Star Gazing

With National Letter of Intent Day come and gone, and Penn State coming out with the 24th ranked class according to Rivals.com, let's step back for a moment to reflect on a few things.

First, it is amazing that Penn State managed to hold on to most of their recruits, and even add to that class--WE ARE  . . . BETTER, through the turmoil of a new coaching staff and the residual sanctions.  Kudos to Coach Franklin and his staff.

And while Nittany Nation rejoices in having a Top 25 recruiting class, at least according to one of multiple sites that rate such things, what exactly does it mean???

A few years ago, I looked at how recruiting classes matched up against actual rankings and came up with a figure I called a RANK INDEX or RECRUITING INDEX.  Basically, I take the Rivals recruiting rank for the past 4 years (2010-2013) for each team and compare that average recruiting rank to where the team ended up at the end of that four year period (this ranking by the USA Today.)  The Rank Index is the Average Recruiting Rank divided by the Rank the team actually managed on the field.  If a given team was ranked #1 in recruiting for four straight years and ended up ranked #1, their Index would be 1.  Numbers above one mean the team outperformed their recruiting rank, that is to say, the numerator would be a larger number such as the 75th recruiting class, compared to a #3 (denominator) ranking in the polls.  The Index would be 25 or 75 divided by 3.  Conversely, indices less than one indicate a high denominator (lower national rank in the polls) compared to a low numerator (higher or better recruiting rank.)

As an example, here are Penn State's numbers:

2010- Rivals recruiting ranked 12th
2011- Rivals ranked 35th
2012- Rivals ranked 51st.
2013- Rivals ranked 43rd.
Average Rivals ranking from 2010-2013 = 35.25

USA Today Rank for 2013-2014 season: 49th.

Rank Index = 0.719 which ranks 89th among all teams.

Here is the data in table form:

	Rivals AVG RANK (2010-2013)	USA Today Rank	Rank Index
Michigan State	35.50	2	17.750
Florida State	7.00	1	7.000
UCF	65.00	11	5.909
Missouri	35.25	6	5.875
South Carolina	19.25	4	4.813
Northern Illinois	92.00	25	3.680
Baylor	40.25	13	3.096
Duke	67.25	22	3.057
Fresno State	81.50	28	2.911
Wisconsin	60.50	21	2.881
Louisville	42.75	15	2.850
Utah State	102.25	37	2.764
Clemson	13.75	5	2.750
Ball State	110.75	41	2.701
Stanford	29.25	12	2.438
Auburn	7.25	3	2.417
Bowling Green	98.50	42	2.345
Navy	98.75	43	2.297
Kansas State	64.25	29	2.216
Louisiana-Lafayette	97.25	44	2.210
Arizona State	41.25	19	2.171
Rice	94.50	48	1.969
East Carolina	78.50	40	1.963
Marshall	63.00	33	1.909
North Texas	105.00	55	1.909
Oklahoma State	31.75	17	1.868
Buffalo	119.50	65	1.838
Oklahoma	11.75	7	1.679
Oregon	15.00	9	1.667
Vanderbilt	45.00	27	1.667
Middle Tennessee	99.75	61	1.635
Arkansas State	93.50	59	1.585
Brigham Young	59.00	38	1.553
Louisiana-Monroe	114.50	74	1.547
UNLV	102.25	69	1.482
San Jose State	106.00	72	1.472
Western Kentucky	87.00	60	1.450
Boise State	62.75	45	1.394
Tulane	93.75	68	1.379
Arizona	44.00	32	1.375
Iowa	42.00	31	1.355
San Diego State	77.75	58	1.341
UCLA	18.50	14	1.321
Ohio	100.75	77	1.308
Colorado State	82.00	64	1.281
Troy	101.00	82	1.232
Central Michigan	102.25	87	1.175
Florida Atlantic	104.25	89	1.171
Akron	108.75	95	1.145
Minnesota	59.25	52	1.139
Cincinnati	57.25	51	1.123
Army	118.25	108	1.095
Houston	57.25	54	1.060
Toledo	70.75	67	1.056
Ohio State	10.50	10	1.050
Syracuse	73.50	70	1.050
Wyoming	96.50	92	1.049
Nevada	95.00	91	1.044
Georgia Tech	56.50	56	1.009
Massachusetts	119.00	120	0.992
Eastern Michigan	113.25	116	0.976
Texas A and M	17.50	18	0.972
UTEP	105.00	111	0.946
Kent State	92.25	98	0.941
Boston College	59.25	63	0.940
Washington	22.50	24	0.938
Washington State	68.25	73	0.935
Air Force	103.50	113	0.916
Louisiana Tech	90.50	99	0.914
Idaho	109.25	123	0.888
Texas Tech	34.50	39	0.885
New Mexico State	101.50	117	0.868
Miami (OH)	105.50	124	0.851
Western Michigan	103.75	122	0.850
Oregon State	44.50	53	0.840
UAB	98.50	118	0.835
SMU	71.75	86	0.834
New Mexico	86.50	104	0.832
Northwestern	69.75	84	0.830
Indiana	64.50	78	0.827
Connecticut	82.25	100	0.823
Tulsa	81.75	101	0.809
FIU	95.50	119	0.803
Wake Forest	66.75	85	0.785
Temple	86.25	110	0.784
Nebraska	19.75	26	0.760
Mississippi State	34.50	47	0.734
Penn State	35.25	49	0.719
Hawaii	80.75	114	0.708
Pittsburgh	43.50	62	0.702
Iowa State	64.25	96	0.669
Memphis	71.25	107	0.666
North Carolina	32.75	50	0.655
Colorado	61.25	97	0.631
Mississippi	21.00	35	0.600
Illinois	56.00	94	0.596
Miami (FL)	20.25	34	0.596
Southern Miss	71.00	121	0.587
LSU	9.00	16	0.563
Virginia Tech	25.25	46	0.549
South Florida	56.00	103	0.544
Rutgers	41.25	76	0.543
NC State	55.25	102	0.542
Maryland	36.75	71	0.518
Purdue	59.25	115	0.515
Notre Dame	11.75	23	0.511
Kansas	52.50	105	0.500
Utah	35.25	75	0.470
Kentucky	51.00	109	0.468
TCU	34.75	79	0.440
West Virginia	36.75	88	0.418
Georgia	11.00	30	0.367
Arkansas	33.50	93	0.360
Virginia	36.75	106	0.347
USC	6.50	20	0.325
Alabama	2.00	8	0.250
Michigan	13.25	57	0.232
Texas	8.00	36	0.222
California	20.75	112	0.185
Tennessee	15.00	83	0.181
Florida	5.25	81	0.065

