Comments about ‘Deseret News recruiting grades in for BYU, Utah and Utah State’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 5 2014 10:15 p.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Highland, UT

The best part of this whole article is no perspectives complete metldown. lol

Iowa City, IA

When you consider the standards that apply at BYU including that honor code, this class is a home-run, A++++

Magna, UT

Hmmm..... When you consider the standards that Bronco has set for the team, competing for a National Championship, this is probably a C at best.

Cottonwood Heights, UT

Chris B. is actually right about star ratings. Utahns have a very kindergarten view toward recruiting. No school in Utah has ever been a destination school for the truly big-time recruits, so they try to degrade recruiting rankings because it's an inexact science. But the problem with that is that it's using the exception to prove the rule. Obviously there are 5-star kids that will be flops and 1 and 2-star kids that will be stars. But they are EXCEPTIONS. The higher a star ranking, the higher the likelihood that player is successful. We're still talking likelihoods and not guarantees, but that's no reason to throw recruiting evaluations out the window. For every Heaps that flops, there's a Winston, Tebow, Teo, Clowney, etc. that were top recruits and did turn out to be star players.

And people need to understand how Rivals and Scout decide rankings- they assign a point value for stars and ranking, then add up all of the signees and use the sum to rank them. Which means teams with fewer scholarships to give are by default ranked lower. Average star ranking is the better indicator

East Salt Lake City, Utah

Utah's class rankings: Scouts #69, Rivals #68.
BYU's class rankings: Scouts #63, Rivals #70

A grade of "C" is about right for Utah, we had a big drop off compared to the last few years.

But an "A-" for BYU?

I guess the grades were relative to strength of conference?

Cheyenne, WY

I agree that an A- for BYU is way to high, but I think what impressed the author is the ability BYU had to compete with bigger programs and land the recruits.
Almost all of BYU's recruits had offers from power conference teams.
I would maybe give BYU a C+

Hyrum, UT

@ Uteology and Mike Johnson:

One thing you guys don't seem to understand. A factor in how rankings are determined is how many recruits were signed. And since BYU didn't have as many scholarships to offer as other schools, due to their number of returning missionaries, that fact cost them in the overall rankings.
However, because they got a higher percentage of those recruits they went after and even beating out Utah, USC, Stanford and even Oregon in head to head battles, they received an A- grade.

Utah, on the other hand, lost out on a higher percentage of their targeted recruits and went down in their average stars from last year. Literally every national recruit ranking service has them either last or second to last among all PAC12 schools. Even with fewer overall commits, BYU was still ranked better.
As such, a C grade was as good as they could possibly expect.

Between these 3 factors...
1) Where Utah finished in the PAC12 this past season.
2) The level of recruits they just committed.
3) An extremely tough schedule next season...
The immediate future doesn't look too bright for Utah. That's an objective assessment.

Sports Nutz
Smithfield, UT

@Chris B

Utah FB = Titanic

Phoenix, AZ

I am not seeing how the #70 ranked recruiting class for BYU can be seen as an A-. Obviously, stars are not the only predictor of success, but you certainly want the best athletes possible. I love the emphasis put on effort and discipline, but you still would want that in folks that are more athletic.

I am not disappointed, but the truth is that I don't see how this can lead to a top 25 ranking, when there are only three BCS schools lower than BYU in the recruiting rankings.

I love the Cougs, but I also believe they must get all of the top recruits that are even remotely interested in BYU. They need to bring them in.

Sandy , UT

@Area 52 byu is not a national brand if they were their viewership would be closer to the top programs in the Country 5 million +. Your viewership on ESPN was barley over 1 million. Utah had over 600,000 + and they played on the PAC12 Network.

Once again GMAN shows his true colors. Utah had a very good recruiting class and filled their needs if you look at the film of the players Utah got SPEED. That is what they need to compete in the PAC12. The WR should be able to get separation from the DBs in the league. The new DB should be able to play man on man and on an island.

Utah will compete in the PAC after all they were close their first year. Remember out of the 22 players on the all PAC12 team there were no 5 or 4 star just 2 and 3 star recruits.

salt lake city, utah

Chris B,

You confuse players "drafted" to the NFL with those "hired".

In 2009, a BCS athlete was 7.2% more likely to make an NFL roster.

55% of all D-1 players play for BCS schools. Assuming the best high school players are randomly distributed among Non-BCS and BCS teams, 55% should come from BCS schools and 45% from non-BCS. Alternatively, if reality is as Chris B wishes it, and BCS schools do recruit better athletes out of high school than non-BCS schools, the margin of NFL players on ROSTERS, not DRAFTED, should well exceed 80%.

