Attrition, interesting numbers for MSU and UM, not sure how

[coach66]

accurate this is but the writer from another board seemed to have his facts pretty straight. I am sure some of our UM posters will rebutt. I wonder if Nix is going to copy and use this, don't think so.

In CM first two signing classes,2009 and 2010,he inked a total of 44 high school players.With the resigning of DariusSlay this year it means 38 of these players will still be in our program.Dan made a committment to help these young menbecome champions on and off the field.Here's a quick lookat the 6 who are missing.
Hood-never made it to EMCC
Hamilton-pro baseball
McKenzie-Quit to concentrate on studies
Conner- transfered
Lee-JC
Crawford-Was supposed to go to JC,qualified,released,signed with FIU

So 86 percent(38 of 44)of thesigned high school players are still in our program.27 of these 38 players were redshirted.

Nutt has signed 82 high school players in his first three classes,2008,2009 and 2010.Yes we all know he oversigned and many players signed a worthless document.At the end of spring practice 46 of these 82 players are still in their program.They have 36 signees gone.Poof! Nutt has retained 56 percent of his high school signees compared to Coach Mullen's 86 percent.You tell me which coach is really in the heppin business.Who would you want your child to play for?

</p>

 

[PokerDawg44]

Thats good ****, I think that says alot about Mullen's character evaluation vs Nutts character evaluation. Players that DM sign know they have to come in and REALLY work hard. I think Nutt rolls the dice too much on players that look good on paper but have character issues. TSUN fans might like that high recruiting ranking(thats the only thing they can best us in right now), but what good is itif the players dont stay once on campus.

 

[Coach34]

is terrible on in-home visits. State's players dont leave because they dont have anywhere else to go but Alcorn State. Nutts players leave because they are bringing in even better players.

(Standard Black Bear response on attrition these days)

 

[jzahner1]

I would love to see the adjusted recruiting class rankings after they have lost 56 percent of his signees.<div>Per rivals</div><div>
</div><div>Ole Miss
<div>2011 - 1573 pts * 56% = 880.88 pts rank adjusted from 19 to 36th.</div></div><div>2010 - 1554 pts * 56% = 870.24 pts rank adjusted from 18 to 45th</div><div>2009 - 1628 pts * 56% = 911.68 pts rank adjusted from 18 to 44</div><div>
</div><div>MSU Rankings</div><div>2011 - 673 pts * 86% = 578.78</div><div>2010 - 1032 pts * 86% = 887.52</div><div>2009 - 1332 pts * 86% = 1145.52</div><div>
</div><div>Now with those points being kind of dumbed down because I am sure they lost more 2009 players than 2010 and 2011, it looks as if the apparent difference between our approaches is clear and measurable. Only time will tell with the 2011 class, but I am sure we have more talent producing for us from every class the previous 3 years than Ole Miss. And furthermore, with these adjusted numbers, it looks like we even beat them in recruiting. Dan Mullen gets it.</div>

 

[RebelBruiser]

I would love to see the adjusted recruiting class rankings after they have lost 56 percent of his signees.<div>Per rivals</div><div>
</div><div>Ole Miss
<div>2011 - 1573 pts * 56% = 880.88 pts rank adjusted from 19 to 36th.</div></div><div>2010 - 1554 pts * 56% = 870.24 pts rank adjusted from 18 to 45th</div><div>2009 - 1628 pts * 56% = 911.68 pts rank adjusted from 18 to 44</div><div>
</div><div>MSU Rankings</div><div>2011 - 673 pts * 86% = 578.78</div><div>2010 - 1032 pts * 86% = 887.52</div><div>2009 - 1332 pts * 86% = 1145.52</div><div>
</div><div>Now with those points being kind of dumbed down because I am sure they lost more 2009 players than 2010 and 2011, it looks as if the apparent difference between our approaches is clear and measurable. Only time will tell with the 2011 class, but I am sure we have more talent producing for us from every class the previous 3 years than Ole Miss. And furthermore, with these adjusted numbers, it looks like we even beat them in recruiting. Dan Mullen gets it.</div>

You'd have to do some advanced figuring there, because Rivals only counts your Top 20 signees.

Not that recruiting rankings are the end all, but they factor in that you won't be able to bring in more than 25 already, so their scoring system can't really be computed on a per signee basis.

Anyway, we've had too much attrition. I'll admit that, but I'm less concerned about overall attrition than I am the bad attrition.

