IU Recruiting Past Six Yrs - Offers Based

[Russell Dunbar]

Long-time lurker who is very appreciative of the great info posted on this board. Spent a few hours looking at and compiling offer data for IU commits over the last six years. Like many others on this site, I have always thought that rankings based on offer lists were a better indicator than a star system. Not bashing the ratings services at all, especially this site, just looking at a different option. I will start a separate thread comparing the 2018 Big Ten teams in the same manner.

IU football recruiting data from the last six years BASED ON OFFERS, listed below with the following qualifiers/assumptions:
- all data gathered from this site (FB Recruiting commitment list tab) and tabulations include all commits that signed, even if they didn't make it to campus.
- assume offer lists are correct or at least flaws are somewhat consistent from year to year (i.e. offers "pulled" or kid perhaps "thought" he had an offer to school listed).
- making assumption that Big 5 conference (ACC, Big Ten, Big XII, SEC, Pac 12, Notre Dame) offers are more desirable and a better indication of the most heavily recruited kids, more so than mid majors/other conferences, certainly not always the case.
- fully understand there will be many examples of kids who had fewer offers that end up being better players and some big offer kids that will not pan out, but assuming law of averages over time with more kids that were heavily recruited by Big 5 coaches generally ending up being better college players.
- data doesn't address a coaching staffs ability to find "diamonds in the rough" or factor in quality within the offer list (i.e. Alabama/Clemson type offers vs. Kansa/Oregon State type offers).

10 or more offers from Big 5 conferences (including IU offer):
2018 - 7 commits, 2017 - 2, 2016 - 1, 2015 - 3, 2014 - 1, 2013 - 1
2018 - Mill (10 offers), King (15), Walk (12), Head (10), Raff (12), Norr (11), McCa (13)

5 or more offers from Big 5 conferences:
2018 - 14 commits, 2017 - 8, 2016 - 5, 2015 - 13, 2014 - 7, 2013 - 7
2018 - seven players listed above plus Will (8 offers), Mars (6), Jone (5), Tayl (5), Ivy (7), Scot (8), Peni (6)

Zero offers from Big 5 conferences (except IU offer):
2018 - 4 commits, 2017 - 4, 2016 - 6, 2015 - 2, 2014 - 10, 2013 - 8

Draw your own conclusions. My personal opinion is that the coaching staff did a GREAT job in 2018!

 

[Bowlmania]

Long-time lurker who is very appreciative of the great info posted on this board. Spent a few hours looking at and compiling offer data for IU commits over the last six years. Like many others on this site, I have always thought that rankings based on offer lists were a better indicator than a star system. Not bashing the ratings services at all, especially this site, just looking at a different option. I will start a separate thread comparing the 2018 Big Ten teams in the same manner.

IU football recruiting data from the last six years BASED ON OFFERS, listed below with the following qualifiers/assumptions:
- all data gathered from this site (FB Recruiting commitment list tab) and tabulations include all commits that signed, even if they didn't make it to campus.
- assume offer lists are correct or at least flaws are somewhat consistent from year to year (i.e. offers "pulled" or kid perhaps "thought" he had an offer to school listed).
- making assumption that Big 5 conference (ACC, Big Ten, Big XII, SEC, Pac 12, Notre Dame) offers are more desirable and a better indication of the most heavily recruited kids, more so than mid majors/other conferences, certainly not always the case.
- fully understand there will be many examples of kids who had fewer offers that end up being better players and some big offer kids that will not pan out, but assuming law of averages over time with more kids that were heavily recruited by Big 5 coaches generally ending up being better college players.
- data doesn't address a coaching staffs ability to find "diamonds in the rough" or factor in quality within the offer list (i.e. Alabama/Clemson type offers vs. Kansa/Oregon State type offers).

10 or more offers from Big 5 conferences (including IU offer):
2018 - 7 commits, 2017 - 2, 2016 - 1, 2015 - 3, 2014 - 1, 2013 - 1
2018 - Mill (10 offers), King (15), Walk (12), Head (10), Raff (12), Norr (11), McCa (13)

5 or more offers from Big 5 conferences:
2018 - 14 commits, 2017 - 8, 2016 - 5, 2015 - 13, 2014 - 7, 2013 - 7
2018 - seven players listed above plus Will (8 offers), Mars (6), Jone (5), Tayl (5), Ivy (7), Scot (8), Peni (6)

Zero offers from Big 5 conferences (except IU offer):
2018 - 4 commits, 2017 - 4, 2016 - 6, 2015 - 2, 2014 - 10, 2013 - 8

Draw your own conclusions. My personal opinion is that the coaching staff did a GREAT job in 2018!

Outstanding information. Thank you, and welcome to the board.

 

[RBB89]

Long-time lurker who is very appreciative of the great info posted on this board. Spent a few hours looking at and compiling offer data for IU commits over the last six years. Like many others on this site, I have always thought that rankings based on offer lists were a better indicator than a star system. Not bashing the ratings services at all, especially this site, just looking at a different option. I will start a separate thread comparing the 2018 Big Ten teams in the same manner.

IU football recruiting data from the last six years BASED ON OFFERS, listed below with the following qualifiers/assumptions:
- all data gathered from this site (FB Recruiting commitment list tab) and tabulations include all commits that signed, even if they didn't make it to campus.
- assume offer lists are correct or at least flaws are somewhat consistent from year to year (i.e. offers "pulled" or kid perhaps "thought" he had an offer to school listed).
- making assumption that Big 5 conference (ACC, Big Ten, Big XII, SEC, Pac 12, Notre Dame) offers are more desirable and a better indication of the most heavily recruited kids, more so than mid majors/other conferences, certainly not always the case.
- fully understand there will be many examples of kids who had fewer offers that end up being better players and some big offer kids that will not pan out, but assuming law of averages over time with more kids that were heavily recruited by Big 5 coaches generally ending up being better college players.
- data doesn't address a coaching staffs ability to find "diamonds in the rough" or factor in quality within the offer list (i.e. Alabama/Clemson type offers vs. Kansa/Oregon State type offers).

10 or more offers from Big 5 conferences (including IU offer):
2018 - 7 commits, 2017 - 2, 2016 - 1, 2015 - 3, 2014 - 1, 2013 - 1
2018 - Mill (10 offers), King (15), Walk (12), Head (10), Raff (12), Norr (11), McCa (13)

5 or more offers from Big 5 conferences:
2018 - 14 commits, 2017 - 8, 2016 - 5, 2015 - 13, 2014 - 7, 2013 - 7
2018 - seven players listed above plus Will (8 offers), Mars (6), Jone (5), Tayl (5), Ivy (7), Scot (8), Peni (6)

Zero offers from Big 5 conferences (except IU offer):
2018 - 4 commits, 2017 - 4, 2016 - 6, 2015 - 2, 2014 - 10, 2013 - 8

Draw your own conclusions. My personal opinion is that the coaching staff did a GREAT job in 2018!

Please post more often!

 

[cshartle123]

Long-time lurker who is very appreciative of the great info posted on this board. Spent a few hours looking at and compiling offer data for IU commits over the last six years. Like many others on this site, I have always thought that rankings based on offer lists were a better indicator than a star system. Not bashing the ratings services at all, especially this site, just looking at a different option. I will start a separate thread comparing the 2018 Big Ten teams in the same manner.

IU football recruiting data from the last six years BASED ON OFFERS, listed below with the following qualifiers/assumptions:
- all data gathered from this site (FB Recruiting commitment list tab) and tabulations include all commits that signed, even if they didn't make it to campus.
- assume offer lists are correct or at least flaws are somewhat consistent from year to year (i.e. offers "pulled" or kid perhaps "thought" he had an offer to school listed).
- making assumption that Big 5 conference (ACC, Big Ten, Big XII, SEC, Pac 12, Notre Dame) offers are more desirable and a better indication of the most heavily recruited kids, more so than mid majors/other conferences, certainly not always the case.
- fully understand there will be many examples of kids who had fewer offers that end up being better players and some big offer kids that will not pan out, but assuming law of averages over time with more kids that were heavily recruited by Big 5 coaches generally ending up being better college players.
- data doesn't address a coaching staffs ability to find "diamonds in the rough" or factor in quality within the offer list (i.e. Alabama/Clemson type offers vs. Kansa/Oregon State type offers).

10 or more offers from Big 5 conferences (including IU offer):
2018 - 7 commits, 2017 - 2, 2016 - 1, 2015 - 3, 2014 - 1, 2013 - 1
2018 - Mill (10 offers), King (15), Walk (12), Head (10), Raff (12), Norr (11), McCa (13)

5 or more offers from Big 5 conferences:
2018 - 14 commits, 2017 - 8, 2016 - 5, 2015 - 13, 2014 - 7, 2013 - 7
2018 - seven players listed above plus Will (8 offers), Mars (6), Jone (5), Tayl (5), Ivy (7), Scot (8), Peni (6)

Zero offers from Big 5 conferences (except IU offer):
2018 - 4 commits, 2017 - 4, 2016 - 6, 2015 - 2, 2014 - 10, 2013 - 8

Draw your own conclusions. My personal opinion is that the coaching staff did a GREAT job in 2018!