Unfortunately for Chris B, in 2009 only 62.5% of NFL rosters were paying BCS players, in spite of the fact that a significantly higher proportion of BCS players were drafted.

Conclusion, BCS marketing and exposure increases a college player's chances of being drafted, but only barely increase the likelihood he will make an NFL roster.

The results are even more even if you look at NFL veterans (5+ years in the league). ESPN actually found that to achieve veteran status in the NFL, it makes no difference whether they attended a BCS or a non-BCS school.

So, BCS recruits are better, 7.2% of the time.

let's roll

Just an illustration of the point made by many that ranking teams on overall points rather than star average is misleading.

Oklahoma State is ranked #27 on Rivals, it's star average is 2.89.

Maryland is ranked #54 with a star average of 3.06. Hard to see how OSU should be 27 places ahead of Maryland, it's just a function of OSU having more scholarships this year.

I counted at least 15 schools with a star average higher than Oklahoma State that were below them in the overall ranking.

And please, no one try the ranking exercise one poster made with the PAC-12 and the WAC (or MTW) with the PAC-12 and the SEC...that would just be too discouraging for me as a fan of west coast football.

Cheyenne, WY

@ Crow
BYU had over 1 million viewership on 9 games that counted.
Utah had 600,000 during 5 games
The TV listings do not include those games on the Pac-12 network (go ahead and look it up)
My guess is 1-2 hundred thousand watched the Utes on the Pac-12 network (similar to the games watched on ESPNU)

Marysville, WA

If the grades are based on getting who they went after, then I think the A- is warranted.

Recruiting comparisons between BYU and UoU are largely meaningless. It is not only ability/willingness to live the honor code, but it is also grades. Ask Star Lotulelei.

Based on the inherent restrictions BYU athletics places on itself by being true to the university's mission, I think they are recruiting just fine.

If your deepest wish for your favorite college football team is that they be the best NFL farm team in the nation, then more power to you. Makes no sense to me.

IRS Agent

Alright Chris B, here is the simple math for you.

Let's assume 2% of the US population is LDS, and by default, 2% of the recruiting pool is LDS. If BYU is able to secure 90% of the LDS recruits, but exclude 90% of Non-LDS recruits (due to unwillingness to live the honor code), then the math looks like this:

(2% x .9) + (98% x .1) = 11.6%
Meaning that BYU's actual recruiting pool amounts to 11.6% of total recruits.
Assuming that the 10% of Non-LDS recruits would also consider schools other than BYU, and that 10% of LDS recruits would also consider other schools, then by default, the pool for all other schools would amount to 98.2% of total recruits.

It is a pretty simple 8th grade algebra problem that should be no issue for someone from an intellectually elite PAC-12 school to calculate.

East Salt Lake City, Utah

Hyrum, UT

@ Uteology and Mike Johnson:

One thing you guys don't seem to understand. A factor in how rankings are determined is how many recruits were signed. And since BYU didn't have as many scholarships to offer as other schools, due to their number of returning missionaries, that fact cost them in the overall rankings.


Utah signed 20 recruits
BYU signed 19 recruits

Source: Scouts

Salt Lake City, UT

Just another reason why Whit needs to go. It's one thing to be at the bottom of the barrel performance-wise, as long as the long-term plan and the future look bright. But when our recruiting is at the bottom of the barrel too? Utah has become a joke. We can and should be competing in the PAC 12. We should not be getting embarrassed week in and week out in nearly every sport THREE YEARS IN.

You supposed Ute fans need to raise your expectations. I thought we had surpassed BYU...if so, why are we happy to be slightly better than them in recruiting? We should be crushing them. And don't get me started on Utah State. Isn't THREE YEARS long enough for us to see the fruits of our conference affiliation advantage? I fear we have become the Mississippi State or the Kentucky (football) of the SEC. Toting conference affiliation when we can't compete in our conference just makes us sound pathetic.

We need a change in leadership. Whit should be fired. Chris Hill needs the boot as well.

Miami, FL

The most significant problem for Utah in recruiting is that its PAC affiliation did it no favors in getting recruits within the PAC footprint, where it is playing games every week, where the PAC TV station is aired. 2-3 "SEC-country" recruits is more dumb luck on mid-tier recruits. As the saying goes, even a blind squirrels find a nut every once in a while.

Plano, TX

While all these comparisons are made between teams and conferences at a national level, the real measure of success is if a given team was able to sign a set of players which fill their needs given existent (and returning in the case of BYU / Utah / USU) players. That's how they should be graded. From what I read, all three did well.

let's roll

@ MountainMan

Be careful...Kentucky had the 17th ranked recruiting class in the country.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments