The
Sunday Morning Quarterback blog has an article on recruiting rankings vs on field results...
Sign Me Up, Tear Me Down: Recruiting Rankings and On-Field Success
Quote:
By SMQ
Posted on Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 04:01:04 PM EDT
The relationship of recruiting and success may be self-evident enough to fall under the heading of “duh studies,” but we are approaching the peak not only of heavy breathing over collections of teenage talent, but also relentless mocking of said breathing, and of the big-business attempts to sate ever-growing recruiting lust with very official, inscrutably-reasoned rankings of that talent. Newspapers will anecdotally trash the system in one-sentence (and occasionally one-word) paragraphs on Signing Day, more or less mirroring the Wizard of Odds’ rhetorical smack before last year’s rankings were released: “snake oil salesmen have more credibility.”
contd...
|
Rivals Rankings:
Winning % against BCS schools:
Underachievers - Records vs equal or higher ranked opponents:
Overachievers - Records vs equal or higher ranked opponents:
Over/Underachievers by conference:
Quote:
|
Not many teams were ranked appreciably higher than Ohio State, and the Buckeyes have played almost none of them. Behind OSU and Michigan, the rest of the Big Ten was ranked in the middle of the pack: Iowa, Illinois, Michigan State, Purdue and Wisconsin occupied spots 39, 40, 42, 43 and 45 in the aggregate rankings. The winners of that group (Wisconsin and Iowa) are therefore “overachievers” in the long haul while facing very few teams that were thought to have superior talent.
|