X's and O's and Jimmy's and Joe's

[RackOps]

The great coaching debate is "X's and O's" vs "Jimmy's and Joe's"......Coaching vs recruiting. I think both are equally important. You have to get the players, but you also have to develop them and put them in position to win.

As far as recruiting goes, I give Stoops a pass. He's recruited better than many of us felt was even possible. I assume if he turns out to be a reliable winner, the recruiting will get even better....so that leaves coaching.


So, what I did was look at the 247 composite recruiting ranking since 2012 for all of our opponents this year.

It's a simple formula....if we ended up with a higher average class ranking, we were "more talented" and should win. If we ended up with a lower ranking, we were less talented and would be expected to lose.

Here were the ranking results:

UK: 35.6
USM: 83.6
NMx: 129
Fla: 9.8
SCa: 19.8
Bama: 1 (shocking, right?)
Vandy: 44
MSU: 25.6
Miz: 36.2
UGa: 8.2
Ten: 13.8
APU: (I didn't bother looking)
Lou: 39.4

So far, UK has lost one that it shouldn't have, So Miss....and has beat 2 that it shouldn't haven't, So Carolina and Miss State.

Louisville remains, as well as our bowl opponent.

If we lose, we will have won 2 that we shouldn't have, and lost 2 that we shouldn't have.

If we win, it's 3 to 1.


Now, as far as my own opinion....I don't think you can fire a coach for meeting expections. Regardless, I think it's a pretty safe bet that he isn't going anywhere.

 

[red rage 2016]

The great coaching debate is "X's and O's" vs "Jimmy's and Joe's"......Coaching vs recruiting. I think both are equally important. You have to get the players, but you also have to develop them and put them in position to win.

As far as recruiting goes, I give Stoops a pass. He's recruited better than many of us felt was even possible. I assume if he turns out to be a reliable winner, the recruiting will get even better....so that leaves coaching.


So, what I did was look at the 247 composite recruiting ranking since 2012 for all of our opponents this year.

It's a simple formula....if we ended up with a higher average class ranking, we were "more talented" and should win. If we ended up with a lower ranking, we were less talented and would be expected to lose.

Here were the ranking results:

UK: 35.6
USM: 83.6
NMx: 129
Fla: 9.8
SCa: 19.8
Bama: 1 (shocking, right?)
Vandy: 44
MSU: 25.6
Miz: 36.2
UGa: 8.2
Ten: 13.8
APU: (I didn't bother looking)
Lou: 39.4

So far, UK has lost one that it shouldn't have, So Miss....and has beat 2 that it shouldn't haven't, So Carolina and Miss State.

Louisville remains, as well as our bowl opponent.

If we lose, we will have won 2 that we shouldn't have, and lost 2 that we shouldn't have.

If we win, it's 3 to 1.


Now, as far as my own opinion....I don't think you can fire a coach for meeting expections. Regardless, I think it's a pretty safe bet that he isn't going anywhere.

So I am going to assume left for margin of error since we all know some 4-5 star recruits end up as bust and some 2-3 stars should have been higher. Plus you have to account for who actually made it to campus.

 

[RackOps]

So I am going to assume left for margin of error since we all know some 4-5 star recruits end up as bust and some 2-3 stars should have been higher. Plus you have to account for who actually made it to campus.

Certainly......recruit rankings are often wrong, kids leave, get hurt, or in Louisville's case beat the hell out of their girlfriend and transfer in.

The hope is that those things even out over the years.

 

[Jon(-24)]

If we could just recruit at the same level as an Austin Peay! Then we'd really be on our way. Our guys are just too young and lightly recruited not to be manhandled by the worst team in the history of football.

EKU kicked our asses last year as an FCS school. They fired their staff for not meeting expectations... It's X's and O's. Unless you're Bama or Ohio State, you will always need to be able to get an advantage in scheme to survive.

 

[jauk11]

Certainly......recruit rankings are often wrong, kids leave, get hurt, or in Louisville's case beat the hell out of their girlfriend and transfer in.

The hope is that those things even out over the years.

They will never even out as long as jurich is at Transfer U and mitch is at UK, polar opposites, and jurich is probably more extreme in his win at all costs philosophy than mitch is in his goody goody approach.

 

[jauk11]

The great coaching debate is "X's and O's" vs "Jimmy's and Joe's"......Coaching vs recruiting. I think both are equally important. You have to get the players, but you also have to develop them and put them in position to win.

As far as recruiting goes, I give Stoops a pass. He's recruited better than many of us felt was even possible. I assume if he turns out to be a reliable winner, the recruiting will get even better....so that leaves coaching.


