What is an acceptable recruiting class rank?

[pcbuff]

Mine using Rivals.

Top 25- An A and worthy of staff bonuses
Top 35 - B. Not where CU should be, but recognizing the reality of where CU is still a good job.
Top 50- C. Meh


An;ything below fifty and heads should roll. We're paying coaches 7 figures. Recruiting is the key to a turn around. With facility projects in motion, and a P 5 program, if you aren't top 50, you've failed.

I seem to have a higher standard in this area than most of you. I do think this staff did as expected this year on the field with the exception of CSU. Interested in your thoughts.

 

[Bufffan68]

As far as rankings go, here's my take. There are 65 power 5 teams. We are in the bottom 10% of performers, so I can see the logic in being around 60 as reasonable. But, we have a better paid staff than many schools, certainly we're not in the bottom 10% of that category, so my expectations are a little higher. Anything below 50 isn't acceptable to me, as if that means anything.

 

[sackman]

Somewhere in the 50's is probably where we should expect to be. Anything better than that and I'll be happy. Anything worse than that and I'll be concerned.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

Mine using Rivals.

Top 25- An A and worthy of staff bonuses
Top 35 - B. Not where CU should be, but recognizing the reality of where CU is still a good job.
Top 50- C. Meh


An;ything below fifty and heads should roll. We're paying coaches 7 figures. Recruiting is the key to a turn around. With facility projects in motion, and a P 5 program, if you aren't top 50, you've failed.

I seem to have a higher standard in this area than most of you. I do think this staff did as expected this year on the field with the exception of CSU. Interested in your thoughts.

What difference does it make?

Do you think the head coach is going to be fired the Wednesday after signing day if he doesn't bring in a top 50 class?
Are you going to stop following the team if CU doesn't sign a top 50 class?
Are you going to cancel your season tickets, stop making donations, etc?

 

[slider]

Minimum of 50 for a school like CU.
Should be in lower 40's with facilities in progress imo

 

[Darth Snow]

Minimum of 50 for a school like CU.
Should be in lower 40's with facilities in progress imo

yup. After this wonderful year on the field along with Mac's self professed love of finding "his guys", might bump to 55. At most. Need to get that **** going.

 

[Bufffan68]

What difference does it make?

Do you think the head coach is going to be fired the Wednesday after signing day if he doesn't bring in a top 50 class?
Are you going to stop following the team if CU doesn't sign a top 50 class?
Are you going to cancel your season tickets, stop making donations, etc?

Really? Bull****ting about sports has to make a difference? It's just for fun...

 

[Buffnik]

As a general rule, there are several tiers in recruiting where classes are pretty similar.

Top 15 is elite.

16-30 is an excellent class.

31-45 is a good class.

46-60 is mediocre.

61-80 is a poor class.

81+ is ****.

 

[sackman]

As a general rule, there are several tiers in recruiting where classes are pretty similar.

Top 15 is elite.

16-30 is an excellent class.

31-45 is a good class.

46-60 is mediocre.

61-80 is a poor class.

81+ is ****.

For a team that has won 10 games in 4 years, mediocrity sounds pretty appealing.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

Really? Bull****ting about sports has to make a difference? It's just for fun...

I just don't understand the point of it.

Will CU's recruiting class be as good as pretty much the rest of the Pac-12? No.

So what?

There's no accountability for it. Nothing will change because of it. So why bother spending so much time worrying about it?

It's just something for fans to bitch and moan about during the off-season.

 

[Bufffan68]

I just don't understand the point of it.

Will CU's recruiting class be as good as pretty much the rest of the Pac-12? No.

So what?

There's no accountability for it. Nothing will change because of it. So why bother spending so much time worrying about it?

It's just something for fans to bitch and moan about during the off-season.

I see your point, but I like to BS about it and all things Buffs football :nod:

 

[pcbuff]

What difference does it make?

Do you think the head coach is going to be fired the Wednesday after signing day if he doesn't bring in a top 50 class?
Are you going to stop following the team if CU doesn't sign a top 50 class?
Are you going to cancel your season tickets, stop making donations, etc?

At this point my Saturdays and summers are filled with my own coaching. CU could cease to exists, and I would probably have more free time and less tension. That said, I am a fan and follow this school with an unhealthy amount of interest.

To answer the second part of your question, I do think 2015 is a pivotal year for this staff. I think if the on field performance and recruiting stays status quo, people will be fired. Right now, no conference wins and a below fifty class are all things being noted by our new AD.

From the last time I angered you, I do think Jeffcoat is not getting it done in Texas. When you called me an idiot when I voiced that concern when the staff was new, I took it personal. Sorry about that.

I really do want this staff to succeed. They seem to have the X&O ability. They seem like hard workers and good people. I really want them to find a few four stars and turn this class into something unexpected.

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

Unless we're in the top 30, I really don't care where the class is ranked as long as it's above ~80. Every class ranked between 30 and 80 is the same class, a bunch of kids who will need to be coached and developed.

Top 10 would be an A
10-30 would be a B
30-80 would be a C
Below 80 is an F

 

[Darth Snow]

Unless we're in the top 30, I really don't care where the class is ranked as long as it's above ~80. Every class ranked between 30 and 80 is the same class, a bunch of kids who will need to be coached and developed.

Top 10 would be an A
10-30 would be a B
30-80 would be a C
Below 80 is an F

I feel like you have some sort of internal divide.

 

[BuffUp]

At this point my Saturdays and summers are filled with my own coaching. CU could cease to exists, and I would probably have more free time and less tension. That said, I am a fan and follow this school with an unhealthy amount of interest.

To answer the second part of your question, I do think 2015 is a pivotal year for this staff. I think if the on field performance and recruiting stays status quo, people will be fired. Right now, no conference wins and a below fifty class are all things being noted by our new AD.

From the last time I angered you, I do think Jeffcoat is not getting it done in Texas. When you called me an idiot when I voiced that concern when the staff was new, I took it personal. Sorry about that.

I really do want this staff to succeed. They seem to have the X&O ability. They seem like hard workers and good people. I really want them to find a few four stars and turn this class into something unexpected.

well put. I am saying to early for bashing coaches on recruit class rank. Kids do not want to play for teams that are losers. Kids these days are really self entitled and want it all now, do not believe in the hard work that needs to be put in to get there. These coaches have an uphill battle for a couple more years. The kids that do want to come here and earn wins hats off to them...and more then not, those are the kids that will get this **** show turned around.

 

[FLounder]

As long as we bring in more talented kids then the ones who leave I'll be happy. 2016 class will be a lot better, this staff can recruit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[patebuff]

Around a 50 ranking should be expected. They have a couple difference makers who can bump it up slightly. The question will be numbers. I think we see a lot of movement from here till signing day.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Unless we're in the top 30, I really don't care where the class is ranked as long as it's above ~80. Every class ranked between 30 and 80 is the same class, a bunch of kids who will need to be coached and developed.

Top 10 would be an A
10-30 would be a B
30-80 would be a C
Below 80 is an F

I disagree, that C range is way too big. If you're in they upper 30's you're going to have a couple impact players or at least plus athletes, low 70's you have guys with nice smiles and firm handshakes, or very late bloomers which is more of a crapshoot.

 

[buffaholic]

There has NEVER been correlation in the rankings and actual talent once you get outside the top tier. Certainly by 40, you can't treat this data as anything but "made for fan discussion" data.

If your expectation is that your team should be top 10, or top 25, then great. If you are worrying about 42nd vs 63rd....

 

[FLounder]

There has NEVER been correlation in the rankings and actual talent once you get outside the top tier. Certainly by 40, you can't treat this data as anything but "made for fan discussion" data.

If your expectation is that your team should be top 10, or top 25, then great. If you are worrying about 42nd vs 63rd....

Welcome to Allbuffs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Buffnik]

There has NEVER been correlation in the rankings and actual talent once you get outside the top tier. Certainly by 40, you can't treat this data as anything but "made for fan discussion" data.

If your expectation is that your team should be top 10, or top 25, then great. If you are worrying about 42nd vs 63rd....

The differences when you get down there are often a matter of who landed a couple guys who are considered front line talents. 90% of each class is a wash between 42 and 63, so you really have to look closely to know the truth.

Also, something that some schools do that CU does not (and it's probably a good idea) is that they'll sign some players they know won't qualify if they don't have room to add 25 to the roster. It artificially inflates the class ranking (whether that has any benefit, I don't know) but, more importantly, it builds a relationship that gives the inside track after the guy is done with his JUCO years while also being good for building a relationship with the player's high school coach (pipeline).

 

[SINKRATZ]

The overall rank really isn't the issue, if we're top 35, but regularly 10th or worse in the Pac 12, it's not good enough. The better question would be where should we expect CU to rank in the Pac 12. For me, top half on the conference should be the expectation.

 

[SD Buff]

I am not using an outlier as an exception to prove the rule, but check out Wisconsins classes over the years.

CU isn't recruiting well enough. CU hasn't been recruiting well enough. But unless we are recruiting elite classes, I really DGAF .

From phone

 

[SINKRATZ]

I am not using an outlier as an exception to prove the rule, but check out Wisconsins classes over the years.

CU isn't recruiting well enough. CU hasn't been recruiting well enough. But unless we are recruiting elite classes, I really DGAF .

From phone

Wisconsin is an outlier though. I look more at a program like Michigan State as a model. They're typically in the 25-40 range, almost never top 15, but almost always in the top half of their conference. They are in the hunt for the conference championship most years, and go to the occasional Rose Bowl. They have conference title hopes every year even if they don't always win it. That's where I want CU to be.

 

[Buffnik]

Wisconsin is an outlier though. I look more at a program like Michigan State as a model. They're typically in the 25-40 range, almost never top 15, but almost always in the top half of their conference. They are in the hunt for the conference championship most years, and go to the occasional Rose Bowl. They have conference title hopes every year even if they don't always win it. That's where I want CU to be.

The thing with CU is that if we can get it back to that, CU can be better than that in recruiting... especially with new facilities. This is a place that can attract recruiting classes in the Top 20 every year when things are right.

 

[bigbang2]

Don't care about rank class.

Getting Busey(sp), Virgil, Brown, Manu, Kelly and other impact players to finish the class will be acceptable for me.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Absolutely nik. I think some are under the wrong impression that the people here who are frustrated with recruiting want us to be recruiting classes full of blue chips. If we could just climb back into the middle of our conference recruiting-wise I think we could build a team that can regularly have a say in who wins the Pac 12 South. Once we're there,you're probably right and we can begin to dream bigger.

 

[Duff Man]

As long as we bring in more talented kids then the ones who leave I'll be happy. 2016 class will be a lot better, this staff can recruit. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The smallest class in years? Good to know.

 

[14er]

< 40

 

[SBG]

well put. I am saying to early for bashing coaches on recruit class rank. Kids do not want to play for teams that are losers. Kids these days are really self entitled and want it all now, do not believe in the hard work that needs to be put in to get there. These coaches have an uphill battle for a couple more years. The kids that do want to come here and earn wins hats off to them...and more then not, those are the kids that will get this **** show turned around.

Tell yourself the next time you are looking for a job. Do you want to go work for a ****show or do you want to work for Google? I don't buy that "people don't want to work hard." Too curmudgeony.