Kick Hornsby Off

If this is even remotely true, Coach Meyer must throw Jamar Hornsby off the football team.

Which should only be the start of his consequences.

Rivals.com takes a shot at Florida’s 2008 schedule

Rivals.com cites the Gator’s game against Citadel as the 11th biggest mismatch of the coming season.

Only 11th?


Listen, I have been critical of Florida’s scheduling of patsy teams in the past. If the sole reason for adding an extra home game in the fall was to schedule teams like Western Carolina, the big NCAA schools should be ashamed.

However, articles like this continue to promote a serious misconception about the non-conference scheduling of teams like Florida. As any SEC fan is aware, with a mandatory 8 game conference slate, SEC schools get to schedule either 3 or 4 “other” games each year.

Florida has 4 non-conference opponents in 2008. Besides Citadel (Nov. 22), we face

Hawaii – August 30
Miami – Sept 6
Florida State – Nov 29

Florida has, despite the occasional patsy, had one of the consistently hardest schedules in the nation for years. Here’s betting that – even with Citadel – 2008 will rank among the toughest.

(BTW – I don’t recall much teeth gnashing at Wisconsin playing Citadel last year, a game the Badgers won by the relatively narrow margin of 45-31)

It's never too early...

or too late to rag the 'noles.



H/T: chrise9886 at ZookFreeZone.

UCLLLA

Sorry, couldn't resist recycling that old Buffalo Bills joke.

I also apologize for the blogging hiatus, but sometimes you just need a freakin' break.

The game

There is one game that the Gators MUST WIN this coming fall. That's the game against the University of Miami Hurricanes. For an explanation of why this date is already circled on my calendar click here.

You like us, you really like us...

In accepting the CFBA award for Best Analysis I want to thank my mother for giving birth to me, Mergz' mother for...

What?

We didn't win?

What the fuck?

Voter disenfranchisement!

We want an investigation.

Seriously, we had no chance against SMQ. In fact when we grow up we want to be SMQ.

Luckily the rules say that this year's winners can't be nominated next year. We'll be working on our acceptance speech...

What?

We weren't even the runner-up?

Bastards.

College Football Talent – Defending the Home Turf

In our last post we looked at the states which the top football prospects in 2008 came from. In this post we are going to take a look at which schools were most successful in recruiting the top players from their own states.

Obviously this exercise is subject to a number of factors that make broad comparisons difficult. Take the state of Florida for instance, in which there were 35 recruits listed in the Scout.com top 300. Florida has the “Big 3” schools (Florida, FSU and Miami) that presumably have the best edge in competing for these kids. The state also has up-and-coming schools like USF and UCF that are becoming more competitive for top talent. Finally, the state has become a recruiting focus for schools all around the nation, and especially schools where the coaches have Florida connections (think North Carolina, Illinois and South Carolina).

Lastly there is no guarantee that any individual school necessarily wanted any particular kid just because he was from the school’s home state. He may not have filled a pressing need. Yet make no mistake, the kids in the top 300 list were heavily recruited and would have been a welcome addition to almost any school. So, assuming that, thinking most schools did want their homegrown talent is reasonable.

The following is a list of the states with at least 10 recruits in the top 300 per Scout, and the schools to which they committed. For schools located in that state we have a percentage that reflects the number of top recruits that school was able to attract from in that state.

State of Texas

Top Recruits* - 44

Where they went:

Texas – 11 (25%)
Texas A&M - 8 (18.2%)
Oklahoma – 7
Michigan – 3
LSU – 2
Nebraska – 2
Alabama – 1
Baylor – 1 (2.3%)
Houston – 1 (2.3%)
Ohio State - 1
Oklahoma State – 1
Oregon -1
Oregon State -1
Penn State – 1
Stanford – 1
UCLA – 1

Percentage of Top Recruits that stayed in-state: 47.7%

Comments – Texas has a pretty average number for percentage that stayed in-state, with a majority going to the state’s flagship football program. However Texas A&M did better than I would have expected. Rival Oklahoma did well, and many top schools looked to Texas for recruits.

State of California

Top Recruits* - 36

Where they went:

UCLA – 10 (28.6%)
USC – 9 (25.7%)
Notre Dame – 3
Arizona State – 2
Cal – 2 (5.7%)
Oregon – 2
Washington – 2
Arizona – 1
Colorado - 1
Miami (FL) – 1
North Carolina – 1
Stanford – 1 (2.9%)

Percentage of Top Recruits that stayed in-state: 61.1%

Comments – A huge surprise that UCLA “won” that state of California (maybe the SMQ’s thesis about the decline of USC holds some water). The supposedly rising program of Cal did miserably within the borders of its home state. Overall, 61% of top recruits staying at home is a high number.

State of Florida

Top Recruits* - 35

Where they went:

Miami (FL) – 8 (22.9%)
Florida – 5 (14.3%)
Florida State – 4 (11.4%)
Clemson - 3
LSU – 3
Alabama - 2
Auburn – 2
Illinois – 2
Ohio State – 2
Georgia – 1
Michigan – 1
USC – 1
Undecided – 1

Percentage of Top Recruits that stayed in-state: 48.6%

Comments – Like Texas, top schools nationwide go “shopping” in Florida. Miami had the most successful year in keeping the state of Florida talent at home. Surprisingly none of the “up-and-comers” like UCF and USF got any of the state’s top talent.

State of Georgia

Top Recruits* - 21

Where they went:

Georgia – 9 (42.9%)
Alabama – 2
FSU – 2
Clemson - 1
Florida – 1
Georgia Tech – 1 (4.8%)
Oklahoma – 1
Ohio State – 1
North Carolina – 1
Notre Dame - 1
USC – 1

Percentage of Top Recruits that stayed in-state: 47.6%

Comments – UGA had a huge year in securing their own borders, but with little competition (Tech?) it is not totally unexpected. The state also attracts attention nationwide.

State of Pennsylvania

Top Recruits* - 16

Where they went:

Pitt – 6 (37.5%)
Penn State – 3 (18.8%)
Boston College – 1
Florida – 1
Florida State – 1
Illinois – 1
North Carolina - 1
Ohio State – 1
Undecided – 1

Percentage of Top Recruits that stayed in-state: 56.3%

Comments – Pitt continues to recruit well, and maybe someday it might help them. And scoring only 3 of the top 16 recruits in the state had to be a disappointment for the folks at Happy Valley.

State of Ohio

Top Recruits* - 13

Where they went:

Ohio State – 4 (30.8%)
Michigan – 3
Notre Dame – 2
Penn State – 2
FSU – 1
Illinois – 1

Percentage of Top Recruits that stayed in-state: 30.7%

Comments – While Ohio State recruited well nationally, they by no means sealed their own borders, attracting only 4 of 13 top recruits (only one more than Michigan!) in a state where they essentially have no competition (Cincinnati?). And having only 30% of recruits stay home is a low number.



State of Alabama

Top Recruits* - 11

Where they went:

Alabama – 8 (72.7%)
Florida – 2
Clemson – 1
Auburn – 0 (0%)

Percentage of Top Recruits that stayed in-state: 72.7%

Comments – Nick Saban dominated in Alabama, pulling in an incredible 73% of the top talent in his state. For Auburn to get no top players from Alabama had to be a huge disappointment (with even a top player – Dee Finley – from Auburn, AL choosing Florida). Nearly 73% of recruits staying in Alabama (at Alabama) was the highest percentage of states with a large number of recruits.

State of Virginia

Top Recruits* - 10

Where they went:

Virginia Tech – 4 (40%)
FSU – 1
Georgia – 1
North Carolina – 1
NC State – 1
Notre Dame – 1
Undecided – 1

Percentage of Top Recruits that stayed in-state: 40.0%

Comments – Where is Virginia? VT managed to get 4 of 10 top players, but UVA got none.

Other Notable States and Programs

I add mention of these programs because they are nationally renowned, yet the states they hail from may have too few top recruits to draw a meaningful conclusion as to how well they defended their turf. For example, Arkansas received commitments from all 3 top recruits in that state, but 3 is too small a sample size to compare to a state like Georgia and its 21 top recruits. We look here at states with at least 6 recruits.

By number of top recruits –

State of Louisiana – 8 recruits

Comments – LSU held serve admirably at home, keeping 6 of the 8. (75%)

State of North Carolina – 8 recruits

NC State – 3 of 8 (37.5%)
North Carolina – 1 of 8 (12.5%)

Comment – That has to be disappointing for Butch Davis, who did well elsewhere.

State of New Jersey – 8 recruits

Rutgers – 1 of 8 (12.5%)

Comment – A disaster for a thought to be up and coming program. The state’s top recruit, safety Will Hill is going to Florida, while Michigan got 3 of the other 8. Being out recruited by Michigan in their own state is not a good sign for Rutgers.

State of Michigan – 7 recruits

Michigan – 3 of 7 (42.9%)

Comments – The Wolverines held only 3 of 8 top recruits in their home state, losing others to the likes of Notre Dame, Penn State, USC, and Ohio State.

State of Illinois – 6 recruits

Illinois – 1 of 6 (16.7%)

Zook may be the master recruiter, but evidently not in his own backyard, losing top talent to Notre Dame (3), Ohio State and Minnesota.

State of South Carolina – 6 recruits

Clemson – 3 of 6 (50%)
South Carolina – 1 of 6 (16.7%)

Bowden cleaned up in South Carolina, with the Ol’ Ball Coach able to snag only a single top player in his state. Not a good sign for the Gamecocks.

I’m going to let readers draw their own conclusions as to who defended well their own turf, and who failed, as a blanket comparison between different sample sizes and situations won’t really work.

NEXT: Who Were The Poachers?

College Football Talent – The State of the States

Even sagacious saurians need a break now and again, as the time between this post and the last indicates. So, what shall we address in this time of sport's doldrums between the end of the football season and the beginning of March Madness?

Well, let’s statistically dissect those recruiting classes.

Conventional wisdom among college football observers holds that certain states are “rich” in football talent, and thus fertile recruiting grounds. Commonly California, Texas and Florida are cited among those states with plentiful football talent. However, how much of this is merely a function of the large population of those states, and how much reflects the true depth of football talent in any individual state?

To determine which states are really founts of college football talent (at least in 2007), we first consulted the Scout.com “Scout 300”, or the 300 top college football prospects in 2007 per Scout.

Statistically 300 provides a pretty good sample size for our analysis. What we are tying to determine is which states have an outsized number of participants in the Scout 300 in relation to the overall population of the states, and well as which states are weakly represented in the overall football talent pool.

For example California has a total share of the US population of 11.95%. Thus in a sample of 300 players, one would expect California to have 35.85 (11.95% of 300) representative players.

And California does have almost exactly that in the Scout 300, with 36 of the 300 players coming from the Golden State. Thus, California is evenly represented when it comes to football talent, being neither over represented in high school talent, nor under represented.

The following shows the states that are over represented by football talent to state population, with percentage of US population, expected number of top 300 recruits, actual number of top 300 recruits, and percentage of over representation –




To determine the percentage of over representation, we took the expected number of top 300 recruits compared to the actual number of top 300 recruits. In the example of Alabama, one would expect a state representing 1.51% of the US population to have 4.53 players in the top 300. Alabama actually had 11 in 2007, or 142.8% more than expected.

Some of the states on this list could be merely a function of sample size, such as Nebraska having 2 recruits over an expected 1.74. However the numbers for states like Georgia, Florida, and Texas are very impressive. Texas, the 2nd most populous state with 44 of the top 300 players, had more total recruits than the bottom 31 states combined.

Several states and/or provinces had no top 300 recruits, and for the most part they had populations so low that this was not outside the realm of normal probability (ranked by expected recruits).

The only state that really stands out here is Massachusetts, who would be expected per population to have about 6 recruits. Compare Washington with a nearly identical population to Massachusetts, yet 8 recruits, or even Georgia with a slightly larger population and 21 recruits.

