forums

"Miami Hurricanes Roster is officially is Championship Caliber per Blue Chip Ratio"

We got the players always have. all we need is the leadership from a real deal staff who’s fcukin hungry for success
 
Advertisement
Agreed. Cam does expand on his liberties greatly at times but he does love the U and sees through green and orange glasses. As to the roster, it’s slowly but surely getting there. We certainly need the hogs up front on the OL before we can get into the upper echelon. Same too for our LB recruiting but that too is at least trending upward. We have improved greatly across many facets of the team and can continue to improve into playoff discussions if we handle our business and beat the scrubs of the Coastal instead of dropping games to them. I think with Manny at the helm that we’ll push the envelope more and bury the teams we should and I don’t mean the Savannah State’s of CFB but the Duke’s, Virginia’s, etc. once we start doing that, beginning with this upcoming season, then we can solidify Top 5 classes and move the needle where we want it to be.
 
kryptonite said:
That's everything right there. Blue chip ratio matters, but it completely misses the point. Our ratio is tons better than 95% of our opponents, but we win 65% of our games. That ratio isn't what's holding us back (yet) so let's just ignore it for now.

And yeah, he took some liberties to get the results he wanted. The team is more talented than a few years ago, but it's not in that upper tier yet.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure we really know until we see competent coaching on the offensive side of the ball. I am willing to bet offensive line play will be significantly improved for two reasons: (1) Searles was an idiot and that is validated by playing Jones and Mahoney and (2) Richt's offense exposed our limitations on the line. If Martell is in our quarterback play sky rockets from the last two years.
 
Tommy Kennedy, KJ Osborn, and Realus George do not count as blue chip prospects.
Blue chip prospects are naturally talented 18-19 yr old's who have the potential to develop into superstars. Not 5th yr grad transfers from small schools and a 3 star fullback. You remove those guys and we're just under 50% which is not considered championship caliber.

That said, we still have way more talent than everyone in the coastal and should not be struggling to make the ACCCG. Like I've said for yrs it's not the talent, it's player development that's our issue.
 
We must win to keep this South Florida talent at home. It is a must. Elite talent will continue to leave if we don't win. We will be their # 2 or their # 3 as they say goodbye and head to UGA. Georgia's main board top two articles is about how they are close to locking down Marcus Rosemy and Derek Bermudez. We need the juice like UGA has now (and they have it, look at their roster) and I hope Manny can bring it if we are going to compete on a national level. We can't expect to keep top talent at home when we are losing to GT, UVA and Duke.
 
Advertisement
Liberty City El said:
We have enough talent to win the Coastal I know that.

We're still 2 classes away from being playoff contenders, but that process gets sped up or slowed down depending on how we do in the regular seasons.

If we mess around & peel off back to back 10/11 win seasons this year & next year we'll finally put ourselves in that top tier upper echelon, because then you'll see consecutive top 5-10 recruiting classes.
Click to expand...

Need to start recruiting consistently on the offensive and defensive lines.
Have championship depth there, and we're in business.
 
Blue chip ratio is the most important recruiting statistic. Class rankings are pretty much arbitrary. The teams with the most blue chip talent win the most championships and it's not debatable. I'd say (if Martell clears waivers or Williams proves capable) that Miami is a playoff contender right now. The only thing stopping us might be that we'd have to play Clemson in the ACCCG and I'm not sure we're quite on their level yet. However, I'm of the opinion that Clemson and Alabama are on a higher level than the rest of college football. I mean Notre Dame and Oklahoma were the other two playoff teams last year and neither of them are on Clemson's level either.
 
Would love to see better development this time around. Need to start pumping out more day 1 and 2 talent so even more kids will want to join.
 
I'd like to see some data on how Blue Chip Ratio plays out by position and class. In other words, if a team hits that 50% BCR but doesn't have a blue chip QB, are they still "championship caliber?" What if only one blue chip player plays on the OL? Also, what if the team is 50% blue chips based on ranking but 80% of those are freshmen? Does the metric still hold up? Also, what if there's that 5-star guy on your team that for whatever reason hasn't panned out and never takes a snap? And as has been mentioned before, there's some "fudging" going on with the numbers (including Pinckney, George, including transfers, et al) - either use the metric or don't.

I agree that the idea of a Blue Chip Ratio is a nice way to start a discussion about how close a team is to potential success, but I have a hard time calling Miami Championship Caliber right now primarily due to:
  1. Inexperience/uncertainty at QB
  2. OL depth, particularly at tackle
  3. DL depth, particularly DT
  4. Implementing a new coaching staff/offensive scheme/culture
All that said, we absolutely have the numbers and talent to win the Coastal and if that happens, a puncher's chance at the playoffs.
 
Advertisement
Combo said:
Not so sure of that. Have you looked at our OL depth chart? It's pathetic. 13 scholarship players, 3 who are project Freshman.

There's probably enough talent to win the Coastal. But not much beyond that.
Click to expand...

2018 Clemson had 5 freshman & 15 total by comparison.
 
Talent was never the issue here especially cause our recruits ranks tend to dip over time here (not all but you know what I mean).

We are clearly a top defense, not perfect but no one is.

A complete overhaul on offense is going to have a huge impact this year. Just with an updated scheme the OL and QBs will look much better.
 
ghost2 said:
I'd like to see some data on how Blue Chip Ratio plays out by position and class. In other words, if a team hits that 50% BCR but doesn't have a blue chip QB, are they still "championship caliber?" What if only one blue chip player plays on the OL? Also, what if the team is 50% blue chips based on ranking but 80% of those are freshmen? Does the metric still hold up? Also, what if there's that 5-star guy on your team that for whatever reason hasn't panned out and never takes a snap? And as has been mentioned before, there's some "fudging" going on with the numbers (including Pinckney, George, including transfers, et al) - either use the metric or don't.

I agree that the idea of a Blue Chip Ratio is a nice way to start a discussion about how close a team is to potential success, but I have a hard time calling Miami Championship Caliber right now primarily due to:
  1. Inexperience/uncertainty at QB
  2. OL depth, particularly at tackle
  3. DL depth, particularly DT
  4. Implementing a new coaching staff/offensive scheme/culture
All that said, we absolutely have the numbers and talent to win the Coastal and if that happens, a puncher's chance at the playoffs.
Click to expand...
I don't think you'd be able to find a team that meets that criteria. I'm imagining it would be tough to find a team with over 50% of it's players "blue chip" but none of them were quarterbacks or offensive linemen. Also, it would be next to impossible to find a team that's 50% blue chip but 80% of them are freshman. You'd have to have 34 blue chip freshman on your roster (assuming you have the full 85 scholarships). If you're at the 50% threshold, it's safe to assume you've strung together multiple very good recruiting classes. The only way you could find a possible outlier would be to find a team that has recruited lots of good players but at only a few positions. A team with a ridiculously unbalanced roster like...FSU maybe?
 
Tetragrammaton Cane said:
Not what you were asking for but of the 13 teams above 51% in 2018 there were a bunch that had no prayer (USC, FSU…) of contending for division honors much less conference, playoff or national championship.

2018 Blue-Chip Ratio Teams
Team Blue-Chips
Alabama 77%
Ohio State 76%
USC 71%
Georgia 69%
Florida State 67%
LSU 63%
Auburn 62%
Clemson 61%
Michigan 57%
Texas 55%
Oklahoma 53%
Penn State 53%
Notre Dame 51%
Click to expand...


I mean, it seems to me the BCR thing is kinda self-spinning. If you just look at the names of the schools, or told a random person on the street "name the top/most famous dozen or so teams in CFB" they'd probably come up with a similar list... May or may not have anything to do with a team's actual record.
 
Advertisement
DTP said:
I don't think you'd be able to find a team that meets that criteria. I'm imagining it would be tough to find a team with over 50% of it's players "blue chip" but none of them were quarterbacks or offensive linemen. Also, it would be next to impossible to find a team that's 50% blue chip but 80% of them are freshman. You'd have to have 34 blue chip freshman on your roster (assuming you have the full 85 scholarships). If you're at the 50% threshold, it's safe to assume you've strung together multiple very good recruiting classes. The only way you could find a possible outlier would be to find a team that has recruited lots of good players but at only a few positions. A team with a ridiculously unbalanced roster like...FSU maybe?
Click to expand...

I was being a bit hyperbolic with the 80% thing lol. But my larger point is that picking a 50% threshold for 4- and 5-star recruits without digging any deeper into roster management or other factors may be a starting point, but I don't think it's a reliable metric. I might be wrong, I haven't done the math - paging @Lance Roffers?
 
ghost2 said:
I was being a bit hyperbolic with the 80% thing lol. But my larger point is that picking a 50% threshold for 4- and 5-star recruits without digging any deeper into roster management or other factors may be a starting point, but I don't think it's a reliable metric. I might be wrong, I haven't done the math - paging @Lance Roffers?
Click to expand...
I know you weren't being exact on the 80% thing but really what team has a whole bunch of freshman stars and a bunch of upper class duds? It's gotta take a few years worth of classes to build up a roster enough to have 43 blue chip players. Maybe....maaaaayyybeee an obvious bag team like Ole Miss who had a roster full of 3 star players and somehow managed one or two ridiculous recruiting classes? Even then, after those obvious bag classes, Old Miss wasn't a 50% blue chip team though.

The 50% metric may not be air tight but outside of the aforementioned FSU team and USC (how do they manage to suck every year?) The rest of the 50% club is pretty much a list of the top teams in college football.
 
ghost2 said:
I was being a bit hyperbolic with the 80% thing lol. But my larger point is that picking a 50% threshold for 4- and 5-star recruits without digging any deeper into roster management or other factors may be a starting point, but I don't think it's a reliable metric. I might be wrong, I haven't done the math - paging @Lance Roffers?
Click to expand...

I'm actually writing Part III of the Leg's Race right now. It touches on some math for athleticism etc. and the roster as a whole.

If you're wanting just a good proxy of where you want to be, ~45% is a great starting point (which adds an error bar). The "only teams with this percentage of blue chip guys" narrative is true, but doesn't necessarily take all factors into consideration because of the way that recruiting services bump guys who get lots of offers in their rankings. That changes absolutely nothing about the player, so in a sense, you are double counting things there.

Without doing deep studies on roster construction for each team, you can rely on recruiting rankings to get you close. The way with a much higher correlation I've found is pairing relevant athleticism and production in with the data. For instance, a QB who jumps 40" will improve his overall athleticism numbers, but the data shows that to be pretty inconsequential in performance at the college level. However, killing the SH as a QB has shown to be extremely correlated with success at the college level. But to dig even deeper on that, you have to remove the guys with crazy results who then were turned into WR's or CB's at the college level but tested as QB's.

It's an exciting new field that I've had fun exploring.
 
Advertisement
Liberty City El said:
We have enough talent to win the Coastal I know that.

We're still 2 classes away from being playoff contenders, but that process gets sped up or slowed down depending on how we do in the regular seasons.

If we mess around & peel off back to back 10/11 win seasons this year & next year we'll finally put ourselves in that top tier upper echelon, because then you'll see consecutive top 5-10 recruiting classes.
Click to expand...

Agree with this, I feel like we can give clemson a much better game next season and wouldn't be shocked if we were able to upset them in the ACCCG. The OL is the biggest question mark, we get good play out of that unit and the sky is the limit.
 
ghost2 said:
I was being a bit hyperbolic with the 80% thing lol. But my larger point is that picking a 50% threshold for 4- and 5-star recruits without digging any deeper into roster management or other factors may be a starting point, but I don't think it's a reliable metric. I might be wrong, I haven't done the math - paging @Lance Roffers?
Click to expand...
You're right. This article I think did a good job laying out what it takes to be a championship caliber roster. Blue chip ratio matters, but there are certainly other factors.
www.espn.com

Recruiting data can predict college football's next championship

The five College Football Playoff champions have at least one thing in common: They know how to recruit. Using recruiting trends that they all share, we are already predicting next season's title game.
www.espn.com www.espn.com
 
Advertisement
Back
Top