A Recruiting Explanation for OSU Big Game Letdowns

[Buckeye86]

I pulled this from the Big Ten discussion thread, but I figured I put enough work into this that it warranted it's own thread.

Originally Posted by blueinfla

However, you could make a claim the Tressel is further down the list because he has the best talent in the conference and despite being able to win in a very down Big10 conference, what else has he done? He's been bringing in top 10 talent every year, but what does he have to show for it? One MNC with players he inherited? Two other MNC game appearances where his team forgot to show up? I don't agree with the list, but I, at least, can see where the author was coming from.

This arguement (made many times by various fans of other schools) has always tempted me to go back and look at the recruiting classes and analyze what exactly happened.

My hypothesis is that several years of recruiting classes not panning out (in particular the '03 class) really hurt Ohio State's depth, so while we had top end talent to dominate the Big Ten, there wasn't much behind it which became obvious when we played teams with equal top end talent and depth to boot. I am certain that this is the case, but I have never taken the time to actually break it down, so now I will.

disclaimer: my categories are super hazy and I am having a hard time putting people into the did not contribute categories who were injuried, but I don't really want to debate why people did or did not contribute, I just want to look at how many people in each class made solid contributions to the program, also, I am not going to count special teams contributions, I love guys like Shaun Lane to death for being true Buckeyes through and through, but you don't recruit people to come to Ohio State to play special teams


2002 Class (24)

Stars (5): Bobby Carpenter, A.J. Hawk, Santonio Holmes, Nick Mangold, Troy Smith

Solid Contributors(7): Doug Datish, TJ Downing, Quinn Pitcock, Nate Salley, Rob Sims, Tyler Everett, Brandon Mitchell

Contributors that didn't quite pan out (7): Roy Hall, Mike Kudla, Joel Penton, Jay Richardson, Tim Schafer, Stan White, Justin Zwick

Little or No Contributions (4): R.J. Coleman, Mike D'Andrea, Michael Roberts, E.J. Underwood

No Category (1): Clarett

I think it's pretty clear that the 2002 class carried the team for as long as they were on campus. What comes after is where the trouble starts.

2003 Class (15)

Stars (1): Anthony Gonzales

Solid Contributors (5): Donte Whitner, Ashton Youboty, Kirk Barton, Todd Boeckman, David Patterson

Little or No Contributions (9): Sian Cotton, Marcel Frost, Ira Guilford, Dareus Hiley, Louis Irizarry, Devin Jordan, Curt Lukens, Brandon Maupin, Reggie Smith

I think that the 2003 class really hurt us bad, in 2006 and 2007 this class would have been Juniors and Seniors. The amount of non contributors in this class clearly hurt our depth and experience when in came time to play in big games after the '02 class was gone.

2004 Class (24)

Stars (1): Ted Ginn

Solid Contributors (6): Marcus Freeman, Vernon Gholston, Rory Nicol, Antonio Pittman, Steve Rehring, A.J. Trapasso

Contributors that didn't quite pan out (5): Dionte Johnson, Ben Person, Brandon Smith, Curtis Terry, Nader Abdallah

Little or No Contributions (12): Alex Barrow, Albert Dukes, Eric Haw, Chad Hoobler, Dennis Kenedy, Shaun Lane, Devon Lyons, Kyle Mitchum, Nick Patterson, Jon Skinner, Brandon Underwood, Sirjo Welch

Another class that had an abnormally large number of non contributors.


2005 Class (18)

Stars (2): Malcolm Jenkins, James Laurinaitis

Solid Contributors (8): Alex Boone, Jim Cordle, Brian Hartline, Todd Denlinger, Brian Robiskie, Lawrence Wilson, Doug Worthington, Donald Washington

Contributors that didn't quite pan out (2): Jamario O'Neal, Maurice Wells

Little or No Contributions (3): Freddie Lennix, Rob Schoenhoft, Ryan Williams

Give them one more year (3): Austin Spitler, Andre Amos, Anderson Russel

In '05 we finally came out of our slump and started having more contributors than non contributors again, and it was this class that formed the core group that took us to four Big Ten championships but a 1-3 bowl record.

It is too early to judge a lot of the players in the classes beyond 2005, but I think it is pretty clear that you don't have to look much further than the 2003 and 2004 recruiting classes to understand Ohio State's troubles in big games recently. I would also say that the arguement that we bring in top ten talent every year is also shot down by an analysis of the 2003 and 2004 classes.

Luckily, we are breaking out of the void that the '03 and '04 classes left on our depth chart and things are only going to get better. And by the way, only at a place like Ohio State can you say that things are only going to get better after going 33-6 in the past three season. It's great to be a Buckeye!

