Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="tep624, post: 1426234, member: 430"]
But couldn't this analysis simply be proving that successful teams get their classes ranked higher?

The measure of a recruiting class's impact is typically 2-4 years after they are recruited, so that recruiting class literally has 0 impact on the current state of the team and its success, or lack there of.The analysis you reference compares recruiting classes from 2002-2012 and team performance during the same period.  I would argue that at least a third of that data set is skewed because 2002-2003 is generally going to be impacted on the field by recruits from the 1999-2001 classes and the 2011-2012 classes likely have little, if any impact on the 2011 and 2012 seasons.  And it's even worse for schools that generally don't recruit plug and play blue chip players.

What they should have done is compare the 2002-2012 classes to the 2004-2014 seasons, at a minimum, for the power programs.  And the scale probably slides even more for schools that recruit the 2 star types that need more time to develop.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?