Yes, I know there is Scout and Rivals and 24/7 and others, but the ESPN 300 seems pretty representative. Anyway, here are how the FBS conferences made out with respect to ESPN 300 prospects in early signing:

SEC .......... 120
B1G .......... 56
ACC .......... 45
PAC .......... 34
B12 .......... 30

Notre Dame .. 9

AAC ............ 1
CUSA ...........0
SBC .............0
MW ..............0
MAC ............ 0
FBS Indy ......0

Doesn’t account for the fact that when a 4 star player commits to an AAC school, all of the sudden they become a 3 star and when one of our players flips to a P5 school, they’re all of the sudden a 4 star.

(12-17-2020 04:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, I know there is Scout and Rivals and 24/7 and others, but the ESPN 300 seems pretty representative. Anyway, here are how the FBS conferences made out with respect to ESPN 300 prospects in early signing:

SEC .......... 120
B1G .......... 56
ACC .......... 45
PAC .......... 34
B12 .......... 30

Notre Dame .. 9

AAC ............ 1
CUSA ...........0
SBC .............0
MW ..............0
MAC ............ 0
FBS Indy ......0

In a related story:

https://theathletic.com/2254757/2020/12/...ll-survey/

Quote:‘I see cheating all the f—ing time’: An anonymous survey of recruiting staffers

How often do you encounter cheating in recruiting?

SEC-1: “I’m in the Southeastern Conference. I see cheating all the f***ing time.”

SEC-2: “I do work in the SEC, so …”

SEC-3: “You hear about it frequently, in our conference anyways.”

AAC: “I probably hear more about it than I encounter it specifically."

Like they said in All the President's Men - follow the money. There's a reason why kids who grow up in urban/suburban areas in places with good weather like Florida would "volunteer" to go live in Oxford or Starkville, Mississippi, or College Station, Texas or even Auburn or Tuscaloosa, Alabama, and it's not because of the great BBQ. A few go because they see it as a path to the NFL. Most go because they get an offer they couldn't refuse. From the same article:

Quote:SEC-1: “We’ve had handlers that come into our building, walk into my office and say, ‘You can have this player, but it’ll cost you blank.’ We tell them, ‘No, thank you. We’re not interested.’ And then those kids go to one of three schools in our conference every time. I have no interest in it because here’s the thing — if they cheat with you, they’ll cheat on you. And so if we enter into that situation when we had that happen, then when push comes to shove, and we need to be tough on them, they own you.”

Here's the thing - I think players should get paid. I just think it needs to be done in the open instead of under the table. It sucks that schools cheat to get ahead, then get more money because they're better (because of the cheating), then use that money to not only cheat some more but to point to why other schools shouldn't be given the same access.

USFFan

(12-17-2020 04:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, I know there is Scout and Rivals and 24/7 and others, but the ESPN 300 seems pretty representative. Anyway, here are how the FBS conferences made out with respect to ESPN 300 prospects in early signing:

SEC .......... 120
B1G .......... 56
ACC .......... 45
PAC .......... 34
B12 .......... 30

Notre Dame .. 9

AAC ............ 1
CUSA ...........0
SBC .............0
MW ..............0
MAC ............ 0
FBS Indy ......0

I’d be curious to do a digger dive and see how many went to each school, particularly the PAC12 and BXII. 34 guys in the PAC12 are probably spread between 3-4 schools... USC, Oregon, Washington and maybe UCLA. Same for the BXII.

The SEC gets more than the ACC, Big 12, PAC12, ND and the G5 combined

(12-17-2020 04:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, I know there is Scout and Rivals and 24/7 and others, but the ESPN 300 seems pretty representative. Anyway, here are how the FBS conferences made out with respect to ESPN 300 prospects in early signing:

SEC .......... 120
B1G .......... 56
ACC .......... 45
PAC .......... 34
B12 .......... 30

Notre Dame .. 9

AAC ............ 1
CUSA ...........0
SBC .............0
MW ..............0
MAC ............ 0
FBS Indy ......0

And that’s before NIL or pay for play becomes a factor. That said, non-power schools don’t recruit guys ready to play on day one. It’s mostly 3-star kids that we develop into guys that can play with top kids after a year or two. That’s why G5 depth isn’t as strong—-it’s also why I’m not crazy about relaxing free transfer rules.

(12-18-2020 03:43 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(12-17-2020 04:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, I know there is Scout and Rivals and 24/7 and others, but the ESPN 300 seems pretty representative. Anyway, here are how the FBS conferences made out with respect to ESPN 300 prospects in early signing:

SEC .......... 120
B1G .......... 56
ACC .......... 45
PAC .......... 34
B12 .......... 30

Notre Dame .. 9

AAC ............ 1
CUSA ...........0
SBC .............0
MW ..............0
MAC ............ 0
FBS Indy ......0

And that’s before NIL or pay for play becomes a factor. That said, non-power schools don’t recruit guys ready to play on day one. It’s mostly 3-star kids that we develop into guys that can play with top kids after a year or two. That’s why G5 depth isn’t as strong—-it’s also why I’m not crazy about relaxing free transfer rules.

