What is the relationship between recruiting and on-field success? I looked at this question by comparing the 247 Composite average team talent ratings with the F/+ ratings for the 2015 season.
The average team talent ratings are just what you’d think – how talented the average player is on a team. I only looked at the top 100-best recruiters in the country last season – so 28 poor recruiting teams are left out.
It’s definitely worth noting that this is just one way to look at team talent. I used average talent, but I could’ve used blue chip percentage, the raw number of four- or five-stars, or total team talent rather average talent.
Talent definitely isn't distributed equally
I started by looking at a probability distribution of the average team talent data. As you can see from the chart below, average team talent is positively skewed – Alabama is far more talented than everyone else in the country:
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7125971/Distribution_test1.0.png)
While teams on the right side of the distribution aren't really surprising, what's interesting is how skewed the distribution is. Most teams across the country in the recruiting top 100 are fairly clustered together. A few elite recruiting programs have a vastly unequal distribution of top talent.
The relationship between talent and performance
Next, I looked at the relationship between average team talent and F/+ to get a sense for how important recruiting actually is to performance. First, after running a simple linear regression, there is significant evidence that the relationship between the two variables (more talent = better performance in F/+) isn’t random. Here’s the chart with the two:
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/7125981/Relationshiptest2.0.png)
The big takeaway from the regression was that average team talent accounts for 41% of the variance in F/+. So it's critically important to be an elite recruiter, but it also didn't account for even half of the variation in performance by F/+. It's possible that there's a fairly high barrier to entry in recruiting for contending for the national championship, but it's more important to be part of that elite club than it is to be first in the club (I looked at the relationship between average talent and F/+ for just the 17 schools with an average team talent rating over .88 and there wasn't a statistically significant relationship between the variables any more).
Under- and overperformers
As you’d imagine, teams on the top of the trend line outperform expectations given their talent and teams below underperform relative to expected F/+. Clemson was one of the 15 or so most talented teams in the country last year but ranked second in the final F/+. The opposite would be either Texas or USC, teams with great recruiting but poor performance relative to talent (and fan expectations).
I took the residuals to measure the overachievers and underperformers relative to their expected F/+ given a certain average talent.
The top overachievers are exactly the people you’d expect – the teams with coaches who got offseason raises or hired away: Bowling Green, Toledo, Clemson, Memphis, Houston, and Temple. The underperformers are the teams who made a coaching change or who entered the season on the hot seat: Kansas, UCF, Oregon State, Rutgers, Texas, Tulane, South Carolina, Rice, and Kentucky.
Moving forward, sorting the 2016 version of this list by residuals is a good way to tell who the likely top candidates for raises, contract extensions, and new jobs are going to be.
In the table below, click on the column headers and you can sort the data too:
| Team | '15 Avg Talent | '15 F/+ | Predicted F/+ | Residuals | Talent Z Scores |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 93.42 | 71.3% | 48.0% | 23.3% | 2.48 |
| Ohio State | 91.92 | 54.7% | 41.8% | 12.9% | 2.11 |
| USC | 91.09 | 33.6% | 38.3% | -4.7% | 1.90 |
| Notre Dame | 90.58 | 43.3% | 36.2% | 7.1% | 1.77 |
| Florida State | 90.27 | 36.4% | 34.9% | 1.5% | 1.69 |
| LSU | 90.11 | 39.1% | 34.2% | 4.9% | 1.65 |
| Auburn | 90.03 | 20.6% | 33.9% | -13.3% | 1.63 |
| Georgia | 89.89 | 21.4% | 33.3% | -11.9% | 1.59 |
| Texas | 89.85 | -2.2% | 33.2% | -35.4% | 1.58 |
| Michigan | 89.73 | 41.6% | 32.7% | 8.9% | 1.55 |
| Texas A&M | 89.11 | 19.7% | 30.1% | -10.4% | 1.40 |
| Florida | 88.92 | 24.0% | 29.3% | -5.3% | 1.35 |
| UCLA | 88.78 | 23.8% | 28.7% | -4.9% | 1.31 |
| Clemson | 88.67 | 61.2% | 28.3% | 32.9% | 1.28 |
| Stanford | 88.33 | 48.1% | 26.9% | 21.2% | 1.20 |
| Oregon | 88.16 | 28.1% | 26.2% | 1.9% | 1.16 |
| Oklahoma | 88.14 | 49.9% | 26.1% | 23.8% | 1.15 |
| Miami | 87.92 | 5.6% | 25.2% | -19.6% | 1.09 |
| Ole Miss | 87.67 | 48.4% | 24.1% | 24.3% | 1.03 |
| Tennessee | 87.62 | 32.3% | 23.9% | 8.4% | 1.02 |
| South Carolina | 87.18 | -12.0% | 22.1% | -34.1% | 0.91 |
| Penn State | 87.06 | 13.6% | 21.6% | -8.0% | 0.88 |
| Michigan State | 86.99 | 39.1% | 21.3% | 17.8% | 0.86 |
| North Carolina | 86.39 | 27.2% | 18.8% | 8.4% | 0.71 |
| Arkansas | 86.31 | 36.7% | 18.5% | 18.2% | 0.69 |
| Nebraska | 86.19 | 17.8% | 18.0% | -0.2% | 0.66 |
| Virginia Tech | 85.89 | 7.0% | 16.7% | -9.7% | 0.58 |
| Mississippi State | 85.84 | 33.9% | 16.5% | 17.4% | 0.57 |
| Arizona State | 85.63 | 12.7% | 15.7% | -3.0% | 0.52 |
| Louisville | 85.52 | 17.2% | 15.2% | 2.0% | 0.49 |
| Virginia | 85.35 | -6.5% | 14.5% | -21.0% | 0.45 |
| Kentucky | 85.34 | -15.3% | 14.5% | -29.8% | 0.44 |
| Washington | 85.20 | 36.0% | 13.9% | 22.1% | 0.41 |
| Missouri | 85.13 | -4.8% | 13.6% | -18.4% | 0.39 |
| Oklahoma State | 84.99 | 16.9% | 13.0% | 3.9% | 0.35 |
| Baylor | 84.94 | 36.0% | 12.8% | 23.2% | 0.34 |
| California | 84.88 | 21.5% | 12.5% | 9.0% | 0.33 |
| Texas Tech | 84.80 | 6.7% | 12.2% | -5.5% | 0.31 |
| West Virginia | 84.58 | 21.4% | 11.3% | 10.1% | 0.25 |
| TCU | 84.42 | 30.5% | 10.6% | 19.9% | 0.21 |
| Arizona | 84.32 | -6.4% | 10.2% | -16.6% | 0.18 |
| Vanderbilt | 84.15 | -8.4% | 9.5% | -17.9% | 0.14 |
| Wisconsin | 84.12 | 20.9% | 9.4% | 11.5% | 0.13 |
| Pittsburgh | 84.08 | 14.5% | 9.2% | 5.3% | 0.12 |
| Utah | 84.04 | 29.0% | 9.1% | 19.9% | 0.11 |
