Recruiting Rankings | Looking Back at the 2010 Class

The 2007, 2008 and 2009 recruiting classes are all under our belt and with the 2010 recruiting class, head coach Tommy Tuberville had about a month or so to keep a class together and add some of his own players. Obviously, Tuberville's first class was over the limit of only signing 25 players, but the truth is that there's a handful of players that never actually even stepped foot on campus and there were other players that were signed relatively late, i.e. into the spring practices.

Let's get to it.

2010 Recruiting Class

 

# Player O/D/ST Scout Rivals Rivals Rating ESPN ESPN Grade
1 Dartwan Bush D 2.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 77.00
2 Joe Carmical D 2.00 2.00 5.30 3.00 77.00
3 Lawrence Cayou D 2.00 2.00 5.20 - 40.00
4 Coby Coleman D 3.00 3.00 5.70 3.00 77.00
5 Cqulin Hubert D 2.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
6 Don Hursey D 2.00 3.00 5.50 2.00 74.00
7 Urell Johnson D 3.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
8 Mike Jones D 2.00 2.00 5.40 - 40.00
9 Donald Langley D 3.00 3.00 5.70 - -
10 Desmond Martin D 3.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 78.00
11 Tahrick Peak D 3.00 3.00 5.70 3.00 78.00
12 Russell Polk D 3.00 3.00 5.60 2.00 73.00
13 Tre' Porter D 3.00 4.00 5.80 3.00 77.00
14 Jackson Richards D 4.00 4.00 5.80 4.00 79.00
15 Lawrence Rumph D 4.00 3.00 5.70 - -
16 Brandon Smith D 2.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
17 Scott Smith D 3.00 4.00 6.00 - -
18 Phillip Warren D 2.00 2.00 5.20 - 40.00
19 Lavaughn Wigham D 2.00 2.00 5.40 - 40.00
20 Zachary Winbush D 3.00 3.00 5.50 3.00 77.00
21 Aleon Calhoun O 3.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
22 Beau Carpenter O 3.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 78.00
23 Shawn Corker O 3.00 3.00 5.70 3.00 78.00
24 Delans Griffin O 3.00 4.00 5.80 3.00 78.00
25 Ben McRoy O 2.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
26 Darren Moore O - - - - -
27 James Polk O 2.00 3.00 5.60 2.00 71.00
28 Scotty Young O 4.00 4.00 5.80 3.00 75.00
  AVERAGES   2.61 2.89 5.40 2.07 60.25

 

Of these 28 players, there's 8 players that never made it to Lubbock or are not on the roster today (or reportedly won't be on the roster soon):

DE Lawrence Cayou
DT Mike Jones
OLB Tahrick Peak
DB Brandon Smith
DB Phillip Warren
DB Lavaughn Wigham
OL Aleon Calhoun
RB Delans Griffin

There's no doubt that Tuberville took some flyers on some players, some of those players worked out and others didn't. Warren and Wigham were from Florida and Tuberville wanted these two lightly recruited players, but they never qualified. I believe that Jones made it on campus but left some time in fall practices. It's my understanding, and this is not confirmed on the official roster, is that Tahrick Peak and Nubian Peak are supposedly no longer in Lubbock. They're listed on the current roster, and yes, this is me rumor-mongering a bit. Cayou, Smith, Calhoun and Griffin didn't qualify either, but I seem to recall that they were originally recruited under Leach. Of all of the players, I would love to have Calhoun on campus and I'd love to see Calhoun back on campus if he were to develop in junior college.

The other interesting thing is that Tuberville did add some players after the actual signing day, including adding CB Don Hursey and WR Darren Moore. Hursey's a bit forgotten as a guy that didn't sign on signing day, but he was actually a decent prospect coming out of high school (a 2-star on Scout and 3-star on Rivals). The addition of Moore should pay dividends next year as he'll be a junior next year and he's already seen quite a bit of time playing this year.

More after the jump.


2010 Recruiting Class | Defense

 

# Player O/D/ST Scout Rivals Rivals Rating ESPN ESPN Grade
1 Dartwan Bush D 2.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 77.00
2 Joe Carmical D 2.00 2.00 5.30 3.00 77.00
3 Lawrence Cayou D 2.00 2.00 5.20 - 40.00
4 Coby Coleman D 3.00 3.00 5.70 3.00 77.00
5 Cqulin Hubert D 2.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
6 Don Hursey D 2.00 3.00 5.50 2.00 74.00
7 Urell Johnson D 3.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
8 Mike Jones D 2.00 2.00 5.40 - 40.00
9 Donald Langley D 3.00 3.00 5.70 - -
10 Desmond Martin D 3.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 78.00
11 Tahrick Peak D 3.00 3.00 5.70 3.00 78.00
12 Russell Polk D 3.00 3.00 5.60 2.00 73.00
13 Tre'Vante Porter D 3.00 4.00 5.80 3.00 77.00
14 Jackson Richards D 4.00 4.00 5.80 4.00 79.00
15 Lawrence Rumph D 4.00 3.00 5.70 - -
16 Brandon Smith D 2.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
17 Scott Smith D 3.00 4.00 6.00 - -
18 Phillip Warren D 2.00 2.00 5.20 - 40.00
19 Lavaughn Wigham D 2.00 2.00 5.40 - 40.00
20 Zachary Winbush D 3.00 3.00 5.50 3.00 77.00
  AVERAGES   2.65 2.90 5.58 1.90 57.75

 

This is a perfect example of how we know that recruiting rankings can maybe tell you a little something about a player, but they can also be incredibly misleading. DE Jackson Richards, a guy that I think is going to be a nice addition to the defensive end rotation next year, was the highest rated player across the board of all scouting services and he didn't play a down, was redshirted. Dartwan Bush, a relatively unknown recruit from Clute, Texas, did play as a true freshman. Of course, Richards and Bush are probably going to be playing two different positions, but generally speaking, they're both defensive ends and they both stepped onto campus at the same time. I still think that recruiting services provide some idea as to a player's talent, but it's not wholly indicative of the talent or make-up of a player.

Of the late adds by the staff that will hopefully make a difference, or made a difference already is Joe Carmical, Cqulin Hubert, and the aforementioned Cayou, Warren and Wigham were all late adds by Tuberville. Obviously, only Carmical and Hubert made it onto the roster, but Hubert is a guy that's played a good amount this year.

Porter is another guy that's seen a ton of time this year and to have three freshmen see time this year speaks to the lack of depth of the defense, or it speaks to the talent of each of these players.

The other interesting thing about this class is that there were three defensive tackles / defensive ends from the JUCO ranks, but there was such little depth, again due to the recruitment of JUCO players in the 2007 recruiting class that either graduated or never panned out. This is the perpetual problem with JUCO players is that you create a situation of needing to replace short-timers. Both Lawrence Rumph and Donald Langley both played in all 12 games this year, while Scott Smith's story is still well documented (was suspended for the year after playing the first 4 games for violation of team rules, but is practicing with the team and is expected to play next year). Langley (13 tackles) and Rumph (9 tackles; 1 Sack) didn't make significant contributions, and Smith actually did more in 4 games (14 tackles; 4.0 TFL; 3.0 Sacks) than either Langley or Rumph, which speaks to Smith's talent.


2010 Recruiting Class | Offense

 

# Player O/D/ST Scout Rivals Rivals Rating ESPN ESPN Grade
1 Aleon Calhoun O 3.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
2 Beau Carpenter O 3.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 78.00
3 Shawn Corker O 3.00 3.00 5.70 3.00 78.00
4 Delans Griffin O 3.00 4.00 5.80 3.00 78.00
5 Ben McRoy O 2.00 3.00 5.60 3.00 76.00
6 Darren Moore O - - - - -
7 James Polk O 2.00 3.00 5.60 2.00 71.00
8 Scotty Young O 4.00 4.00 5.80 3.00 75.00
  AVERAGES   2.50 2.88 4.96 2.50 66.50

 

After all of the attrition, the loss of Calhoun and Griffin, we're really talking about an offensive class of only 6 players. That's really small for any class, but if there was ever an indication that the current staff felt that the defense needed a boost before Tuberville even coached a down, it's the emphasis on the defensive side of the ball as far as recruits were concerned. The nice thing about this class is that another player that went under the radar, Ben McRoy showed that he can play on this level and he's got a speed to burn. The other thing about this class is that the staff is speaking highly of Young and Carpenter, and had Carpenter not had an appendectomy early in the season, there's a good chance that he would have played.


Overall

 

Year # Scout Rivals Rivals Rating ESPN ESPN Grades
2007 29 2.38 2.72 5.47   59.34
2008 16 2.75 3.00 5.58   42.88
2009 25 2.84 3.00 5.57   70.36
2010 28 2.61 2.89 5.40 2.07 60.25

 

We're finally starting to have a bit more information here. This was a down class in comparison to the 2009 class, but there were also a lot of late shots with the hopes that one or two of those players would have qualified and then stuck with the program. And just in case you're counting, that's 28 players that were signed in a 4 year period and there's an 85 scholarship limit. As previously mentioned, there's a ton of players that never even made it on campus.


Overall | Offense

 

Year # % Scout Rivals Rivals Rating ESPN ESPN Grades
2007 15 51.72% 2.40 2.80 5.49   66.33
2008 7 43.75% 2.43 3.00 5.59   54.43
2009 9 36.00% 3.00 3.22 5.63   77.44
2010 8 28.57% 2.50 2.88 4.96 2.50 66.50
AVERAGES 9.75 40.01% 2.58 2.97 5.42   66.18

 

The most worrisome thing about this class is the low percentage of sheer numbers for the offense. The low numbers for the 2009 and 2010 recruiting classes could be troublesome down the road and I've briefly mentioned this before, but it could really be a problem on the offensive line at some point.  The 2011 class will have more offensive players, at least at this point, but I've decided not to even get into that until after signing day.


Overall | Defense

 

Year # % Scout Rivals Rivals Rating ESPN ESPN Grades
2007 13 44.83% 2.38 2.69 5.46   52.77
2008 8 50.00% 3.13 3.13 5.63   33.13
2009 16 64.00% 2.75 2.88 5.53   66.38
2010 20 71.43% 2.65 2.90 5.58 1.90 57.75
AVERAGES 14.25 57.56% 2.73 2.90 5.55   52.50

 

For the third straight class, the defense has received at least a majority of the commitments. Not a surprise, the 2008 class was Ruffin McNeill's first class and this is where you began to see the fact that the defense needed to be addressed, now you just worry about the focusing on both sides of the ball and there was a bit of an adjustment for the offense in 2011, which is 57.89% of the current commits on offense and 42.11% on defense.

One other thing to note.  for the most part, the offense has had better classes on paper than the defense.  Like a lot of you, I don't really know what to think about recruiting rankings.  As I think about the NFL, talent evaluators place a big emphasis on athletic ability, which is why they hold an annual combine, and if a player has the requisite athletic ability then the scouts go to production on the field and the film.  I think you could think about talent evaluation on the high school level as the same way.  The best that they can do is to judge the athletic ability of each of these players because it seems that it would virtually be impossible to determine how a player is better than another player except for the elite prospects. 

At the end of the day, I think that what you're looking at with recruiting rankings is a collective effort to simply gauge the athletic ability of various players, plug them into a spreadsheet and/or mathematical formula and spit out a ranking.  I'm sure that there are talent evaluators that can bump up or bump down a player as a result of the film and/or production on the field, but if you're a high school player and such high school player is on the radar for a BCS college then at this point there's going to be film to adjust the grade.  The NFL puts a high priority on certain measurables and the reason there are camps is for coaches to get measurables on potential recruits.  Take a look at Jace Amaro's Rivals.com page and what you get is an idea of what colleges consider when looking at a player:

Height
Weight
40 Yard Dash
Bench Max
Squat Max
Shuttle
Vertical
GPA
SAT

Just like the NFL, it's about getting information that can be compared to other recruits to differentiate between other players at his position.  It makes sense for colleges to utilize SAT and GPA's for recruits rather than the Wonderlic Test as the bottom line is whether or not they can get on campus, but I'd imagine that you're dealing with national test that's easy to compare results across the board. 

So when you wonder why a player is ranked as a 3-star player or a 4-star player then my guess is on the measurables that are easy to compare across the board and then tweaking things based on production on the field.  And yes, it's absolutely an inexact science, but there's a reason why it's such a difficult process and there's a reason why NFL teams miss on players, because it's really tough to judge talent and the intangibles of a particular player.

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Viva The Matadors

You must be a member of Viva The Matadors to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Viva The Matadors. You should read them.

Join Viva The Matadors

You must be a member of Viva The Matadors to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Viva The Matadors. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9347_tracker