Great point. Let the lower paid schools develop the players, then take them, especially with pay for play coming.

I took a shot at a school by school break down and my numbers differ slightly from Quo's

Based off the ESPN 300 12/18 at midnight.

275 have committed to a total of 54 schools
25 remain unsigned

SEC (97)

Alabama 19
Georgia 15
LSU 14
Florida 13
Texas A&M 9
Tennessee 7
Ole Miss 6
Auburn 4
Miss. St. 3
Arkansas 2
Missouri 2
Kentucky 2
Vanderbilt 1

Big Ten (51)

Ohio St. 17
Michigan 9
Wisconsin 6
Maryland 5
Penn St. 3
Iowa 3
Nebraska 2
Michigan St. 1
Purdue 1
Indiana 1
Northwestern 1

ACC (48)

Clemson 16
UNC 10
Miami 9
Florida St. 4
NC State 3
Virginia 2
Pitt 2
Boston College 1
Georgia Tech 1

PAC-12 (38)

Oregon 14
USC 7
Washington 4
Cal 4
Arizona St. 3
Utah 3
Stanford 2
UCLA 1

Big-12 (28)

Oklahoma 9
Texas 9
TCU 3
Texas Tech 2
Oklahoma St. 2
West Virginia 2
Kansas St. 1

AAC (1)

SMU 1

C-USA (1)

Southern Miss 1

Independents (10)

Notre Dame 9
Liberty 1

FCS (1)

Jackson St. 1 (Deion's Son)

(12-17-2020 04:21 PM)BraveKnight Wrote:  Doesn’t account for the fact that when a 4 star player commits to an AAC school, all of the sudden they become a 3 star and when one of our players flips to a P5 school, they’re all of the sudden a 4 star.

This ^^^^

(12-18-2020 10:26 AM)wylioats Wrote:  

(12-17-2020 04:21 PM)BraveKnight Wrote:  Doesn’t account for the fact that when a 4 star player commits to an AAC school, all of the sudden they become a 3 star and when one of our players flips to a P5 school, they’re all of the sudden a 4 star.

This ^^^^

Yep. Plus, no one really knows what these players will turn out to actually be. It's a glorified guessing game really. That's why player development is more important than recruiting stars.

As PirateJPs post shows the P5 vs G5 imbalance is once again not P5 vs G5, but the top 1/3 of the P5 vs everyone else. Again the gulf is much wider between Ohio state and Indiana than Indiana and Cincinnati(if there is one at all).

You'll notice a good bit of P5 teams with none from the top 300. In the ACC half of the conference has 1 or none. The PAC 12 1 or none for half of the conference.

Also of note is USM's only one was a Tulane commit that switched because he was going to sit behind Tulane's breakout Freshman Qb for multiple years and our OC who recruited him became the HC at USM.

(12-17-2020 04:02 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yes, I know there is Scout and Rivals and 24/7 and others, but the ESPN 300 seems pretty representative. Anyway, here are how the FBS conferences made out with respect to ESPN 300 prospects in early signing:

SEC .......... 120
B1G .......... 56
ACC .......... 45
PAC .......... 34
B12 .......... 30

Notre Dame .. 9

AAC ............ 1
CUSA ...........0
SBC .............0
MW ..............0
MAC ............ 0
FBS Indy ......0

I’d also suggest that this is exactly the distribution you would expect to see among the top players when 50% of the league is effectively barred from participation in the official post season playoff system.

We've had 25 former players on NFL rosters this season. More than many of these schools that are cheating. Not particularly concerned about it, especially when the deck is stacked against anyone outside the cartel.

Using the 247Sports composite ratings over the last 5 years, AAC recruiting has been consistently improving quality wise from year to year. Baby steps.

Read Recruiting Year/AAC team composite Avg/Avg National Rank, then composite rating average/team/national recruiting rank

2021 83.53 (76.2)

85.40 SMU (50)
85.14 Cincinnati (45)
84.79 Memphis (48)
84.29 UCF (61)
83.82 Houston (92)
83.67 ECU (80)
83.58 USF (68)
83.35 Tulane (74)
82.66 Temple (93)
82.60 Tulsa (124)
79.56 Navy (103)


2020 82.96 (83.5)

85.31 Cincinnati (41)
84.24 SMU (70)
84.16 Memphis (66)
83.83 UCF (75)
83.65 Houston (72)
83.38 Tulane (69)
83.13 USF (109)
82.39 ECU (74)
82.22 Temple (101)
81.26 Tulsa (116)
78.98 Navy (126)


2019 82.48 (83.8)

