D dendox 250+ Posts Jan 22, 2008 #1 The Link This is a very interesting article that I thought you all may enjoy. It isn't as precise as it could be, but seems to do a better than average job of trying to break down how the recruiting ratings correlate to the performance on the field. discuss?
The Link This is a very interesting article that I thought you all may enjoy. It isn't as precise as it could be, but seems to do a better than average job of trying to break down how the recruiting ratings correlate to the performance on the field. discuss?
C cam4mav 25+ Posts Jan 22, 2008 #2 Winning % vs. BCS Schools, 2002-2007 Rank Team Record Win % Rivals Rank Difference 4__Texas_____48-12 .800 7 + 3 47_Texas A&M 24-34 .414 14 -33
Winning % vs. BCS Schools, 2002-2007 Rank Team Record Win % Rivals Rank Difference 4__Texas_____48-12 .800 7 + 3 47_Texas A&M 24-34 .414 14 -33
U UnBiased Horn 250+ Posts Jan 23, 2008 #3 in short, Texas overachives by 3 spots according to their recruiting ranking and actual field performance vs BCS teams Atm underachieves by 33 spots., that largest out of all BCS schools.
in short, Texas overachives by 3 spots according to their recruiting ranking and actual field performance vs BCS teams Atm underachieves by 33 spots., that largest out of all BCS schools.
H Hager85 25+ Posts Jan 23, 2008 #4 If you don't excel in recruiting you better have a great coach (Ohio State, WVU, V Tech). However, if you do well in recruiting, you still need a great coach (FSU, Tenn, Irish, Aggie). Very interesting.
If you don't excel in recruiting you better have a great coach (Ohio State, WVU, V Tech). However, if you do well in recruiting, you still need a great coach (FSU, Tenn, Irish, Aggie). Very interesting.