This perhaps explains the empty seats at Boston College games.


Finally we have the underachievers.

The top 7 teams on this list are mostly a function of having less than one less recruit than expected, and not a accurate indication of lack of talent.

New York is the most startling aberration, a state that is 3rd in US population with only 2 of an expected 19 total recruits.

This perhaps explains Syracuse.

Finally, look again at the list of names that have more than their share of expected recruits, those that have about their share, and those that have none or far fewer than expected. In this political year, what “color” states do, for the most part, those look like?

Just sayin’.

Next: How the schools did in their own back yards

It's an honor to just be nominated

But we want to win dammit!


If you are one of our blogging colleagues and like our work, then I urge you to vote for us. If you don't like our work then bugger off.

Accumulated Recruiting Totals

In following up on our last post regarding the average “star” talent recruited over the past four years per Rivals.com we present here the total accumulated points from 2005-2008 for 111 Division I teams.

Is this a perfect indicator of total talent for the teams for the upcoming season? Of course not. For one we are relying on Rivals assessment of talent. Additionally, this does not take into account players that have graduated early, or players that were highly ranked but have proven to be “busts”.

It does show however those schools that have been most successful over the past 4 years in attracting the big names – the talent every school wanted. Thus in that way it shows where the most desired recruits have chosen to play their college ball in the past 4 years.

It also shows, if the near past is any indication, the limited pool of possible schools from which a mythical national champion will be named as in the past 4 years, the eventual MNC was a name somewhere in this top ten list.

First the top 10 in accumulated recruited talent totals for the past 4 years (with point totals) –


1 Southern Cal 10,722
2 Florida 9927
3 Florida State 8930
4 Oklahoma 8747
5 Georgia 8466
6 LSU 8402
7 Alabama 8176
8 Texas 8173
9 Michigan 7934
10 Miami-FL 7680

One of these will be your 2008 MNC (with a strong maybe at that!)

USC has a commanding lead on any other school, nearly 800 points ahead of Florida. And, even though Miami makes the top 10, it is still nearly 29% behind the talent of USC.

USC was also first for the 2004-2007 period, but actually has lost points from their total of last year, down from 11,318. Florida on the other hand, while still second, has closed the gap with USC, going from 9392 to the current 9927. For reference, last year’s top 10 –

1 Southern Cal 11318
2 Florida 9392
3 Florida State 9056
4 LSU 8760
5 Oklahoma 8380
6 Georgia 8219
7 Tennessee 8122
8 Texas 8118
9 Michigan 7835
10 Miami-FL 7542

Moving up strongly year-over-year is Alabama, from 13th last year with 6706 total points to 7th this year and 1470 points stronger. Tennessee which was 7th last year falls from the top 10 to 13th overall this year with 7401, a loss of 721 points.