84.56 Cincinnati (66)
84.24 UCF (60)
84.02 Houston (73)
83.76 Memphis (68)
83.31 USF (78)
82.95 SMU (69)
82.56 ECU (79)
81.59 Tulane (94)
81.47 Temple (104)
80.19 Tulsa (107)
78.66 Navy (124)


2018 81.96 (78.3)

84.43 Cincinnati (49)
83.64 UCF (62)
83.59 USF (65)
82.66 Tulane (68)
82.56 Houston (73)
82.08 SMU (87)
81.56 Memphis (81)
81.34 Temple (84)
81.09 ECU (89)
80.36 Tulsa (97)
78.21 Navy (106)


2017 80.82 (80.2)

83.36 UCF (55)
82.70 Cincinnati (63)
82.38 Houston (69)
81.87 Memphis (56)
81.55 USF (76)
81.13 SMU (80)
80.83 ECU (79)
79.87 Tulsa (85)
78.76 Temple (119)
78.55 Tulane (112)
78.00 Navy (88)

(12-18-2020 11:06 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I’d also suggest that this is exactly the distribution you would expect to see among the top players when 50% of the league is effectively barred from participation in the official post season playoff system.

Thing is, though, we almost surely would see the same distribution of talent if we looked at 2010, 2000, 1990, 1980 etc.

The CFP and BCS did not create these big gaps, they developed historically long before.

(12-19-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-18-2020 11:06 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I’d also suggest that this is exactly the distribution you would expect to see among the top players when 50% of the league is effectively barred from participation in the official post season playoff system.

Thing is, though, we almost surely would see the same distribution of talent if we looked at 2010, 2000, 1990, 1980 etc.

The CFP and BCS did not create these big gaps, they developed historically long before.

this is true but now it’s even worse with half of FBS locked out of playing for a championship

(12-17-2020 04:21 PM)BraveKnight Wrote:  Doesn’t account for the fact that when a 4 star player commits to an AAC school, all of the sudden they become a 3 star and when one of our players flips to a P5 school, they’re all of the sudden a 4 star.

I do agree this happens but I'm not so sure it's frequent. I could be wrong.

(12-18-2020 08:21 AM)PirateJP Wrote:  I took a shot at a school by school break down and my numbers differ slightly from Quo's

Based off the ESPN 300 12/18 at midnight.

275 have committed to a total of 54 schools
25 remain unsigned

SEC (97)

Alabama 19
Georgia 15
LSU 14
Florida 13
Texas A&M 9
Tennessee 7
Ole Miss 6
Auburn 4
Miss. St. 3
Arkansas 2
Missouri 2
Kentucky 2
Vanderbilt 1

Big Ten (51)

Ohio St. 17
Michigan 9
Wisconsin 6
Maryland 5
Penn St. 3
Iowa 3
Nebraska 2
Michigan St. 1
Purdue 1
Indiana 1
Northwestern 1

ACC (48)

Clemson 16
UNC 10
Miami 9
Florida St. 4
NC State 3
Virginia 2
Pitt 2
Boston College 1
Georgia Tech 1

PAC-12 (38)

Oregon 14
USC 7
Washington 4
Cal 4
Arizona St. 3
Utah 3
Stanford 2
UCLA 1

Big-12 (28)

Oklahoma 9
Texas 9
TCU 3
Texas Tech 2
Oklahoma St. 2
West Virginia 2
Kansas St. 1

AAC (1)

SMU 1

C-USA (1)

Southern Miss 1

Independents (10)

Notre Dame 9
Liberty 1

FCS (1)

Jackson St. 1 (Deion's Son)

This means more than the op. The top 20 will always be top 20.

Same as ever. Nothing "sobering" about it.

(12-19-2020 11:36 AM)bill dazzle Wrote:  

(12-17-2020 04:21 PM)BraveKnight Wrote:  Doesn’t account for the fact that when a 4 star player commits to an AAC school, all of the sudden they become a 3 star and when one of our players flips to a P5 school, they’re all of the sudden a 4 star.

I do agree this happens but I'm not so sure it's frequent. I could be wrong.

I agree that this happens, but it's a marginal thing, it doesn't happen enough to come close to changing the big picture here.

(12-19-2020 08:50 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-18-2020 11:06 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  I’d also suggest that this is exactly the distribution you would expect to see among the top players when 50% of the league is effectively barred from participation in the official post season playoff system.

Thing is, though, we almost surely would see the same distribution of talent if we looked at 2010, 2000, 1990, 1980 etc.

The CFP and BCS did not create these big gaps, they developed historically long before.

Id also suggest it doesnt matter as much as one might think. As I said, while those P5 conferences are getting "ready to play" talent directly from high school--the G5 is getting 3-star players that take a year or two to develop into "ready for the field" players. So, while it might affect depth---the quality of the team on the field is not that different. This can be seen in the draft where the number of players drafted by conference is far tighter than the original recruiting rankings would suggest (for instance, 26 players drafted from the Big12 in 2019 vs 11 from the AAC in the same year).