MajorAppleCat wrote: ↑January 28th, 2019, 5:26 pm
purplemob wrote: ↑January 28th, 2019, 3:28 pm
To be fair this years class was probably headed for 10th in conference and somewhere in the 70s or possibly even 80s. So the fact that with a few more food additions this class could be looking at ending in the 50s is a good sign from this staff. Now this is all just my opinion and speculation based on the recruiting trend and past few years so I am by no means trying to back LHOFHCBS or his staff. Just trying to give credit where it’s due.
I'm not defending FHCBS; I' not attacking Klieman. It is all conjecture on what type of class FHCBS would have had. Just saying from the looks of the class, it does not appear to be any better or worse than prior classes. Klieman may very well be a very good coach. If he can average 7-8 wins seasons at KState he too should belong in the HOF. Only saying at this point, his classes are not at the Prince level.
The thing about recruiting rankings is that a few highly rated players can inflate a class very quickly. Rankings are also subjective to the teams around them at the time.
For example, the 2006 class was rated #41 in the nation and contained two 4*s in James Johnson and Josh Freeman and had 29 commits. But it also contained eleven 2* players with a score of 168.63 and an average rating of .8059.
Prince's 2007 class had 33 in it, with an average rating of .8251 with a score of 189.4
Prince's 2008 class had 32 in it, with an average rating of .8404 with a score of 198.72
The current 2019 class has only 18 commits, no 4*s but only two 2*s. It's score is 165.54 with an average rating of .8359.
You can see that the 2019 class, had it been in 2006, would have actually been rated #42, right behind the #41 actual K-State class. Hence that class rankings are relative to the year they are in, comparing them year to year is not a fair comparison because the rest of college football is not the same.
You can also see that with more players, you get more points, but the average rating of the players drops, like in 2006 and 2007. If K-State were to sign 14 more players to get to the 32 in 2008, they would need 33.18 points, or 2.37 points per additional player to meet the same score. 2.37 points would put the players rating right below current commit Jonathan Alexander's score, the 3rd lowest recruit in the class, which is basically the line between a 2* and 3* player. Would everyone be instantly happy if K-State signed 14 more borderline 3* players so it can be as good as Prince's class?
Not to mention that you can't sign more then 25 anymore, so it's comparing apples to oranges.
Prince did sign some top 4* players, but he also littered the classes with a ton of 2* players and JUCOs that never panned out. Look at the class list, you will see names you won't recognize. He signed 19 JUCOs one year. Would anyone be okay with that now if it boosted the class ranking?
Is it better to have a few stars in each class and overload the class with players that never make the field, or is it better to have a smaller class that has a higher overall average of player, but maybe no superstars?
Not all of Prince's top recruits panned out either. Lamark Brown was his top player in 2007. In 3 years, 838 yards from scrimmage and 8 TDs flipping between RB and WR is probably not what was expected. Aubrey Quarles was his top player in 2008. Not a bad player by any means, but would you expect more then 1167 receiving yards and 6 TDs from a 4*? Tyler Lockett was only a measly 3*. If K-State got a 4* WR nowdays, we would be expecting a Blietnikoff Award and consensus AA.
247sports also has a lot of inaccuracies as they had only been doing recruiting rankings for 7 years at that point. The 2006 class lists a Jason Coffman, QB, from Missouri. I didn't know Carson had a brother....
All I'm saying is that before you just look solely at numbers, do a little digging into those numbers and see how they are obtained.