Finally the other 101 schools in our study, and their point totals –

11 Notre Dame 7526
12 Ohio State 7460
13 Tennessee 7401
14 Auburn 7114
15 Clemson 6840
16 Nebraska 6503
17 South Carolina 6058
18 California 5776
19 UCLA 5423
20 Penn State 5398
21 Texas A&M 5281
22 Virginia Tech 5238
23 Ole Miss 5084
24 Maryland 4726
25 Arizona 4691
26 Oregon 4683
27 Arkansas 4563
28 Pittsburgh 4550
29 North Carolina 4324
30 Oklahoma State 4312
31 Illinois 4274
32 Arizona State 4048
33 Iowa 4043
34 Virginia 3725
35 Colorado 3724
36 Missouri 3499
37 Kansas State 3482
38 West Virginia 3353
39 Washington 3344
40 Wisconsin 3324
41 Michigan State 3305
42 NC State 3200
43 Texas Tech 3082
44 Boston College 3065
45 Mississippi State 2919
46 Louisville 2739
47 Georgia Tech 2661
48 Kansas 2587
49 Minnesota 2433
50 Rutgers 2376
51 Oregon State 2275
52 Purdue 2106
53 Syracuse 2041
54 Stanford 2031
55 Southern Miss. 1858
56 Kentucky 1807
57 South Florida 1486
58 Washington St. 1316
59 Duke 1275
60 Baylor 1217
61 Iowa State 1186
62 Utah 1169
63 Northwestern 1142
64 Brigham Young 1033
65 UCF 928
66 TCU 847
67 Marshall 826
68 San Diego St. 798
69 Wake Forest 777
70 Boise State 762
71 Vanderbilt 732
72 Fresno State 719
73 Troy State 711
74 Connecticut 641
75 East Carolina 611
76 Toledo 604
77 Tulsa 576
78 UAB 573
79 Hawaii 516
80 Middle Tenn St. 489
81 Western Michigan 484
82 Louisiana Tech 463
83 Indiana 462
84 Cincinnati 447
85 Temple 421
86 Ohio 406
87 UNLV 395
88 Nevada 395
89 Memphis 386
90 Miami-OH 366
91 New Mexico 358
92 Wyoming 352
93 Kent 348
94 Eastern Michigan 334
95 Louisiana-Laf. 332
96 SMU 308
97 Rice 307
98 Houston 300
99 Colorado State 284
100 North Texas 278
101 New Mexico St. 273
102 Idaho 260
103 Utah State 255
104 Louisiana-Mon. 252
105 Tulane 244
106 Northern Illinois 232
107 San Jose St. 231
108 Air Force 208
109 Army 159
110 Navy 132
111 McNeese St. 54

At 54 points, McNeese State is only 1/199th of USC’s point total.

Recruiting – Four Year Trailing Numbers

The “Star” Averages

Using Rivals.com’s rankings we have now updated our 4 year trailing totals of the accumulated recruiting talent of 111 Division I teams (those teams with 4 total years of data), as well as our 4 year average “star” talent of the players recruited.

As before, the rich have gotten richer.

To keep this relatively short, in this post I will address the “star” ratings which show the average number of stars of all recruited players over the past 4 years. We will follow up with the total accumulated talent ratings in a later post.

The average “star” ratings for the top 20 teams for the past four years per Rivals.com is –

1 Southern Cal 4.01
2 Florida 3.75
3 LSU 3.70
4 Ohio State 3.67
5 Texas 3.64
6 Georgia 3.59
7 Oklahoma 3.59
8 Michigan 3.54
9 Notre Dame 3.54
10 Florida State 3.51
11 Miami-FL 3.43
12 Alabama 3.41
13 Tennessee 3.35
14 Auburn 3.29
15 Clemson 3.28
16 UCLA 3.26
17 Nebraska 3.22
18 Penn State 3.21
19 California 3.18
20 South Carolina 3.16

USC’s average of 4 “stars” is really impressive, coming in a full quarter point better than the second place Gators. In contrast, you have to go all the way from the 2nd place Gators to 10th place FSU to see a similar drop in average talent.

This top 20 perhaps tells us a great deal about what we have seen in conference competition over the past several years, and what to expect yet again next year. USC, despite a “down” season, managed to win the Pac Ten. When you look at the talent disparity between the Trojans and their conference mates, that outcome seems obvious. The only other Pac Ten teams in the top 20, UCLA and Cal, rank 23% and 26% worse talent-wise than USC, respectively.

Ohio State and Michigan, and to a lesser extent Penn State, rule the Big Ten talent-wise. And most of the competition in that conference over the past several seasons has been there.

When you look at the SEC, you have Florida, LSU, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, Auburn and South Carolina all in the top 20. Which pretty much accurately describes the annual conference bloodbath.

The Big 12? Well, Texas and Oklahoma rule that roost. And they usually do.

Lastly you have the confusion that is the ACC. According to both this year’s average, and last year’s, FSU and Miami are the most talent laden in the conference. Yet neither was very competitive. Reader explanations are solicited.