[stxbuck]

The 03'/04' classes certainly hurt us, especially at DT,TE, and, most importantly,OL. I don't know what he changed, exactly, but it seems that Tressel began to improve his recruiting, starting w/ the 05' class, which basically covered a lot of holes of the previous 2 classes at WR and OL.

[RB07OSU]

Good points, though I would consider Gholston and Whitner stars...both were top 15 picks (top ten?...Whitner at #9?) and had great production their final year. To simplify this even further, I think our DT recruiting hurt us the worst, with OL recruiting taking a close second. All the games we got thumped in (Florida, LSU, USC) we got destroyed in the trenches. We took DE's and expected some to pan out at DT...horrible strategy and I doubt we see it again. Taking one tweener DT/DE every class or two is fine, but taking 0-1 true DT's and doing guess work doesn't cut it. I got lambasted for pointing this out but it played out. However, I think lately we are making up for this with Mobley, Goebel, Rowell, Simon, and Bellamy...5 true DT's is about right for two classes, though it doesn't look like Rowell will make it. In '02 we had a great DL and good depth to back it up. I think we are getting back to that point.

[brutus2002]

Donte Whitner was a stud my man. You need to add him to the superstar list. Donte tore [censored] up in 2005.

[Buckeye86]

Originally Posted by RB07OSU

Good points, though I would consider Gholston and Whitner stars...both were top 15 picks (top ten?...Whitner at #9?) and had great production their final year.

I knew those two were going to come into question. I didn't put them into the star category because from my recolection they both had one breakout year but not much outside of that one year. Anyways, the point is kind of moot but that was my reasoning.

I ran out of energy a little bit as I put that together, but it is interesting to note that between the '03 and '04 classes there was 1 DT (Patterson), 2 OL (Rehring and Barton), and 1 DE (Gholston) that made significant impacts on the field and only 1 additional OL (Person) and 1 DT (Abdallah) that even saw the field, but not until very late in their careers.

So between the two classes that is six guys in the trenches... not exactly ideal.

I think that Tressel really began to hit his stride recruiting in '05 like stxbuck said, and now he seems to have it down to a science as evidenced by the '08 and '09 classes. I guess we will have to wait and see how those classes pan out, but they certainly seem like they are destined to do great things.

And to get back to the 'Tressel hasn't done anything even though he has top ten talent' arguement, I'd say Tressel did a pretty damn good job coaching the team to a 33-6 record from '06 through '08 considering the relatively disastarous results from the '03 and '04 classes.

And one final note on the '03 class, Whitner and Youboty both left for the NFL early, meaning that the tiny number of players that did contribute from that class didn't even stay the total amount of time that they could have. Gonzales also only contributed for three years rather than four since he left after his RS Junior season. The '03 class definitely could have turned out better to say the least.

[Stellar]

I don't think you can necessarily draw the conclusion based on this that Tressel has a better system for recruiting now than he did before. A lot of what happened with the 2003 and 2004 classes was just sort of back luck. Those classes had an inordinate number of players that washed out. The attrition in those classes was extremely high. Guys don't pan out at his level for a number of reasons - sometimes its lack of talent, but other factors like lack of work in the classroom, getting in trouble, lack of effort, transfers for lack of playing time, and injuries can prematurely end a players career. A lot of the guys in the 03 and 04 classs had the talent to go all the way, but for one reason or another they weren't able to put it all together and a very large number of them ended up leaving the program prematurely. Of the guys listed as "little or no contributions" most of them only lasted a couple years in the program. Only Mitchum and Patterson on those lists played trough their eligibility. So it wasn't so much that those classes were loaded with guys that weren't good enough as it was that most of them got injured, left, or got kicked out before they had a chance to make an impact on the field.

Hopefully the attrition factors will be lower and the success rate will be higher for the recent and future classes, but it is way too soon to tell - some of the guys that people thing will be stars now will probably end up not panning out for one reason or another. Thats just kind of the way it works with recruiting. Talent evaluation is one thing, but when it comes to guessing if a player is going to take advantage of his opportunities, stay healthy, and put everything tougher its really a crap shoot.

[Stellar]

Originally Posted by RB07OSU

Good points, though I would consider Gholston and Whitner stars...both were top 15 picks (top ten?...Whitner at #9?) and had great production their final year. To simplify this even further, I think our DT recruiting hurt us the worst, with OL recruiting taking a close second. All the games we got thumped in (Florida, LSU, USC) we got destroyed in the trenches. We took DE's and expected some to pan out at DT...horrible strategy and I doubt we see it again. Taking one tweener DT/DE every class or two is fine, but taking 0-1 true DT's and doing guess work doesn't cut it. I got lambasted for pointing this out but it played out. However, I think lately we are making up for this with Mobley, Goebel, Rowell, Simon, and Bellamy...5 true DT's is about right for two classes, though it doesn't look like Rowell will make it. In '02 we had a great DL and good depth to back it up. I think we are getting back to that point.

Oh trust me, you'll see it again. And not just at Ohio State - watch any team and you'll see it. Everybody tries to grow DTs from DEs. There are just such few natural young DTs out there that already have the size and quickness to play tackle. Once you get past a handful there just aren't enough to go arond. So the idea is that it's better and easier to take a guy whos already quick and athletic and put some weight on him than it is to take a big huge guy whose not quick enough and try to make him faster. As I said before, everybody does that. You'll find them on pretty much every team. In fact on those Florida, LSU, and USC teams you listed all featured DTs that were grown from DEs.

[Steve19]

Those classes were nothing but the result of the media onslaught brought on by Maurice "where's my money mommy?" Clarett. That disgusting ESPiN onslaught put a lot of quality recruits out of reach. And despite their crap, we made it to the NC game and won beaucoup Big Ten championships.

Yeah, Tressel is way behind Ferentz and RR. They are not qualified to shine his shoes.

[BUCKYLE]

I'll give you an explanation:

[censored] happens.

[OregonBuckeye]

The problem with this thread is you're responding to a weak attempt at flaming by a skunkbear.

National Championships are hard as hell to win. Pete Carroll's only managed one and he's had top 5 class after top 5 class and has played in a relatively weak conference.

blueinfla needs to get a clue. You'd think he'd appreciate just how rare it is considering his favorite team has .5 in the last 60 years.

[Oh8ch]

Oregon nails it.

Beyond that, the coach recruits. It is part of the job. So you don't subtract points from a coach based on perceived "return on talent". You credit him for what happens on the field - period.


Otherwise Pete Carrol would be the worst coach in the history of CFB.

Andy by the same token you don't give RR a break because he can't attract talent to the "winningest program in the history of CFB". You bust his chops for not doing so.

[RB07OSU]

Originally Posted by Stellar

Oh trust me, you'll see it again. And not just at Ohio State - watch any team and you'll see it. Everybody tries to grow DTs from DEs. There are just such few natural young DTs out there that already have the size and quickness to play tackle. Once you get past a handful there just aren't enough to go arond. So the idea is that it's better and easier to take a guy whos already quick and athletic and put some weight on him than it is to take a big huge guy whose not quick enough and try to make him faster. As I said before, everybody does that. You'll find them on pretty much every team. In fact on those Florida, LSU, and USC teams you listed all featured DTs that were grown from DEs.

I agree that big athletic guys don't grow on trees, especially up north. However...Al Woods, Marlon Favorite, and Glenn Dorsey (LSU), Cedric Ellis and Fili Moala (USC), Torrey Davis (Florida) etc...all recruited as DT's and are the dominant ones. Sure there is Ricky-Jean Francois who converted and is a stud but it really isn't all that common. Trying to take 6-4 to 6-7 DE's with rangy frames and converting them doesn't usually work well. 6-2 or 6-3 heavier strongside seems to work sometimes, like a Darion Scott. They don't always have to be giants like Woods or Favorite but at least true DT's if they are lighter, like Goebel or Mobley.

[Buckeye86]

Originally Posted by OregonBuckeye

The problem with this thread is you're responding to a weak attempt at flaming by a skunkbear.

That is not at all what I was trying to do. The point of quoting the flaming skunkbear was to show what had inspired me to dig a little deeper into the topic.

Originally Posted by OregonBuckeye

National Championships are hard as hell to win.

and they are especially hard to win when you have back to back recruiting classes where over half of the recruits never contribute significant minutes to the program and should be juniors and seniors in the prime of their careers during the National Championship games. In particular when you have only six men in the trenches who even earn a letter in two recruiting classes combined it is difficult to win championship.

That is the point of this analysis.

[BuckeyeMike80]

You have to consider that when these kids are recruited, they likely aren't done growing both physically and emotionally. 17 year olds can and will do different things even if he looks like a stud at 17 he could have a .02 head OR the kid might not be great physically and be the smartest on the field.

It's a crapshoot. Tressel hasn't hit em all, but he's done pretty damned well and it's only going to get better.

[Buckeye86]

I think people are reading this too much as a critique of Tressel. I wasn't trying to judge Tressel as a coach or compare him to any other coaches or anything like that. Think of the original post as an in depth analysis combined with Buckyle's comment.

[censored] happens. The [censored] that happened to the '03 and '04 recruiting classes hurt Ohio State chances to match up against the best teams in the country in the '06 and '07 National Championship games. That is not a comment on Coach Tressel, his recruiting ability, or his coaching ability, it is simply a comment on the [censored] that has happened.