Class rankings matter? According to this chart. Every 1 of these NATIONAL CHAMPIONS. We’re in the top 10 for 4 years leading up to their Championship.

[Caneofcanes]

This is before CFP expansion. So now we see why the same teams kept making the CFP. They were out recruiting everyone. Honestly it’s not groundbreaking at all. We all knew that you couldn’t win without the horses. Just shows how consistent you have to be in the recruiting game.

So although we may have struck out on some of the so called whales. It’s also obvious why we have a BIG GAME HUNTER in recruiting. You can’t compete without JIMMIES and JOES.

 

[Dwinstitles]

Was this difficult to figure out just based off our memory? We are always here on the recruiting board. Good info though but expected.

 

[Caneofcanes]

Was this difficult to figure out just based off our memory? We are always here on the recruiting board. Good info though but expected.

As you stated it. We always knew, but what I would really find interesting is. Who are the other teams in the top 10 and why weren’t they as consistent? I know the LAME school and OU have to be in there. Yet they couldn’t WIN THE BIG GAME.

 

[Dwinstitles]

As you stated it. We always knew, but what I would really find interesting is. Who are the other teams in the top 10 and why weren’t they as consistent? I know the LAME school and OU have to be in there. Yet they couldn’t WIN THE BIG GAME.

Off the top of my head I would say it's DT recruiting that separated the men from the boys. We went to the days of thinking Michael Wyche was a 5 star goon from Compton or some sh. To really being at least a choice for elite DTs that national title schools are after.

 

[WeBallinBoyz]

But how many 3-star evals did they have?

 

[Squid Bumciorek]

But how many 3-star evals did they have?

 

[RightSaidFred]

The 2001 Canes won because we had better players than everyone else by a lot. It wasn’t because of Larry Coker’s X’s and O’s.

 

[01Canes]

The last 10 national champions have basically fit into 1 of 2 categories. You have to recruit at a Top 3 level year after year (Bama 3x, UGA 2x) or you have to recruit at a Top 10 level on an annual basis and have ELITE QB play (three #1 overall pick QB’s and the other was a mid-1st round QB):

- LSU with the unstoppable QB/WR group of Joe Burrow, Ja’Marr Chase, and Justin Jefferson.
- Clemson with Trevor Lawrence and the elite WR duo of Tee Higgins and freshman year Justyn Ross.
- Clemson with Deshaun Watson.
- FSU with Jameis.

OSU was the lone exception to this in 2014 and even they had a four-year class average that ranked in the Top 6.

 

[DC3]

Buddy let me tell you about a thing called the Blue Chip Ratio

 

[hurricaneman]

This graph says something different to me.

Alabama likely has the best average class ranking in all of those years, or **** near close to it. And they've had the best coach in college football history. Yet they've only won 3 out of the 9 (3 out of 10 if you count the year prior). Three national championships is obviously awesome but you would think the success rate, given those parameters, would be much higher.

 

[TriStarCane]

EVAL SZN BROS!!! Everyone know these ratings are super rigged anyway

 

[01Canes]

This graph says something different to me.

Alabama likely has the best average class ranking in all of those years, or **** near close to it. And they've had the best coach in college football history. Yet they've only won 3 out of the 9 (3 out of 10 if you count the year prior). Three national championships is obviously awesome but you would think the success rate, given those parameters, would be much higher.

Making 6 appearances in the national title game in a 10-year span (3 wins, 3 losses) is a remarkably high success rate, though. And UGA has been the only program to really reach their level of recruiting during this decade as the bar graph in the OP certainly illustrates.

Bama was toppled twice in championship games by Clemson teams that overcame Bama's overall talent advantage with elite QB play (Watson in 2016 and Lawrence in 2018), which shows just how dramatic an impact that level of QB can have on your program's ceiling.

 

[n0rcalcane]

This graph says something different to me.

Alabama likely has the best average class ranking in all of those years, or **** near close to it. And they've had the best coach in college football history. Yet they've only won 3 out of the 9 (3 out of 10 if you count the year prior). Three national championships is obviously awesome but you would think the success rate, given those parameters, would be much higher.

The 1986 team is one of the best of all time. What happened against Penn State? Teams have off days, and you can’t be off against top competition, even if you are better.
If Miami had a 33% natty success rate in the next decade I would be more than ok with that lol. Other teams recruited well during that time and had some generational talent at QB.

 

[KingB02]

Then you have Miami with average of 15th overall class rankings (second in ACC) and finished In the top 15 once maybe! It’s not all about the stars. If you can’t develop and have culture all that goes out the window.

 

[Dwinstitles]

Elite ballers on the squad make four stars and three stars jobs a whole lot easier. Makes everyone look developed. Pause

 

[Canesrule230]

Then you have Miami with average of 15th overall class rankings (second in ACC) and finished In the top 15 once maybe! It’s not all about the stars. If you can’t develop and have culture all that goes out the window.

I think this is the key here. We may not have had the talent to win the natty but we've had enough to average 9 wins a season. I like making the comparison to Oklahoma State to show how much we have underachieved. We recruit on average 22 spots ahead of OSU but average 1.5 less wins than they do over the last 10 years. Say what you want about Gundy/OSU but they get the most out of their players. We need to be better at evals and talent development.

Year	OSU Record	OSU Team Talent Rank		Year	Miami Record	Miami Team Talent Rank
2013	10-3	No 247 Data		2013	9-4	No 247 Data
2014	7-6	No 247 Data		2014	6-7	No 247 Data
2015	10-3	33		2015	8-5	17
2016	10-3	39		2016	9-4	19
2017	10-3	38		2017	10-3	20
2018	7-6	37		2018	7-6	17
2019	8-5	39		2019	6-7	18
2020	8-3	42		2020	8-3	18
2021	12-2	47		2021	7-5	13
2022	7-6	40		2022	5-7	12
10 yr record avg	8.9-4.0	.690 Win %		10 yr record avg	7.5-5.1	.595 Win %
Avg Team Talent Rank	39.4			Avg Team Talent Rank	16.75

 

[Hegemon]

7 days

 

[Dghustla]

Breaking news water is very wet

 

[pacusmc]

Clemson’s was not top 10 four years in a row prior to their natty with Watson.
That’s some revisionist history right there