There was a great SBN article in Friday morning's links post that brought to light the asinine intrinsic value of team rankings in recruiting. I, for one, think team rankings are absolutely pointless until that class has been signed. And even then, you're not really looking into all the players that made it on campus or stuck with the team.
Much like preseason polls/rankings, ranking team's recruiting classes before their signed can be quite misleading.
So, I wanted to look specifically at the Big 12 and see how the 10 of us did in end-of-recruiting-cycle rankings. Again, this is an imperfect measure as I am not (and cannot) account for every player that signed but didn't make it to campus or has since left the team.
Come National Signing Day, top-10 classes almost always have at least 24 commitments with half or more being rated as blue chips. Top-20 classes typically have at least 35 percent blue chips.
These ratings are based on the 247 individual and composite rating. So, let's take a look at the teams in the Big 12.
|Team||Commits||Blue Chip % (rank)||4-year BC%||14 BC%||13 BC%||12 BC%||11 BC%|
|10||50 (3)||16 (6)||18||19||19||9|
|Iowa State||6||0 (8)||3 (10)||8||4||0||0|
|Kansas||9||0 (8)||7 (8)||4||3||0||10|
|Kansas State||6||0 (8)||5 (9)||4||16||0||0|
|Oklahoma||7||57 (2)||54 (2)||39||46||70||61|
|Oklahoma State||8||25 (5)||22 (3)||25||26||26||11|
|Texas||10||90 (1)||70 (1)||43||73||89||73|
|Texas Christian||16||6 (7)||18 (5)||8||13||25||25|
|Texas Tech||7||29 (4)||19 (4)||4||8||21||41|
|West Virginia||13||15 (6)||15 (7)||24||14||17||4|
*current data as of 6/27/14
We're comparing where the team is at right now to their 4 year average to see if it indicates the team is ahead of the recruiting cycle, on pace, or behind. I also included the data from the previous 4 years to try to show trends, if any.
What does it mean?
First, I want to look at the trends in the 4-year averages and note some things that stuck out to me.
Texas Tech has seen a dramatic decrease in blue-chip recruits since the 2011 season. We all that recruiting cycle was the feather in Tuberville's hat, but if things don't turn around, Tech will not be challenging for the conference title or beyond. Same with TCU.
Baylor has seen a steady influx of blue-chip recruits for the past 3 seasons and the results are starting to pay off. What I also see here is that you don't need a class with 50% or more of blue-chippers to challenge for titles. You need consistency. Same with Oklahoma State.
And then we see teams that over-achieve based on their recruiting rankings, like Kansas State. *Insert obligatory Wizard reference here*
Finally, we see that in 2013 and 2014, every team signed at least one blue-chip recruit. We're starting to see much less disparity in terms of distribution of these blue-chip recruits. Percentages ranged from 4 to 49 in 2014. Whereas in 2012, three teams signed zero, while Texas' class was almost 90% BC'ers.
Tell me what you see and what you make of all this.