Based on a tangent in another thread, I wanted to see how the top 25 teams in the country recruit. I used the most recent College Football Playoff rankings (last Tuesday). Obviously some of these will change tomorrow night based on results from this past weekend. The first four numbers are the class rank from 2017 to 2014 in that order. The second number is the average recruiting ranking. The third number is the difference in the average recruiting ranking and the current ranking. The final number is the variance between the highest ranked class and the lowest ranked class.
Here's what I found with some analysis:
THE CURRENT TOP 25
1 Georgia 3 9 6 7 / 6.25 / +5.25 / 6
2 Bama 1 1 2 1 / 1.25 / -.75 / 1
3 ND 13 13 11 11 / 12 / +9 / 2
4 Clemson 22 6 4 13 / 11.25 / +7.25 / 18
5 Oklahoma 7 16 14 15 / 13 / +8 / 9
6 TCU 41 20 34 50 / 36.25 / +30.25 / 30
7 Miami 11 23 26 12 / 18 / +11 / 15
8 Wisconsin 35 35 37 33 / 35 / +27 / 4
9 Washington 23 37 30 36 / 31.5 / + 22.5 / 13
10 Auburn 14 8 7 9 / 9.5 / +0.5 / 7
11 USC 6 10 1 10 / 6.75 / -4.25 / 9
12 Michigan State 33 18 22 22 / 23.75 / +11.75 / 15
13 Ohio State 2 3 9 3 / 4.25 / - 8.75 / 7
14 Penn State 12 15 21 24 / 18 / +4 / 12
15 Oklahoma State 36 45 38 27 / 36.5 / +21.5 /21\
16 Mississippi State 27 34 16 37 / 27.5 / +11.5 / 21
17 Virginia Tech 28 49 24 25 / 31.5 / +14.5 / 25
18 UCF / 53 57 63 73 / 61.5 / +43.5 / 20
19 Washington State 51 52 55 69 / 56.75 / +37.75 / 18
20 Iowa 40 42 58 59 / 49.75 / +29.75 / 19
21 Iowa State 44 53 68 56 / 55.25 / +34.25 / 24
22 Memphis 62 72 76 88 / 74.5 / +52.5 / 26
23 NC State 54 43 35 30 / 40.5 / +17.5 / 24
24 LSU 8 5 8 2 / 6.75 / -17.25 / 6
25 Northwestern 55 46 55 67 / 55.75 / +30.75 / 21
List in order of most overachieving to most underachieving
Northwestern
Memphis
UCF
Washington State
Iowa State
TCU
Iowa
Wisconsin
Washington
Oklahoma State
NC State
Virginia Tech
Michigan State
Mississippi State
Miami
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Clemson
Georgia
Penn State
Auburn
Alabama
USC
Ohio State
LSU
Perhaps the most noticeable thing from this list for me is the relative lack of variance in recruiting rankings. If you recruit in the top ten once, you’re likely always going to recruit in the top 10. Notre Dame has been 11th or 13th every year. Oklahoma is always in the top 16. Clemson started at 22, but is now always in the top 15. Wisconsin, Washington, Michigan State are pretty much always in the 30s. Mississippi State and Oklahoma State are always in that same range. North Carolina State is always in the 30s or 40s.
Nine teams on the list have a difference of fewer than ten spots between their highest ranked class and lowest ranked class. Nine teams have a difference of more than 20 spots between the highest and lowest, but in EVERY SINGLE CASE that school had one class that was on outlier (either ranked at least 10 spots higher or lower than any other class in the four year sample). In other words, it’s virtually impossible to significantly change where you rank in the Rivals rankings by more than about ten spots over time. You can do it in an individual year, but for the most part, you’re going to have about a 15 spot range where you’re going to rank.
Here’s the other thing to take from the list: You can absolutely overachieve compared to your ranking. There are 15 teams that rank at least 10 spots above their average recruiting ranking. I kind of discount Memphis and UCF because they’re not in Power Five leagues so it’s a different thing. But there are still 13 Power Five teams that are at least ten spots better than recruiting say they should be.
The most overachieving teams are in the bottom half of the top 25. But TCU, Wisconsin and Washington are all top ten teams without top 20 recruiting classes on average. In fact, there is only one top 20 recruiting class TOTAL among those four teams and it’s TCU’s class that ranked 20th last year.
How it relates to Missouri:
Here are Missouri’s ranks over the same time period: 49, 47, 34, 27. That’s an average rank of 36.75. The programs they’re most similar to are TCU, Wisconsin and Oklahoma State, which I think we all probably would have guessed without the numbers. So is it possible for Mizzou to be a top 5/10/15 team abso-freaking-lutely. And we’ve seen them do it recruiting very similarly to the way they are recruiting lately. Now, the one variable is the SEC. With more teams in the top 20 of recruiting and more in the top 25 overall than the Big Ten or the Big 12, it’s a little bit tougher for Missouri to do it, but it can be done.
Missouri has to overachieve its average recruiting ranking by probably about 20 spots to be in competition for a division title and play for the SEC championship. Can you do that every single year? Probably not. The biggest overachievers on this list are not teams that we expect to see in the top 25 year in and year out. I would say Oklahoma State is probably the biggest CONSISTENT overachiever. Wisconsin’s in that discussion too. In a few years, we might say the same thing about Washington. But all these teams are in Missouri’s range as far as recruiting. So to say that Missouri can’t reach the heights you want it to reach recruiting the way it currently recruits is incorrect. Would it make it easier to do if they had top 20 classes? Sure. Is that going to happen? Based on these numbers, it is not.