| Maryland | 83.98 | -5.3% | 8.8% | -14.1% | 0.10 |
| Northwestern | 83.88 | 11.0% | 8.4% | 2.6% | 0.07 |
| N.C. State | 83.79 | 12.7% | 8.0% | 4.7% | 0.05 |
| Rutgers | 83.68 | -29.7% | 7.6% | -37.3% | 0.02 |
| Georgia Tech | 83.45 | 0.5% | 6.6% | -6.1% | -0.03 |
| Iowa | 83.33 | 17.5% | 6.1% | 11.4% | -0.07 |
| Washington State | 83.20 | 10.4% | 5.6% | 4.8% | -0.10 |
| USF | 83.19 | 15.1% | 5.5% | 9.6% | -0.10 |
| Duke | 83.09 | -4.3% | 5.1% | -9.4% | -0.13 |
| Oregon State | 82.91 | -35.6% | 4.4% | -40.0% | -0.17 |
| Indiana | 82.54 | 5.7% | 2.8% | 2.9% | -0.26 |
| Illinois | 82.48 | 0.2% | 2.6% | -2.4% | -0.28 |
| Boston College | 82.47 | -2.8% | 2.5% | -5.3% | -0.28 |
| Brigham Young | 82.46 | 19.2% | 2.5% | 16.7% | -0.29 |
| Boise State | 82.42 | 17.7% | 2.3% | 15.4% | -0.30 |
| Purdue | 82.26 | -15.7% | 1.7% | -17.4% | -0.34 |
| Iowa State | 82.25 | -6.5% | 1.6% | -8.1% | -0.34 |
| Kansas | 82.13 | -57.6% | 1.1% | -58.7% | -0.37 |
| Cincinnati | 81.98 | -2.9% | 0.5% | -3.4% | -0.41 |
| Colorado | 81.92 | -18.5% | 0.3% | -18.8% | -0.42 |
| UCF | 81.79 | -57.9% | -0.3% | -57.6% | -0.45 |
| Syracuse | 81.75 | -9.1% | -0.4% | -8.7% | -0.46 |
| Minnesota | 81.44 | 8.9% | -1.7% | 10.6% | -0.54 |
| Kansas State | 81.38 | -7.7% | -2.0% | -5.7% | -0.56 |
| Wake Forest | 81.36 | -15.7% | -2.1% | -13.6% | -0.56 |
| Marshall | 81.30 | 7.1% | -2.3% | 9.4% | -0.58 |
| San Diego State | 80.76 | 15.6% | -4.6% | 20.2% | -0.71 |
| Houston | 80.72 | 24.9% | -4.7% | 29.6% | -0.72 |
| East Carolina | 80.19 | -3.3% | -6.9% | 3.6% | -0.86 |
| Connecticut | 79.99 | -6.9% | -7.8% | 0.9% | -0.91 |
| Louisiana Tech | 79.96 | 8.4% | -7.9% | 16.3% | -0.92 |
| Georgia Southern | 79.91 | 12.8% | -8.1% | 20.9% | -0.93 |
| SMU | 79.76 | -34.0% | -8.7% | -25.3% | -0.97 |
| Western Michigan | 79.75 | 12.4% | -8.7% | 21.1% | -0.97 |
| Toledo | 79.70 | 30.5% | -9.0% | 39.5% | -0.98 |
| Southern Miss | 79.57 | 8.4% | -9.5% | 17.9% | -1.02 |
| Fresno State | 79.49 | -32.4% | -9.8% | -22.6% | -1.04 |
| Temple | 79.42 | 14.5% | -10.1% | 24.6% | -1.05 |
| South Alabama | 79.34 | -30.1% | -10.4% | -19.7% | -1.07 |
| Louisiana-Lafayette | 79.31 | -32.6% | -10.6% | -22.0% | -1.08 |
| Tulane | 79.24 | -45.5% | -10.9% | -34.6% | -1.10 |
| Nevada | 79.11 | -20.6% | -11.4% | -9.2% | -1.13 |
| Tulsa | 79.11 | -18.9% | -11.4% | -7.5% | -1.13 |
| Arkansas State | 78.52 | -2.8% | -13.9% | 11.1% | -1.28 |
| Florida Atlantic | 78.32 | -19.9% | -14.7% | -5.2% | -1.33 |
| Memphis | 78.30 | 16.7% | -14.8% | 31.5% | -1.34 |
| Bowling Green | 78.21 | 26.2% | -15.1% | 41.3% | -1.36 |
| Rice | 78.06 | -49.1% | -15.8% | -33.3% | -1.40 |
| Akron | 77.76 | -8.7% | -17.0% | 8.3% | -1.47 |
| Colorado State | 77.67 | -10.4% | -17.4% | 7.0% | -1.50 |
| Middle Tennessee State | 77.56 | -7.7% | -17.8% | 10.1% | -1.52 |
| San Jose State | 77.56 | -15.1% | -17.8% | 2.7% | -1.52 |
| Central Michigan | 77.52 | -2.1% | -18.0% | 15.9% | -1.53 |
| Miami (OH) | 77.32 | -39.4% | -18.8% | -20.6% | -1.58 |
| Northern Illinois | 76.70 | -0.1% | -21.4% | 21.3% | -1.74 |
Loading comments...