The CardBoard
2016 Blue Chip Ratio--bring it on - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: 2016 Blue Chip Ratio--bring it on (/thread-12422.html)


2016 Blue Chip Ratio--bring it on - JJJ - 08-18-2016

According to this, we are tied for #20 with Oregon.
As we here on the CARDboard know, our coaches' strengths include getting more out of the team than the sum of its parts--so bring on the season! (*note: definitely not woofing, but simply saying let's see how things stand at the end of the season)

Quote:0.77 Alabama SEC
0.7 USC Pac-12
0.7 Ohio State Big Ten
0.66 LSU SEC
0.63 Notre Dame Independent
0.6 Florida State ACC
0.59 Michigan Big Ten
0.57 Auburn SEC
0.55 UCLA Pac-12
0.53 Texas A&M SEC
0.52 Georgia SEC
0.52 Clemson ACC
0.5 Texas Big XII
0.44 Tennessee SEC
0.39 Florida SEC
0.38 Ole Miss SEC
0.38 Miami ACC
0.36 Oklahoma Big XII
0.34 Penn State Big Ten
0.33 Oregon Pac-12
0.33 Stanford Pac-12
0.3 South Carolina SEC
0.28 Michigan State Big Ten
0.26 Washington Pac-12
0.23 Arkansas SEC

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2016/8/18/12530108/ncaa-football-best-recruiters-2016

Re: 2016 Blue Chip Ratio--bring it on - washingtonismoney - 08-18-2016

I think the notion -- advanced in the article -- that scoring over .5 in blue chip ratio is somehow necessary, rather than suggested, is pretty weak. While all national champs over the past decade-plus may have surpassed .5, it's a pretty limited sample. Expanding it to national game champions and playoff participants adds several sub-.5 teams -- Oregon twice, Michigan State, Oklahoma, and Clemson.* If a sub-.5 team can make the final four (or two), it can win it all. (Indeed, Clemson was toe-to-toe with 'bama last year.)

* (Clemson was sub-.5 last year.)

EDIT: The interesting thing for Stanford is the way its blue-chip ratio has slipped -- in 2014, it was 39%. Now it's 33%. It appears the 2015 (26%) and 2016 (36%) dragged us down by this metric. Which is a bit flawed; it would seem to reward not filling out your roster. For example if Shaw never offered scholarships to Maddox, McNitzky, Toner, and Segina suddenly the ratio goes up to 42%. But it's surely better to have a filled-out roster than not to have one.

Re: 2016 Blue Chip Ratio--bring it on - AthleticsDynasty - 08-19-2016

Going by that article the most blue chip of blue chips Toby Gerhart would bring down the average

Re: 2016 Blue Chip Ratio--bring it on - OutsiderFan - 08-19-2016

The hidden data in these sorts of analyses is attrition.  Stanford doesn't lose players at the rate other programs do.  To normalize the data Stanford ought to be given some kind of modifier that accounts for its lower attrition rate.

Re: 2016 Blue Chip Ratio--bring it on - Langdude - 08-19-2016

(08-19-2016, 05:13 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:The hidden data in these sorts of analyses is attrition.  Stanford doesn't lose players at the rate other programs do.  To normalize the data Stanford ought to be given some kind of modifier that accounts for its lower attrition rate.

Right. This was one of my points in the Burnt Shirts entry. We have low attrition compared to other schools, which means that, if we do redshirt freshmen, there is less chance they will leave prior to graduation relative to other top-notch schools. Thus a lower-rated prospect will be more effective their fifth year, which is also something this method does not take into account.

-m.

Re: 2016 Blue Chip Ratio--bring it on - Stymie - 08-19-2016

(08-18-2016, 03:52 PM)JJJ link Wrote:According to this, we are tied for #20 with Oregon.
As we here on the CARDboard know, our coaches' strengths include getting more out of the team than the sum of its parts--so bring on the season! (*note: definitely not woofing, but simply saying let's see how things stand at the end of the season)

Quote:0.77 Alabama SEC
0.7 Unbelievably Spoiled Children Pac-12
0.7 Ohio State Big Ten
0.66 LSU SEC
0.63 UFDFG Independent
0.6 Florida State ACC
0.59 Michigan Big Ten
0.57 Auburn SEC
0.55 UCLA Pac-12
0.53 Texas A&M SEC
0.52 Georgia SEC
0.52 Clemson ACC
0.5 Texas Big XII
0.44 Tennessee SEC
0.39 Florida SEC
0.38 Ole Miss SEC
0.38 Miami ACC
0.36 Oklahoma Big XII
0.34 Penn State Big Ten
0.33 Oregon Pac-12
0.33 Stanford Pac-12
0.3 South Carolina SEC
0.28 Michigan State Big Ten
0.26 Washington Pac-12
0.23 Arkansas SEC

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2016/8/18/12530108/ncaa-football-best-recruiters-2016

One of the most useless tables I have ever seen.