Here's what I found with some analysis:
THE CURRENT TOP 25
1 Georgia 3 9 6 7 / 6.25 / +5.25 / 6
2 Bama 1 1 2 1 / 1.25 / -.75 / 1
3 ND 13 13 11 11 / 12 / +9 / 2
4 Clemson 22 6 4 13 / 11.25 / +7.25 / 18
5 Oklahoma 7 16 14 15 / 13 / +8 / 9
6 TCU 41 20 34 50 / 36.25 / +30.25 / 30
7 Miami 11 23 26 12 / 18 / +11 / 15
8 Wisconsin 35 35 37 33 / 35 / +27 / 4
9 Washington 23 37 30 36 / 31.5 / + 22.5 / 13
10 Auburn 14 8 7 9 / 9.5 / +0.5 / 7
11 USC 6 10 1 10 / 6.75 / -4.25 / 9
12 Michigan State 33 18 22 22 / 23.75 / +11.75 / 15
13 Ohio State 2 3 9 3 / 4.25 / - 8.75 / 7
14 Penn State 12 15 21 24 / 18 / +4 / 12
15 Oklahoma State 36 45 38 27 / 36.5 / +21.5 /21\
16 Mississippi State 27 34 16 37 / 27.5 / +11.5 / 21
17 Virginia Tech 28 49 24 25 / 31.5 / +14.5 / 25
18 UCF / 53 57 63 73 / 61.5 / +43.5 / 20
19 Washington State 51 52 55 69 / 56.75 / +37.75 / 18
20 Iowa 40 42 58 59 / 49.75 / +29.75 / 19
21 Iowa State 44 53 68 56 / 55.25 / +34.25 / 24
22 Memphis 62 72 76 88 / 74.5 / +52.5 / 26
23 NC State 54 43 35 30 / 40.5 / +17.5 / 24
24 LSU 8 5 8 2 / 6.75 / -17.25 / 6
25 Northwestern 55 46 55 67 / 55.75 / +30.75 / 21
List in order of most overachieving to most underachieving
Northwestern
Memphis
UCF
Washington State
Iowa State
TCU
Iowa
Wisconsin
Washington
Oklahoma State
NC State
Virginia Tech
Michigan State
Mississippi State
Miami
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Clemson
Georgia
Penn State
Auburn
Alabama
USC
Ohio State
LSU
Perhaps the most noticeable thing from this list for me is the relative lack of variance in recruiting rankings. If you recruit in the top ten once, you’re likely always going to recruit in the top 10. Notre Dame has been 11th or 13th every year. Oklahoma is always in the top 16. Clemson started at 22, but is now always in the top 15. Wisconsin, Washington, Michigan State are pretty much always in the 30s. Mississippi State and Oklahoma State are always in that same range. North Carolina State is always in the 30s or 40s.
Nine teams on the list have a difference of fewer than ten spots between their highest ranked class and lowest ranked class. Nine teams have a difference of more than 20 spots between the highest and lowest, but in EVERY SINGLE CASE that school had one class that was on outlier (either ranked at least 10 spots higher or lower than any other class in the four year sample). In other words, it’s virtually impossible to significantly change where you rank in the Rivals rankings by more than about ten spots over time. You can do it in an individual year, but for the most part, you’re going to have about a 15 spot range where you’re going to rank.
Here’s the other thing to take from the list: You can absolutely overachieve compared to your ranking. There are 15 teams that rank at least 10 spots above their average recruiting ranking. I kind of discount Memphis and UCF because they’re not in Power Five leagues so it’s a different thing. But there are still 13 Power Five teams that are at least ten spots better than recruiting say they should be.
The most overachieving teams are in the bottom half of the top 25. But TCU, Wisconsin and Washington are all top ten teams without top 20 recruiting classes on average. In fact, there is only one top 20 recruiting class TOTAL among those four teams and it’s TCU’s class that ranked 20th last year.
How it relates to Missouri:
Here are Missouri’s ranks over the same time period: 49, 47, 34, 27. That’s an average rank of 36.75. The programs they’re most similar to are TCU, Wisconsin and Oklahoma State, which I think we all probably would have guessed without the numbers. So is it possible for Mizzou to be a top 5/10/15 team abso-freaking-lutely. And we’ve seen them do it recruiting very similarly to the way they are recruiting lately. Now, the one variable is the SEC. With more teams in the top 20 of recruiting and more in the top 25 overall than the Big Ten or the Big 12, it’s a little bit tougher for Missouri to do it, but it can be done.
Missouri has to overachieve its average recruiting ranking by probably about 20 spots to be in competition for a division title and play for the SEC championship. Can you do that every single year? Probably not. The biggest overachievers on this list are not teams that we expect to see in the top 25 year in and year out. I would say Oklahoma State is probably the biggest CONSISTENT overachiever. Wisconsin’s in that discussion too. In a few years, we might say the same thing about Washington. But all these teams are in Missouri’s range as far as recruiting. So to say that Missouri can’t reach the heights you want it to reach recruiting the way it currently recruits is incorrect. Would it make it easier to do if they had top 20 classes? Sure. Is that going to happen? Based on these numbers, it is not.
Last edited:
