (or whatever) becomes an all-conference player and/or a draft pick. That might get us closer to narrowing in on development as you could then have expected all-conference/draft totals for any roster based off the recruiting rankings and compare the actual output.
And I strongly agree with your Iowa sentiment. Based on the Draft Points approach, Iowa would've gotten 9 points. Nebraska last hit that number in the 2011 draft, also with 7 picks (Amukamara, Helu, Henery, Gomes, Paul, Williams, Hagg).
The curbs look about like I expected. I'm curious how much it could change if the first class after a coach left counted for that coach at least before the portal. also, as a subscriber I expect you to put me in the prose.
The numbers in the story do include the class after a coach's end of tenure, so Solich's final draft class was 2004, for example. But if you meant give the preceding coach credit for two classes after departure--and I can see the logic in that--the DPAs change as such:
Not much change to the first three, but adding another class after departure does change the look some for Callahan (worse), Pelini (better) and Riley (way worse).
Friday’s question about coaching or talent may be answered by combining today’s data about the draft and more data about recruiting rankings from 2022-2023. For example, Iowa just had seven players selected—how were those players ranked when they signed?
Rephrasing the question: development or recruiting? I’d bet Nebraska’s classes in 2022-23 were ranked higher than Iowa’s, but far fewer of those players were drafted. Either Nebraska is signing the wrong four-stars, or they are failing to help those players maximize their potential.
Rhule told Hurrdat last week that it takes money to compete with Ohio State and Texas for players. I think long-term success entails competing with Iowa first: coach like the Hawkeyes and Gophers, then recruit like the Ducks and Buckeyes.
One of my long-term projects if I can get the data all scraped together is to get a decent 5-year (or more) sample of recruiting rankings, grab the corresponding all-conference lists for those years and then fold in the draft data. Ideally, I'd like to know the probability that a player with a 247 recruiting ranking of 0.877 (or whatever) becomes an all-conference player and/or a draft pick. That might get us closer to narrowing in on development as you could then have expected all-conference/draft totals for any roster based off the recruiting rankings and compare the actual output.
And I strongly agree with your Iowa sentiment. Based on the Draft Points approach, Iowa would've gotten 9 points. Nebraska last hit that number in the 2011 draft, also with 7 picks (Amukamara, Helu, Henery, Gomes, Paul, Williams, Hagg).
The curbs look about like I expected. I'm curious how much it could change if the first class after a coach left counted for that coach at least before the portal. also, as a subscriber I expect you to put me in the prose.
The numbers in the story do include the class after a coach's end of tenure, so Solich's final draft class was 2004, for example. But if you meant give the preceding coach credit for two classes after departure--and I can see the logic in that--the DPAs change as such:
Devaney: 8.7 | Osborne: 10.2 | Solich: 6.5 | Callahan: 4.8 | Pelini: 5.3 | Riley: 0.7 | Frost: 2.2 | Rhule: 1.5 (two years)
Not much change to the first three, but adding another class after departure does change the look some for Callahan (worse), Pelini (better) and Riley (way worse).
thank you! that is more how I picture the coaches in comparison with each other, especially Bellini to Riley