National Signing Day 2016

[yankeeND]

Agreed, would be our lowest class since 2012. I'm not necessarily disappointed with it, but let's not pretend this year's class should be celebrated as a triumph of recruiting.

I hear what some are saying and I think you guys are doing it more elequently than others I've seen today. Hayes, Kraemer, Eichenberg, Pride, Studstill, Mckinley, Claypool, Elliot, and Kareem make me say otherwise. Would love to land Robertson and Kelly, but if not I am very happey to get the best OL haul in the land, 2 DE's that look to have star potential and a secondary class with several impact players in the lot.

 

[Dizzyphil]

Without Demetris Robertson, this class is really average, especially considering we had 10 wins. It's currently #15 on 247.

Disagree - anytime Notre Dame can recruit in the top 20 based on their academic requirements and location, I believe it to be a good class. I believe (based on 247), USC is the only private school ahead of ND.

 

[Luckylucci]

Seeing OSU and Michigan have top 5 classes while we arent even in the top 10 is probably the most disappointing part. Once we put together a few 10 win season in a row I expect recruiting to pick up. 2017 looks to be the start of it. We cant afford another 8-5 year under Kelly for awhile if we want to win a NC. It would kill recruiting.

I agree to some extent, especially with UM and Harbaugh. However, once again what numbers are you looking at. They have an average player rating of 89.9 and we are at 89 so not much of a difference in talent, just numbers. They brought in 29 guys. If we had 29 guys, we'd be much much closer to them

 

[Veritate Duce Progredi]

Would've been great to end with fireworks but our roster has been bolstered by the players added. We now have adequate if not very good numbers at all positions. We signed players at positions of need and we should see many of them compete for snaps.

I'm very pleased with the entire year of ND football. With the injuries piling up, I expected another subpar season. We didn't end the bowl like we wanted and we lost our last game of the year yet we kept all of our players in this class.

Happy with where we are at and I believe this next year's team has all potential needed. Now it's time to see this team come together.

What will #128 give us?

 

[Dizzyphil]

Seeing OSU and Michigan have top 5 classes while we arent even in the top 10 is probably the most disappointing part. Once we put together a few 10 win season in a row I expect recruiting to pick up. 2017 looks to be the start of it. We cant afford another 8-5 year under Kelly for awhile if we want to win a NC. It would kill recruiting.

I believe that is somewhat driving a few to believe ND's class is mediocre. Which is why I quoted yankeeND too. I seriously think some of these recruits are going to be exceptional adds the team.

I hear what some are saying and I think you guys are doing it more elequently than others I've seen today. Hayes, Kraemer, Eichenberg, Pride, Studstill, Mckinley, Claypool, Elliot, and Kareem make me say otherwise. Would love to land Robertson and Kelly, but if not I am very happey to get the best OL haul in the land, 2 DE's that look to have star potential and a secondary class with several impact players in the lot.

 

[gkIrish]

I like the class in terms of filling needs but I'm not overly impressed by the talent as a whole. Seems like we have a lot of pretty good players but very few guys that I am specifically excited about. Of course that could end with a bang.

Lots of people said 10 wins would lead to a top 10 class and right now it doesn't look like it. Not sure if we are ever going to recruit top 10 classes consistently.

 

[irishfanjho15]

ND is currently #11 (247), #11 (Rivals), and #14 (ESPN) in the different services. I would say this class is far from mediocre, even from a pure numbers/stars standpoint.

 

[NDgradstudent]

Disagree - anytime Notre Dame can recruit in the top 20 based on their academic requirements and location, I believe it to be a good class. I believe (based on 247), USC is the only private school ahead of ND.

The data, going back to 2003, suggests that signing a top 10 class the spring before the season you win a title is an effective threshold, i.e. a minimum to compete for a title. The average ranking of classes signed the year before a program wins a title is 4; the rolling average for that year and the three years prior is 6. This is from my own perusal of 247, ESPN, and Rivals rankings.

 

[Dizzyphil]

ND is currently #11 (247), #11 (Rivals), and #14 (ESPN) in the different services. I would say this class is far from mediocre, even from a pure numbers/stars standpoint.

I agree with you.

I wonder how ND would move up/down if JUCO transfers were not included in the grading of the recruiting classes. Some forget that JC transfers are included in the overall recruiting score.

 

[greyhammer90]

The data, going back to 2003, suggests that signing a top 10 class the spring before the season you win a title is an effective threshold, i.e. a minimum to compete for a title. The average ranking of classes signed the year before a program wins a title is 4; the rolling average for that year and the three years prior is 6. This is from my own perusal of 247, ESPN, and Rivals rankings.

That's an interesting stat. I can see it being slightly inflated recently because of the Bama dynasty. Are there any significant outliers?

 

[Dizzyphil]

The data, going back to 2003, suggests that signing a top 10 class the spring before the season you win a title is an effective threshold, i.e. a minimum to compete for a title. The average ranking of classes signed the year before a program wins a title is 4; the rolling average for that year and the three years prior is 6. This is from my own perusal of 247, ESPN, and Rivals rankings.

Well, I don't think ESPN started ranking classes until 2005/6. And I never suggested that this class was going to be part of a NC. I just stated IMO it was a good signing class. Don't get me wrong, I see your point and have a local reporter that has haggled that 'Top10" class almost all the time.

Top Ten Signing Classes Are Necessary For National Titles | FOX Sports

 

[RDU Irish]

I like the class in terms of filling needs but I'm not overly impressed by the talent as a whole. Seems like we have a lot of pretty good players but very few guys that I am specifically excited about. Of course that could end with a bang.

Lots of people said 10 wins would lead to a top 10 class and right now it doesn't look like it. Not sure if we are ever going to recruit top 10 classes consistently.

Getting a lot more stoked about the class seeing the ND videos on them. (Then again, that is the purpose of marketing.)

Kraemer and P-money - all the makings of premier OT and G.

Hayes and Kareem - real, high level DL help in short order while Okwara and Ogundeji look like very high ceiling QB chasers down the road.

Secondary group has all the tools to succeed an some good intangibles - fully some of them to make a mark next year on ST and shake up the 2-deep - tons of size and athleticism with plenty of stars to go around. Lots of 4 stars for an area in which we really needed quality and quantity.

WR - McKinley is a flat out stud, Claypool is a monster, Stepherson a sleeper - this is top notch WR haul even without Drob who would put an enormous cherry on top of a great group.

High impact players on OL, DL, WR and secondary - I think that makes for a pretty good class.

 

[palinurus]

A couple of points:

1. Even #15 isn't "mediocre;" it's just below the high expectations we have for ND as an elite, top tier program.

2. The class still has some really really good players that will compete early and help a lot in two years.

3. We don't know if we're finished yet. DRob makes it a very good year. Without him, it's, as some have said, "solid" -- not what we can live with every year, but okay for one year.

4. This year had this feel for a while. It was noticeable to me, early on, that we were getting verbals from a disproporitionate number of three stars (as rated by the majority of the raters). I think we need to be mostly fours, with one five, at least, and a few threes that staff "sees something in." By that standard, it's low this year. I think Kelly does a good job of projecting, but I'd rather project a four star than a three star; they can both get better, but the finishing point of most four stars will be above the finishing point of most three stars. You can say "Kelly recruits system guys," and that's fine; he does. But we really cannot become an every year "two-thirds three star/one-third four star" program and expect to compete for titles. That is a second tier program (ie, one ranked between #10 and #20 most years) standard, and that's below where we want to be.

5. Having said all this, it's not a disaster, by any means, or even disappointing. And if we get DRob, I'm damn happy. Plus, I'd bet money that there is one or two guys here who will surprise the hell out of everybody. It's just that I really don't think this (w/o DRob) can be a permanent standard.

 

[gkIrish]

Getting a lot more stoked about the class seeing the ND videos on them. (Then again, that is the purpose of marketing.)

Kraemer and P-money - all the makings of premier OT and G.

Hayes and Kareem - real, high level DL help in short order while Okwara and Ogundeji look like very high ceiling QB chasers down the road.

Secondary group has all the tools to succeed an some good intangibles - fully some of them to make a mark next year on ST and shake up the 2-deep - tons of size and athleticism with plenty of stars to go around. Lots of 4 stars for an area in which we really needed quality and quantity.

WR - McKinley is a flat out stud, Claypool is a monster, Stepherson a sleeper - this is top notch WR haul even without Drob who would put an enormous cherry on top of a great group.

High impact players on OL, DL, WR and secondary - I think that makes for a pretty good class.

Don't get me wrong, I like just about every player and I think they all have a good chance to be successful. I just don't see a lot of championship caliber players. Daelin Hayes gets me excited but his health is a big question mark.

We continue to get great offensive lineman but I don't see a reason that we should expect these players to produce a better O-line than what we've seen in the last few years. I expect the line to be consistently good.

We already have too many projects on the defensive line as it is and while I think Kareem and Hayes will be solid, I don't see either guy becoming even a 3rd team All-American down the road. Again, good players, but not championship caliber.

I like Claypool a lot, but without Robertson, the WR haul is good but not great.

I'm coming off as being unhappy with the class but I am truly happy with it. We have a bunch of guys that will probably play 4-5 years at ND. Very few flight risks, if any. Solid pieces but I just think we need to do better to make the playoffs.

 

[RDU Irish]

Well, I don't think ESPN started ranking classes until 2005/6. And I never suggested that this class was going to be part of a NC. I just stated IMO it was a good signing class. Don't get me wrong, I see your point and have a local reporter that has haggled that 'Top10" class almost all the time.

Top Ten Signing Classes Are Necessary For National Titles | FOX Sports

So signing DRob and Kelly would take us from 1 five, 12 four star to 3 five, 12 four star which would be tied for second most five stars with Clemson and fifth most four stars behind FSU, OSU, Michigan and LSU. I think it is fair to say those guys would significantly increase our chances of making the playoffs over the next 3-4 years but it is not like we are SOL without them. On the edge of a top ten class is keeping you in the mix.

 

[NDgradstudent]

Well, I don't think ESPN started ranking classes until 2005/6. And I never suggested that this class was going to be part of a NC. I just stated IMO it was a good signing class. Don't get me wrong, I see your point and have a local reporter
that has haggled that 'Top10" class almost all the time.

I agree that it's a good class, and we are not so far off going back a couple years. 10 of the 13 teams did not have a top 10 class every one of the four years leading up to according to the services available (ESPN, as you say, does not go back that far).

That's an interesting stat. I can see it being slightly inflated recently because of the Bama dynasty. Are there any significant outliers?

The two candidates are Texas in 2005-6 and Auburn in 2010-11. That said, both 247 and Rivals gave Texas the #1 class in 2002, so I wouldn't call them an outlier, but their classes in 03, 04, and 05 were variously ranked between 8 and 20. They are an exception to the top-10-in-the-year-immediately-before-you-win-a-title rule.
As for Auburn, they were ranked in the top 10 both in 2007 and 2010 by all three of the services I looked at, but the classes in 2008 and 2009 were ranked between 19-25 by all three, too.

Another nugget: every team to win a title since 2003 has had a class ranked in the top 4 by either ESPN, 247, or Rivals (note that not all go back that far) in at least one of the four years leading up to their title.

 

[NDPhilly]

The one thing I love about this class is how we addressed the need for Pass Rushers. Hayes, Kareem, and Okwara can all be high impact players. I wish we would have tried to get atleast one impact DT but we have plenty of numbers there.

 

[gkIrish]

The data, going back to 2003, suggests that signing a top 10 class the spring before the season you win a title is an effective threshold, i.e. a minimum to compete for a title. The average ranking of classes signed the year before a program wins a title is 4; the rolling average for that year and the three years prior is 6. This is from my own perusal of 247, ESPN, and Rivals rankings.

I think this may be more of a coincidence than a trend. Your average championship team is going to start mostly sophomores and upperclassmen. You might have 1-2 freshman who start but rarely more than that. So I'm not sure why the freshman class would have so much of an impact that it created a trend.

 

[NDdomer2]

I think this may be more of a coincidence than a trend. Your average championship team is going to start mostly sophomores and upperclassmen. You might have 1-2 freshman who start but rarely more than that. So I'm not sure why the freshman class would have so much of an impact that it created a trend.

high quality scout teams and special teams?

 

[yankeeND]

The one thing I love about this class is how we addressed the need for Pass Rushers. Hayes, Kareem, and Okwara can all be high impact players. I wish we would have tried to get atleast one impact DT but we have plenty of numbers there.

This. We did well in the trenches on both sides and in the back end of the defense.

 

[Luckylucci]

A couple of points:

1. Even #15 isn't "mediocre;" it's just below the high expectations we have for ND as an elite, top tier program.

2. The class still has some really really good players that will compete early and help a lot in two years.

3. We don't know if we're finished yet. DRob makes it a very good year. Without him, it's, as some have said, "solid" -- not what we can live with every year, but okay for one year.

4. This year had this feel for a while. It was noticeable to me, early on, that we were getting verbals from a disproporitionate number of three stars (as rated by the majority of the raters). I think we need to be mostly fours, with one five, at least, and a few threes that staff "sees something in." By that standard, it's low this year. I think Kelly does a good job of projecting, but I'd rather project a four star than a three star; they can both get better, but the finishing point of most four stars will be above the finishing point of most three stars. You can say "Kelly recruits system guys," and that's fine; he does. But we really cannot become an every year "two-thirds three star/one-third four star" program and expect to compete for titles. That is a second tier program (ie, one ranked between #10 and #20 most years) standard, and that's below where we want to be.

5. Having said all this, it's not a disaster, by any means, or even disappointing. And if we get DRob, I'm damn happy. Plus, I'd bet money that there is one or two guys here who will surprise the hell out of everybody. It's just that I really don't think this (w/o DRob) can be a permanent standard.

Stanford, Michigan State, Baylor, TCU, Oregon, etc. have all been top 5-10 teams perennially for awhile now and none of those teams consistently beat us in the recruiting rankings. Team recruiting rankings are about as useless as it comes to evaluating future success. The best Oregon team was led by Marcus Mariotta (you know, Heisman winner), yea, he was a 3 star who had virtually no other meaningful Pac 12 offers.

 

[NDgradstudent]

I think this may be more of a coincidence than a trend. Your average championship team is going to start mostly sophomores and upperclassmen. You might have 1-2 freshman who start but rarely more than that. So I'm not sure why the freshman class would have so much of an impact that it created a trend.

That's definitely true; its probably usually a "good sign" correlation rather than causation.

I edited one of my posts above to include what I think is the more important figure: every team to win a title since 2003 has had a class ranked in the top 4 by either ESPN, 247, or Rivals (note that not all those services go back that far) in at least one of the four years leading up to their title. The only school where that year was the year immediately before their title was Auburn in 2010, and I don't think that includes Cam Newton, anyway.

 

[gkIrish]

high quality scout teams and special teams?

Perhaps...

That's definitely true. I'm just looking for patterns. I edited one of my posts above to include what I think is the more important figure: every team to win a title since 2003 has had at least one class ranked in the top 4 by at least one of ESPN, 247, or Rivals (note that not all those services go back that far) in the four years leading up to their title.

Yeah that stat definitely means something. You need a class or two of studs across the board.

 

[palinurus]

Stanford, Michigan State, Baylor, TCU, Oregon, etc. have all been top 5-10 teams perennially for awhile now and none of those teams consistently beat us in the recruiting rankings. Team recruiting rankings are about as useless as it comes to evaluating future success. The best Oregon team was led by Marcus Mariotta (you know, Heisman winner), yea, he was a 3 star who had virtually no other meaningful Pac 12 offers.

Okay, but there are no titles in that group, and if you look at the teams in the top ten in recruiting, on average, over the last 5-10 years, they're the teams -- Bama, Ohio State, FSU, Auburn, LSU, maybe Fla (until lately) -- that win titles. And I think we have a better recruiting advantage, in terms of prestige, academics, exposure, network -- than any of those schools, though Stanford is a good one, too. I mean TCU and Baylor are relatively recent top ten teams; Mich State has been in there only a couple of years I think, and I think the Big Ten has had few decent teams at all, which has helped their rankings. Oregon seems to be declining post-Kelly and Mariotta. Stanford I'll grant you is an aberration -- hell, they're only 51st this year per Rivals, based on 14 recruits. I don't know; it's just easier to compete when you have better talent, and we should be able to recruit top ten talent most years. And we have; I just don't want to get used to #15 classes.

 

[NDgradstudent]

Stanford, Michigan State, Baylor, TCU, Oregon, etc. have all been top 5-10 teams perennially for awhile now and none of those teams consistently beat us in the recruiting rankings. Team recruiting rankings are about as useless as it comes to evaluating future success. The best Oregon team was led by Marcus Mariotta (you know, Heisman winner), yea, he was a 3 star who had virtually no other meaningful Pac 12 offers.

The evidence is that since 2003 having a top 4 class according to one or more of ESPN/Rivals/247 in at least one of the four years leading up to the title is a necessary condition to win the title. It is not sufficient, obviously, or else Alabama would have won in 2014, 2015, etc. Plus, of course, four teams can't win the title.

 

[Irish Insanity]

Did I hear the state correctly today, the last like 10 National Champions have all had top 10 classes the previous year.

There's always 2017.

Another stat:

Since 1998 every team that has won a national title except for Oklahoma in 2000 has had at least two top ten national signing classes in the four years before a title. So while signing a top ten recruiting class doesn't guarantee that you're going to win a national title -- indeed, there are plenty of teams that don't -- for most of the past generation, you can't win a title without at least two top ten recruiting classes. More interestingly, every champion from the past nine years with the exception of Auburn in 2010 has had at least three top ten recruiting classes in the four years before it won a title.

 

[Luckylucci]

Well two of the 4 teams in the College football playoff, very rarely if ever get in the top 10 in recruiting let alone the top 5. Again, Baylor is probably in the CFP if Russell doesn't get injured and they have never even come close. Oregon did it for 5ish years without it. Stanford doesn't even come close most years and those two teams have dominated the Pac12 for the last 7+ years.

The final top 10 is as followed:

Bama (Yes)
Clemson (Yes)
Stanford (No)
OSU (Yes)
Oklahoma (No)
MSU (No)
TCU (not even remotely close)
Houston (not even remotely close)
Iowa (not even remotely close)
Ole Miss (yes)

So of the final 10 college rankings, 4 actually recruit as this "mythical" level, 3 aren't even remotely close, and 3 more don't as well.

Hmmm, those numbers say to me that it doesn't Fing matter what 247's team rankings suggest.

Yes, there is a correlation between recruiting and winning. Its the lifeblood of all good programs but that has nothing to do with 247 or rivals team rankings. If you believe so, then you believe that they have accurately scouted and rated every single HS football player, which I know you guys don't believe.

 

[kmoose]

Don't get me wrong, I like just about every player and I think they all have a good chance to be successful. I just don't see a lot of championship caliber players. Daelin Hayes gets me excited but his health is a big question mark.

We continue to get great offensive lineman but I don't see a reason that we should expect these players to produce a better O-line than what we've seen in the last few years. I expect the line to be consistently good.

We already have too many projects on the defensive line as it is and while I think Kareem and Hayes will be solid, I don't see either guy becoming even a 3rd team All-American down the road. Again, good players, but not championship caliber.

I like Claypool a lot, but without Robertson, the WR haul is good but not great.

I'm coming off as being unhappy with the class but I am truly happy with it. We have a bunch of guys that will probably play 4-5 years at ND. Very few flight risks, if any. Solid pieces but I just think we need to do better to make the playoffs.

Relax. We were almost in the playoffs this year. So we have the talent. Clemson hasn't exactly been tearing up recruiting. Like us, they've been doing well, but not elite. And they were in the playoffs. We can get there, too, with just the right pieces.

 

[NDdomer2]

Well two of the 4 teams in the College football playoff, very rarely if ever get in the top 10 in recruiting let alone the top 5. Again, Baylor is probably in the CFP if Russell doesn't get injured and they have never even come close. Oregon did it for 5ish years without it. Stanford doesn't even come close most years and those two teams have dominated the Pac12 for the last 7+ years.

The final top 10 is as followed:

Bama (Yes)
Clemson (Yes)
Stanford (No)
OSU (Yes)
Oklahoma (No)
MSU (No)
TCU (not even remotely close)
Houston (not even remotely close)
Iowa (not even remotely close)
Ole Miss (yes)

So of the final 10 college rankings, 4 actually recruit as this "mythical" level, 3 aren't even remotely close, and 3 more don't as well.

Hmmm, those numbers say to me that it doesn't Fing matter what 247's team rankings suggest.

Yes, there is a correlation between recruiting and winning. Its the lifeblood of all good programs but that has nothing to do with 247 or rivals team rankings. If you believe so, then you believe that they have accurately scouted and rated every single HS football player, which I know you guys don't believe.

Except that stats weren't about being in top ten or making CFP. It was about championship winners.

And I don't think this is souch about what site rated who where. Chances are if ur consistently having a class ranked that high by multiple services then you are bringing in talent. Period. Rankings don't win it all but skilled football players do. And the champions bring them in.

Plain and simple.

 

[GoIrish41]

This argument will be moot when we sign Kelly and DRob!