Often these analytics for which is the better team use this concept of roster talent to elevate the floor of a program. "Texas may be 8-4, but they are busting at the seams with talent, so they remain in our Top10."

Where does this talent analysis come from? If its not from performance and its just innate in the "talent" recruited, that doesnt make too much sense either. Here is the recruiting rankings for 3 talented teams from 2021-2024.

LSU
2021 #3
2022 #12
2023 #5
2024 #7
Avg 6.75

Texas
2021 #15
2022 #5
2023 #3
2024 #6
Avg 7.25

Ags
2021 #8
2022 #1
2023 #15
2024 #19
Avg 10.75

The "talent gap" is slim, if not non-existent. I had a mentor who was an auburn grad, back when Auburn was a National Champion under Chizik, and I talked to him about NSD. He just brushed it off saying champions arent made in High School or because of star ratings. Meaning talent doesnt always translate to success. Counting chickens before they hatch, as it were.

If the "talent gap" is not truly that significant, and it isnt especially is you weigh 2021 & 2022 as upperclassmen thus being MORE impactful on team composition than freshmen, where does it come from?

There was an old joke when we were in the B12, a 3-star recruit gets 2 extra stars when Mack Brown signed him. I dont think the "talent" metric that goes into the rankings is without bias.

Those portal guys tho

Sincerely,
Mr Craver

You already know where the analysis comes from. The source also happens to be in the word analysis

For starters they probably look at our actual roster vs. the rankings you posted.

There are maybe 10 kids still on the team from the 2021/2022 classes you are referencing their rankings.

Recruiting rankings are 100% purely subjective.

And what's far,far,far more important? Having a coaching staff that actually understands how to develop talent. Look at Jimbo vs Elko? Two different worlds. I believe Sark = Jimbo which is why Texas is seriously struggling.

Secondly, the staff needs to have them own process for determining talent and then determining needs for the program.

So HS recruiting rankings IMO are less important. A good starting spot but the coach staff needs to do all the due diligence and internal rankings. And this is why I freaking LOVE Mike Elko. He has it figured out and is the modern model of how to develop a sustainable football program.

I am not saying HS recruiting ranks are totally BS. Not true. But I am saying many of these players are grossly overranked or underrated.

dcg4403 said:

---

Recruiting rankings are 100% purely subjective.

And what's far,far,far more important? Having a coaching staff that actually understands how to develop talent. Look at Jimbo vs Elko? Two different worlds. I believe Sark = Jimbo which is why Texas is seriously struggling.

Secondly, the staff needs to have them own process for determining talent and then determining needs for the program.

So HS recruiting rankings IMO are less important. A good starting spot but the coach staff needs to do all the due diligence and internal rankings. And this is why I freaking LOVE Mike Elko. He has it figured out and is the modern model of how to develop a sustainable football program.

---

A little too early to make that statement. We have seen some great returns on his transfers, jury is still out on HS recruiting.

I trust HC's like Elko more than some talking head who gives Archibold the highest rating in the history of QB ratings.

TheDecadeSapling said:

---

You already know where the analysis comes from. The source also happens to be in the word analysis

---

From my sister??

harge57 said:

---

For starters they probably look at our actual roster vs. the rankings you posted.

There are maybe 10 kids still on the team from the 2021/2022 classes you are referencing their rankings.

---

I get what you're saying.

But again its still anchored in "perceived talent" in High School. Its not unheard of for a 3* or 4* player beating out a 5* player for a position. 3* recruits end up in the NFL over 5* busts.

I think analyzing "talent" is far too subjective, especially when the data is obsolete.

I think we are both saying the same thing differently.

Averaging relative rankings is pretty meaningless.

247 does it by rerunning scores based on the current rosters - yes, using their out-of-high-school ratings. They're used because they're highly predictive.

https://247sports.com/season/2025-football/collegeteamtalentcomposite/