While USC’s average rating is impressive, they actually declined slightly from last year’s four year average, from 4.05. The teams marking the greatest improvements in average talent year-over-year were –

1 Notre Dame 0.28
2 Clemson 0.26
3 Pittsburgh 0.23
4 UCLA 0.23
5 Alabama 0.21
6 Minnesota 0.21
7 Colorado 0.18
8 Illinois 0.18
9 Kansas 0.17
10 Army 0.15
11 North Carolina 0.15
12 South Carolina 0.14
13 Arizona 0.14
14 Southern Miss. 0.14
15 UCF 0.14
16 Ohio State 0.14
17 Arizona State 0.13
18 Utah 0.12
19 Louisville 0.12
20 Georgia Tech 0.11

Increasing a four-year average by 0.28 (or anything over 0.20) is no small feat, and the talent at Notre Dame has undergone a serious upgrade, as has been widely observed. Likewise at Alabama. However upgrades at teams like Clemson, Pittsburgh, UCLA and Minnesota are a bit more surprising.

The statistics for declining talent are a bit less illuminating, as overall teams show very little decline in average recruited talent. The top 10 teams for declining talent are –

1 McNeese St. -0.37
2 Washington St. -0.10
3 San Diego St. -0.08
4 Florida State -0.06
5 Virginia -0.06
6 Michigan State -0.05
7 Purdue -0.05
8 Tennessee -0.05
9 Tulane -0.04
10 Southern Cal -0.04

McNeese State is more of a data anomaly (they had one decent year in 2005 with an average of 2.5, and fell off substantially later on). And while teams like FSU and Tennessee show a declining average talent, the number is very small.

In our next installment we will look at the overall four year trailing accumulated talent per Rivals.com. Or, if you prefer, we will take a look at next year’s potential mythical national champions. For in the past 4 years, the eventual MNC was someone in the top ten in accumulated talent every year (last year’s MNC LSU was 4th overall last year)

Next – Accumulated 4 Year Totals

National Signing Day

It’s National Signing Day and, according to which recruiting service you believe, the Gators are somewhere in the top 10 heading into the day.

Rivals sees the Top Ten this way (with point total) –

1 Notre Dame 2,744
2 Alabama 2,689
3 Florida 2,570
4 Oklahoma 2,422
5 Georgia 2,388
6 Miami 2,298
7 Florida State 2,203
8 Ohio State 2,167
9 LSU 2,065
10 Michigan 2,037

Interestingly USC comes in at 11.

Scout.com has the following Top Ten (with number of commits, conference and point total) –

1. Alabama 29 SEC 4585.
2. Notre Dame 22 I-A Ind 4421
3. Georgia 24 SEC 4275
4. Miami (Fl) 29 ACC 4106
5. LSU 25 SEC 3865
6. Florida State 26 ACC 3819
7. UCLA 23 Pac-10 3811
8. Florida 22 SEC 3736.
9. Ohio State 18 Big Ten 3704
10. Oklahoma 21 Big 12 3691

USC falls all the way to 17th in the Scout rankings.

As we have mentioned before, Florida is likely to have a smaller than average class due to fewer scholarships available. (The Gators signed 27 recruits in both 2007 and 2006). Thus far the quality of the Florida class has been stellar, with 4 “5 Star” recruits according to either the Rivals or Scout.

The “big one” remaining is the possible commitment of the nation’s top receiver in Julio Jones of Foley, Alabama. Scout seems to predict he will commit to Alabama, but if UF can land Jones the day will be an unqualified success. He plans on announcing his decision live on ESPNU at 11:30.

We will update then.

UPDATE: (1:36 PM)

As expected Jones signed with Alabama, but Florida did pick up a nice receiver in TJ Lawrence of Lakeland.

The day has been a bit disappointing for the Gators, with de-commitments from Ricky Barnum and Ramon Buchanan. According to Rivals, the overall team winner appears to be between Alabama and Notre Dame, with the Gators "out of the running". However a class anywhere in the top 5 with the existing talent base can only be considered outstanding.

Jortgia Nation!

Many thanks to one of our fine readers out there for picking up this over the weekend. It looks to have been taken at the Jacksonville Landing......a fertile ground for Bulldogs in Jorts.

Zoom in to inspect the T-shirt---Bulldog Nation.

A fine specimen indeed!

18-1

The 1972 Dolphins remain the only perfect team.