Thanks for putting this together. This class is clearly better in terms of offers. The only other variable that we would need to know is if the number of offers that each school gives out has increased, deceased, or stayed the same. I would expect that it has slightly increased over the years.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Long-time lurker who is very appreciative of the great info posted on this board. Spent a few hours looking at and compiling offer data for IU commits over the last six years. Like many others on this site, I have always thought that rankings based on offer lists were a better indicator than a star system. Not bashing the ratings services at all, especially this site, just looking at a different option. I will start a separate thread comparing the 2018 Big Ten teams in the same manner.

IU football recruiting data from the last six years BASED ON OFFERS, listed below with the following qualifiers/assumptions:
- all data gathered from this site (FB Recruiting commitment list tab) and tabulations include all commits that signed, even if they didn't make it to campus.
- assume offer lists are correct or at least flaws are somewhat consistent from year to year (i.e. offers "pulled" or kid perhaps "thought" he had an offer to school listed).
- making assumption that Big 5 conference (ACC, Big Ten, Big XII, SEC, Pac 12, Notre Dame) offers are more desirable and a better indication of the most heavily recruited kids, more so than mid majors/other conferences, certainly not always the case.
- fully understand there will be many examples of kids who had fewer offers that end up being better players and some big offer kids that will not pan out, but assuming law of averages over time with more kids that were heavily recruited by Big 5 coaches generally ending up being better college players.
- data doesn't address a coaching staffs ability to find "diamonds in the rough" or factor in quality within the offer list (i.e. Alabama/Clemson type offers vs. Kansa/Oregon State type offers).

10 or more offers from Big 5 conferences (including IU offer):
2018 - 7 commits, 2017 - 2, 2016 - 1, 2015 - 3, 2014 - 1, 2013 - 1
2018 - Mill (10 offers), King (15), Walk (12), Head (10), Raff (12), Norr (11), McCa (13)

5 or more offers from Big 5 conferences:
2018 - 14 commits, 2017 - 8, 2016 - 5, 2015 - 13, 2014 - 7, 2013 - 7
2018 - seven players listed above plus Will (8 offers), Mars (6), Jone (5), Tayl (5), Ivy (7), Scot (8), Peni (6)

Zero offers from Big 5 conferences (except IU offer):
2018 - 4 commits, 2017 - 4, 2016 - 6, 2015 - 2, 2014 - 10, 2013 - 8

Draw your own conclusions. My personal opinion is that the coaching staff did a GREAT job in 2018!

Very interesting data...thank you.

I suspect chartle123 above is correct that offer counts are increasing, but this is a pretty tight timeline...so not much.

 

[Indianaftw]

Nice breakdown!

 

[IUHDog]

Love this kind of information.....thanks!

 

[vesuvius13]

Thanks for the great breakdown of recruiting as I think your approach is a better rating than the stars given players.

 

[mk23]

Thanks for the great breakdown of recruiting as I think your approach is a better rating than the stars given players.

Couldn't agree more and exactly what I was going to say until I read your post. Offers = Coaches perspective, Stars = who know what.

 

[IUHDog]

The Rivals rating system is seriously flawed.....time for a complete makeover.

 

[Indianaftw]

The system isnt flawed. These rivals guys go to camps and have a certain evaluation criteria they follow. Its a good overall perspective. Of course they arent correct all the time and there are alot of late bloomers or small town kids. If you've been around it long enough you get used to it.

The only area imo the system fails is player character. It would be hard to make a judgment on that in a camp and rivals does not have the time and resources to interview thousands of kids.

 

[76-1]

Great work R.D.

Thanks!

As far as the recruiting services go I've always felt that they do a good job evaluating most of the 4 star types and all of the 5 star types but simply don't have the time or interest level in evaluating all of the 3 star and below types...

It's all about keeping the subscription levels up with the top thirty fan bases and anything past that is just what ever time and interest they may have left after grinding through their top thirty group...

I trust this staff to identify and evaluate more than I trust any of the scouting services. The staff knows their very jobs may be on the line based on how these young guys produce both on and off the field...