So, what I did was look at the 247 composite recruiting ranking since 2012 for all of our opponents this year.

It's a simple formula....if we ended up with a higher average class ranking, we were "more talented" and should win. If we ended up with a lower ranking, we were less talented and would be expected to lose.

Here were the ranking results:

UK: 35.6
USM: 83.6
NMx: 129
Fla: 9.8
SCa: 19.8
Bama: 1 (shocking, right?)
Vandy: 44
MSU: 25.6
Miz: 36.2
UGa: 8.2
Ten: 13.8
APU: (I didn't bother looking)
Lou: 39.4

So far, UK has lost one that it shouldn't have, So Miss....and has beat 2 that it shouldn't haven't, So Carolina and Miss State.

Louisville remains, as well as our bowl opponent.

If we lose, we will have won 2 that we shouldn't have, and lost 2 that we shouldn't have.

If we win, it's 3 to 1.


Now, as far as my own opinion....I don't think you can fire a coach for meeting expections. Regardless, I think it's a pretty safe bet that he isn't going anywhere.

A good slant on the situation, but of course there is a lot more to the situation. What I find interesting is that you (and his critics, not saying you are one) say (and I think this is an understatement considering where we were and our records)," He's recruited better than many of us felt was even possible." and for that he only earns a pass. LOL

I have always felt raw talent, not coaching, was UK's main problem, and that IMO was entirely on the support they got from the athletic department, the picture of the "recruiting room" made a liar of any coach that told recruits UK wasn't a basketball school first. Of course Tee did pretty well by lying to them about it. Best conference, great fans, great State University, lots of great things about UK, but way too many handicaps in recruiting without putting a lot more money into the facilities and effort; And I do credit the strike (along with the obscene money SEC football brings in) for us making great strides in correcting some of those things, but it will take some time.

 

[JC CATS]

If we could just recruit at the same level as an Austin Peay! Then we'd really be on our way. Our guys are just too young and lightly recruited not to be manhandled by the worst team in the history of football.

EKU kicked our asses last year as an FCS school. They fired their staff for not meeting expectations... It's X's and O's. Unless you're Bama or Ohio State, you will always need to be able to get an advantage in scheme to survive.

Damn, I could have sworn that we won both those games

 

[catscratchfever3215]

The great coaching debate is "X's and O's" vs "Jimmy's and Joe's"......Coaching vs recruiting. I think both are equally important. You have to get the players, but you also have to develop them and put them in position to win.

As far as recruiting goes, I give Stoops a pass. He's recruited better than many of us felt was even possible. I assume if he turns out to be a reliable winner, the recruiting will get even better....so that leaves coaching.


So, what I did was look at the 247 composite recruiting ranking since 2012 for all of our opponents this year.

It's a simple formula....if we ended up with a higher average class ranking, we were "more talented" and should win. If we ended up with a lower ranking, we were less talented and would be expected to lose.

Here were the ranking results:

UK: 35.6
USM: 83.6
NMx: 129
Fla: 9.8
SCa: 19.8
Bama: 1 (shocking, right?)
Vandy: 44
MSU: 25.6
Miz: 36.2
UGa: 8.2
Ten: 13.8
APU: (I didn't bother looking)
Lou: 39.4

So far, UK has lost one that it shouldn't have, So Miss....and has beat 2 that it shouldn't haven't, So Carolina and Miss State.

Louisville remains, as well as our bowl opponent.

If we lose, we will have won 2 that we shouldn't have, and lost 2 that we shouldn't have.

If we win, it's 3 to 1.


Now, as far as my own opinion....I don't think you can fire a coach for meeting expections. Regardless, I think it's a pretty safe bet that he isn't going anywhere.

Another thing you need to factor is attrition and incoming transfers. Those players aren't factored into recruiting rankings. UK has lost around 50% give or take of Stoops first class. Also they typically don't add any talented players with character issues. While UL adds players yearly that were highly sought after recruits(Fields, Harvey-Clemons, Wiggins)because character issues.

 

[Deeeefense]

Another thing you need to factor is attrition and incoming transfers. Those players aren't factored into recruiting rankings. UK has lost around 50% give or take of Stoops first class. Also they typically don't add any talented players with character issues. While UL adds players yearly that were highly sought after recruits(Fields, Harvey-Clemons, Wiggins)because character issues.

This. Who you get is just part of it, who you keep is just as important.
Recruiting rankings in a very general sense gives you some indication of a player's potential, but all they really are is the collective opinions of "recruiting analysts" which can vary greatly.