Every team needs to have some good attrition, which is when you have players leave because they didn't turn out to be good enough. I don't care how good you are at evaluating talent or recruiting, if you bring in 25 players, at least 5 of them won't be good enough to be significant contributors for a good football team. You're better off if those guys end up leaving to make room for you to sign a full class the next class.

I'm much less concerned about losing guys like Stanley, Cotton, Hackney, Haynes, and Mason than I am about losing guys like Grandy, Patterson, and Drummond, guys that stood to make an impact. That last group is an example of bad attrition.

If you don't have some measure of attrition, you run into an issue where you either have to undersign for a class or two, which will hurt your numbers 2-3 years down the line, or you have to do like Nick Saban does and make cuts to get the numbers back where he needs them to be able to bring in his next crop. The Nick Saban route is the way to go if you can get to that point.

If you could do it all in a vacuum to create your ideal numbers scenario, from every class you'd keep your top 17 players who would all develop into very good contributors for you. The other 8 or so would eventually transfer or quit football. Of those 17, you'd have 6 or 7 that don't take a redshirt. If you did that every year, you'd have roughly 17 players in your senior, junior, and sophomore classes, with another 10 or so that were redshirt freshmen, which would leave you roughly enough room to still bring in a class of roughly 25 true freshmen to stay under the 85 limit. So the breakdown could be like this for example (17 seniors, 16 juniors, 17 sophomores, 10 redshirt freshmen, 25 true freshmen).

We need to cut the bad attrition and get to where we're essentially pushing guys out to transfer after 2-3 years when it's determined that they won't develop to where we need them, which is essentially what happened with Terrance Hackney, Lekenwic Haynes, and Julian Whitehead this year.

ETA: Again, the reason you need some attrition is because, like I said, even if you are a great talent evaluator and developer, you're going to have a certain percentage of your signees that just don't work out. That's why you want to bring in your maximum every year (25), so that you increase the odds on the number of signees you have that work out from a class. If you paint yourself in a corner and only bring in a class of 15 or so for a couple years in a row due to lack of room for new signees, you're going to end up with a couple classes that only have 8-10 really solid players in them.

And yes I realize I'm talking about players like they are just cogs in a machine, because that's what they are. Look at the Nick Saban model if you want to see a dehumanization of the athlete for the sake of stacking the odds in your favor.

 

[EAVdog]

Players leave for academics or transfer from every class. I don't equate being 'cut' ala Nick Saban or Les Miles as attrition. That it is just cutting the roster down.
I think it's possibly too early to tell if Nutt's methods are a consistent pattern at Ole Miss or just the circumstances he's fallen into. This year's recruiting class so far appears to be different. From my observation though it appears that in hte pastNutt's methods are just to sign as many players as allowed that have talent but perhaps some extinuating circumstances that may keep them from participating. All the while hoping that the cream sort of rises to the top with those who do make it. I think that can certainly boost overall class ratings and make everyone excited on signing day.
If I were an Ole Miss fan I would hope that the recruiting classes here on out are more like this year's. Constantly trying to patch and fill with transfers and Juco's does not bode well for team chemistry in the long run. Plus it creates an atmosphere where player development is second to trying to meet current needs. And yes we are plugging in a LB where we have a need, and I am concerened about the rift it could create with the LB corp. But spreading that out over multiple positions, especially every year at QB is trouble. Maybe Mackey and Brunetti are long term solutions for QB though. Assuming Nutt will think 'long term'.

 

[jzahner1]

I agree with your take on attrition. Like I tried to say above, my numbers above are a stretch if anything. There is good attrition and bad attrition. My biggest problem with the whole situation is over signing in great numbers.1-2 over your limit is one thing, but when you approach the 10-12 range it gets a little dirty in my opinion. After seeing what happened to that LSU quarterback, it should make all of us question what is going on with these recruiting/attrition techniques.

 

[RebelBruiser]

Not all of our attrition, but some of it has been in the form of cuts.

Some coaches (Saban) are blatant about it, and they do it with the goal of keeping the player from other universities. Saban likes to wait until the summer has passed to make his cuts at the last possible minute so the players he's cutting have no other option but to either take the medical hardship and end their football career or at the very least sit out a semester before they can try to find a school to take them.

Guys like Hackney, Whitehead, and Haynes from our roster just all of a sudden weren't on the spring roster. News about why was very vague which tells me that most likely they were asked to leave, but at least they were told before the spring, which gives them all spring and summer to find a place to land before the fall.

Saban does his the way he does because he knows the players he's cutting might end up at Ole Miss, MSU, or some other school he might have to compete against.

It's dirty as ****, but I wish we could be in that position.