- Jun 9, 2014
- 19,757
- 27,657
Founding Member
Kind of funny too hiw weve fallen. #7 class isnt "good". It is an acceptabke class at UF. Good for us 1 through 3 or so. Seventh is "mehhh we missed on a few guys". #9 is WTF were you people doing? 15-17 is fire them all yesterday. 20+ is fire the whole damn athletic dept.We'll just remind our opponents how good our 2018 class is. That should solve it.
How many # 1-3 ranked classes did SOS have?
Well, there really werent any legitimate rankings back then (Beano Cook was a joke) but once scouts came out he had one and most were top five. One was pretty poor like 17th but that was after three top classes and not much scholly space.How many # 1-3 ranked classes did SOS have?
The 1995 and 2000 classes were right up there in the top three, and there were others. On balance he and his staff recruited very well. Under rated as a recruiter because he had trouble recruiting QBs and WRs, despite his offensive genius, believe it or not. Everywhere else we recruited quite well. Plus, the guy was a freakin' WITCH on the sideline. I think some of us would cut Mac some slack if he could coach an offense that was at least in the top 30 for godsakes. When he was in his prime, Spurrier could have taken the three-star players Mac's loaded this team up with and turned it into a top ten offense.How many # 1-3 ranked classes did SOS have?
I counted blue chips using rivals so #s are a little different but it's still valid for comparing year over year
Year.....BlueChip/Total....Percentage - 4 year total....Percentage
2002* 9/23 39% (8-5)
2003 14/26 54% (8-5)
2004 12/23 52% (7-5)
-----------------
2005* 8/18 44%....... 43/90 48% (9-3)
2006 21/27 78%....... 55/94 59% (13-1)
2007 20/27 74%....... 61/95 64% (9-4)
2008 16/22 73%....... 65/94 69% (13-1)
2009 12/17 71%....... 69/93 74% (13-1)
2010 21/27 78%....... 69/93 74% (8-5)
-------------------
2011* 11/19 58%...... 60/85 71% (7-6)
2012 13/22 59%....... 57/85 67% (11-2)
2013 16/29 55%....... 61/97 62% (4-8)
2014 13/24 54%....... 53/94 56% (7-5)
-------------------
2015* 7/21 33%........ 49/96 51% (10-4)
2016 10/25 40%....... 46/99 46% (9-4)
2017 15/23 65% ...... 45/93 48%
Rivals only goes back to 2002 so that's as far back as I could go.
Some take aways:
The 2015 class was the worst going all the way back to 2002 with Zook's transition class.
Transition classes hurt.
Meyer was signing classes in the 70's which eventually got our 4 year numbers up to 74%.
Recruiting of bluechippers dropped off with Chump, compared to Meyer. Chump's classes ranked high I assume because although he took fewer bluechippers they were high quality.
Not counting transition years Meyer signed on average 18 bluechippers a class. Let's call that the gold standard.
If you're aiming for 66% bluechips that's 16.5 per class of 25.
I counted blue chips using rivals so #s are a little different but it's still valid for comparing year over year
Year.....BlueChip/Total....Percentage - 4 year total....Percentage
2002* 9/23 39% (8-5)
2003 14/26 54% (8-5)
2004 12/23 52% (7-5)
-----------------
2005* 8/18 44%....... 43/90 48% (9-3)
2006 21/27 78%....... 55/94 59% (13-1)
2007 20/27 74%....... 61/95 64% (9-4)
2008 16/22 73%....... 65/94 69% (13-1)
2009 12/17 71%....... 69/93 74% (13-1)
2010 21/27 78%....... 69/93 74% (8-5)
-------------------
2011* 11/19 58%...... 60/85 71% (7-6)
2012 13/22 59%....... 57/85 67% (11-2)
2013 16/29 55%....... 61/97 62% (4-8)
2014 13/24 54%....... 53/94 56% (7-5)
-------------------
2015* 7/21 33%........ 49/96 51% (10-4)
2016 10/25 40%....... 46/99 46% (9-4)
2017 15/23 65% ...... 45/93 48%
Rivals only goes back to 2002 so that's as far back as I could go.
Some take aways:
The 2015 class was the worst going all the way back to 2002 with Zook's transition class.
Transition classes hurt.
Meyer was signing classes in the 70's which eventually got our 4 year numbers up to 74%.
Recruiting of bluechippers dropped off with Chump, compared to Meyer. Chump's classes ranked high I assume because although he took fewer bluechippers they were high quality.
Not counting transition years Meyer signed on average 18 bluechippers a class. Let's call that the gold standard.
If you're aiming for 66% bluechips that's 16.5 per class of 25.
The 1995 and 2000 classes were right up there in the top three, and there were others. On balance he and his staff recruited very well. Under rated as a recruiter because he had trouble recruiting QBs and WRs, despite his offensive genius, believe it or not. Everywhere else we recruited quite well. Plus, the guy was a freakin' WITCH on the sideline. I think some of us would cut Mac some slack if he could coach an offense that was at least in the top 30 for godsakes. When he was in his prime, Spurrier could have taken the three-star players Mac's loaded this team up with and turned it into a top ten offense.
(Cue the dumper excuses about Muschamps defense, SEC East, etc. - Mac's fault when he loses, but no credit to him when he wins)
The 1995 and 2000 classes were right up there in the top three, and there were others. On balance he and his staff recruited very well. Under rated as a recruiter because he had trouble recruiting QBs and WRs, despite his offensive genius, believe it or not. Everywhere else we recruited quite well. Plus, the guy was a freakin' WITCH on the sideline. I think some of us would cut Mac some slack if he could coach an offense that was at least in the top 30 for godsakes. When he was in his prime, Spurrier could have taken the three-star players Mac's loaded this team up with and turned it into a top ten offense.
Correct. It's signees not roster only because I don't have quick access to roster. But obviously if you sign three deep blue chippers you're more likely to have depth than if you sign only 2 deep.Your post seems to be about signees not rosters. I looked at the original article and can not tell if it is about rosters or signees. Signees are much LESS relevant than rosters. You play games with an 85 man roster not the 100 guys you recruited over the last 4 classes. So what matters most is who is on your roster.
Correct. It's signees not roster only because I don't have quick access to roster. But obviously if you sign three deep blue chippers you're more likely to have depth than if you sign only 2 deep.
Losing 8 games in two years isn't winning. He's Jim Donnan or Ron Zook with slightly more luck. Hell, not only is he not winning, often he isn't even scoring.Mac's fault when he loses, but no credit to him when he wins
Losing 8 games in two years isn't winning. He's Jim Donnan or Ron Zook with slightly more luck. Hell, not only is he not winning, often he isn't even scoring.
If he ever wins anything, I might change my mind. So far he's just fat Muschump who can't recruit.
Well if more "blue chippers" leave than non-blue chippers, then a team has fewer blue chippers than the numbers presented suggest. Of course the opposite could be true too. It really should be pretty easy to go to UF's rosters, and go player by player and calculate the proportion of blue chippers.
I guess the one reason to do it your way is that if a team like UF for example has a bunch of blue chip QBs, yet a non blue chip like Allen wins the job, that team did not just give the job to a non blue chipper. Rather the non blue chipper is validated by beating out blue chip players.