Michigan State outperformed teams in this four year span, ending up ranked #2, while having recruiting classes that averaged 35th nationally.  Conversely, Florida consistently had good recruiting classes, but with a USA Today ranking of 81, they were the worst performing team in terms of talent.  Naturally, teams that do not "recruit well" will be higher on the list, such as Northern Illinois, Duke and Ball State because their success this season is beyond what would be expected from the recruiting classes.  Meanwhile, powerhouses like USC, THEM, and Alabama litter the bottom part of the list because their top ranked classes did not bring USA Today ranks that are equivalent.  Alabama averaged the second best class over the last four years to produce a team ranked 8th.  Note the number of SEC teams at the bottom of the list.  Also note that Vanderbilt was #31, getting a decent USA Today ranking out of modest recruiting classes.

A similar table can be constructed based on STAR ratings--this is the STAR index.  Rivals assigns star ratings to the recruits and then reports an "average" star rating.  For Penn State, that was 3.12.  For Alabama, that average star rating was 3.79.  So what I did was took the star rating ranks in order, such as this abbreviated list . . .

#1 USC (4.04)
#2 Alabama (3.79)
#3 Texas (3.73)
#4 Florida (3.69)
#5 Florida State (3.60)
#6 Auburn (3.58)
#6 LSU (3.58)
#6 Notre Dame (3.58)
#6 Ohio State (3.58)
#10 Georgia (3.49)
#28 Penn State (3.12)
#41 Vanderbilt (2.95)

So for the STAR INDEX, here is how teams fared the past four years compared to their USA Today Ranking on the field:

	Rivals AVG STARS (2010-2013)	USA Today Rank	Star Index
Michigan State	3.07	2	14.000
South Carolina	3.23	4	5.750
UCF	2.74	11	5.273
Florida State	3.60	1	5.000
Missouri	3.12	6	4.000
Northern Illinois	2.23	25	3.680
Duke	2.55	22	3.136
Clemson	3.36	5	3.000
Fresno State	2.46	28	2.571
Baylor	3.00	13	2.462
Ball State	2.10	41	2.610
Utah State	2.22	37	2.514
Navy	2.09	43	2.465
Arizona State	2.90	19	2.316
Bowling Green	2.22	42	2.143
Louisville	3.00	15	2.000
Louisiana-Lafayette	2.22	44	2.000
Marshall	2.55	33	1.939
Auburn	3.58	3	1.667
East Carolina	2.43	40	1.700
Kansas State	2.78	29	1.621
Wisconsin	3.00	21	1.381
North Texas	2.23	55	1.473
Buffalo	2.07	65	1.477
Brigham Young	2.64	38	1.500
Oklahoma State	3.03	17	1.412
Rice	2.47	48	1.271
Oklahoma	3.47	7	1.286
Stanford	3.38	12	1.000
Louisiana-Monroe	2.10	74	1.216
Western Kentucky	2.29	60	1.200
Arkansas State	2.29	59	1.153
Oregon	3.40	9	1.111
Boise State	2.64	45	1.133
Arizona	2.90	32	1.125
Middle Tennessee	2.31	61	1.049
San Jose State	2.19	72	1.042
UNLV	2.23	69	1.014
Vanderbilt	2.95	27	1.000
Tulane	2.29	68	0.926
Iowa	2.94	31	0.935
San Diego State	2.46	58	0.931
Colorado State	2.38	64	0.906
Ohio	2.20	77	0.870
Troy	2.20	82	0.817
Cincinnati	2.73	51	0.843
Toledo	2.42	67	0.836
Central Michigan	2.18	87	0.759
Florida Atlantic	2.17	89	0.753
Houston	2.74	54	0.759
Akron	2.14	95	0.695
UCLA	3.39	14	0.714
Minnesota	2.78	52	0.712
Ohio State	3.58	10	0.700
Syracuse	2.51	70	0.671
Texas A and M	3.28	18	0.667
Army	1.89	108	0.593
Wyoming	2.22	92	0.620
Washington	3.15	24	0.625
Nevada	2.26	91	0.582
Boston College	2.72	63	0.603
Kent State	2.13	98	0.592
Texas Tech	2.95	39	0.564
Washington State	2.63	73	0.548
Massachusetts	1.76	120	0.475
UTEP	2.17	111	0.486
Oregon State	2.90	53	0.528
Eastern Michigan	2.13	116	0.457
Air Force	2.11	113	0.469
Georgia Tech	2.95	56	0.393
SMU	2.59	86	0.442
Indiana	2.71	78	0.449
Louisiana Tech	2.51	99	0.384
Idaho	2.21	123	0.382
New Mexico	2.32	104	0.404
Miami (OH)	2.18	124	0.371
New Mexico State	2.29	117	0.359
UAB	2.24	118	0.373
Nebraska	3.32	26	0.385
Connecticut	2.46	100	0.370
Wake Forest	2.77	85	0.365
Western Michigan	2.37	122	0.311
Tulsa	2.56	101	0.347
Northwestern	2.87	84	0.333
Mississippi State	3.03	47	0.340
Temple	2.24	110	0.327
Miami (FL)	3.25	34	0.353
Pittsburgh	2.94	62	0.323
Mississippi	3.26	35	0.314
LSU	3.58	16	0.313
FIU	2.43	119	0.244
Iowa State	2.67	96	0.281
North Carolina	3.01	50	0.260
Hawaii	2.29	114	0.246
Penn State	3.12	49	0.224
Memphis	2.43	107	0.243
Colorado	2.73	97	0.247
Illinois	2.73	94	0.245
Virginia Tech	3.19	46	0.217
Notre Dame	3.58	23	0.217
Southern Miss	2.64	121	0.174
Rutgers	2.95	76	0.171
Maryland	2.94	71	0.183
South Florida	2.89	103	0.146
Georgia	3.49	30	0.167
Purdue	2.78	115	0.139
Kansas	2.88	105	0.133
Utah	3.01	75	0.120
NC State	2.98	102	0.098
West Virginia	2.87	88	0.136
Alabama	3.79	8	0.250
TCU	3.05	79	0.089
Kentucky	2.92	109	0.083
Arkansas	3.01	93	0.075
Virginia	2.94	106	0.066
Michigan	3.41	57	0.070
USC	4.04	20	0.050
Texas	3.73	36	0.028
California	3.31	112	0.027
Tennessee	3.36	83	0.024
Florida	3.69	81	0.012

Once again, MSU led the field with a strong USA Today rank (low denominator) and a higher denominator (poor recruiting class compared to other powerhouses like USC and Ohio State.)  Vanderbilt out-performed Penn State in both recruiting classes and star indices, with Penn State on sanctions 2 of those years in the period and Franklin coaching Vandy for three of those four years.

Of course, all the variables are based on subjective rankings and do not take into account coaching changes, injuries, or BCS calculations.  But it still gives us an interesting way to look at how recruiting class rank translates into wins and losses.