College Recruiting vs. Pointspread Success

A couple of weeks ago on these pages, I discussed some of the do's and don'ts when judging the impact of new players (both college and pro) in football for the upcoming season. Here, I'm going to focus strictly on a closer look at the college game.

This is the time of year that many fans who enjoy wagering on college football are gobbling up articles from football annuals, newspapers, and Internet sites, and are also listening intently when a TV or radio show features a coach, player, or sportswriter in an interview from training camp about the upcoming season. One of the major topics of discussion in those articles and interviews will be players who are new to the starting lineup and/or new to the team.

Just as the draft is the lifeblood of development for an NFL franchise, so is recruiting the lifeblood of a college football program. It is because of this fact that the many magazines and websites on high school and junior college recruits have increased and flourished in the last few years. Big-time high school football has never been played at such a high level. Never have so many good players received so much coaching, weight training, film work, and so on. And never have so many good high school and junior college players reported early to their college campuses in order to go through spring practice, begin their film work, and give themselves every opportunity to compete for a starting position in the fall.

The recruiting magazines and services have generally done a good job of heralding the achievements of the signees, causing the hearts of college alumni to flutter as they read about the "studs" signed by their schools. The many recruiting services and various football annuals go out of their way to grade and rank the recruits and recruiting classes of each school, one against the other.

My point here, as a handicapper, is to urge all to remain calm and to avoid being influenced by the hype. Here's why.

These lists and grades of incoming players are little more than tallies of new beef on the hoof – a series of snapshots of the quality of the new bulls and steers joining the herd, if you will. But (completing the analogy) you really don't know how good a team is until you see how the new cattle fit in with the herd.

The point is this: Someone can talk all they want to about how big, how fast, and how good a new recruit might be, but until a blue-chip newcomer demonstrates his ability to perform in the "crucible of fire," he's just a star recruit, not a star in fact.

As far as I can tell, the accumulated blue-chip numbers and grades over the years do not necessarily equate to either national championships or, more importantly, pointspread success.

Obviously, it is better for a coach to have good players rather than overmatched players. After all, football is still mostly a violent, physical game. Big is good. Fast is good. Big and fast is very good. And big, fast, and well-coached is excellent.

That's why I pointed out two weeks ago that the key to successful recruiting is not to land the most high school stars, because many such players became high school stars because they peaked in high school, or reached physical maturity early, or maybe faced weak opposition, or were made to look good because they shined on a very good team.

Building a college program is not accomplished merely by landing the most high school all-Americans, but by landing and then developing players who project to being good college players in two or three years. That's why Nebraska, which rarely ranks in the top 10 in recruiting (the Huskers were ranked about 16th or 17th, on average, by most recruiting services over the last six years), can repeatedly rank much higher in the weekly polls. And that's why Notre Dame, which usually ranks in the top five in recruiting (about 10th this year, however) has frequently found itself out of the top 10 in recent seasons. The Irish have landed more established high school stars; Nebraska has gotten more players with better college potential.

Granted, you can also easily argue that Nebraska (whose academic requirements are not as high as those of Notre Dame) has done a better job of developing its players, thanks to its much-copied program of strength and skills training. Some might also say it's because of better coaching, as Lou Holtz was sometimes accused of "cruising" a bit at South Bend after the Irish won the national title in 1988. Successor Bob Davie has constantly been under scrutiny since taking over four years ago, with Notre Dame finishing unranked at the end of the 1999 season and then being blown out 41-9 by formerly lowly Oregon State in last season's Fiesta Bowl. Despite all of its accumulated high school all-Americans, Notre Dame was slower than Oregon State, which has ranked below 50 in the cumulative recruiting rankings for the past half-dozen years (but 16th for the 2001 class, according to this year's tally by The Gold Sheet).

So, what should you look for as far as new players go for 2001? Take note of potential "immediate impact" recruits – players who are big enough, strong enough, and/or fast enough to immediately help a team where it needs help. Religiously scan write-ups and box scores of all early games (even those not on the Las Vegas line) and note the new impact players, and the strength of the opposition.

Also, note all high-quality players who have been in a team's pipeline, such as redshirt frosh and well-developed juniors and seniors who are finally getting their chance to start. Such players are often the bulwark of a team.

Take note of all recruiting "projections," surprises, or overachievers – players who have improved in a major way because of gains in weight and strength, or because of position changes (linebacker to defensive end, defensive back to linebacker, running back to defensive back, and so on). This is where coaching really comes into play. For example, how many good high school QBs fail vs. the tougher competition in college due to their lack of size, speed, or arm strength? This is where Bobby Bowden of Florida State has excelled. He not only brings in good beef on the hoof, he is a master of the redshirting, training, position-changing, platooning, and developing aspects of coaching. Thus, the Seminoles are perennial top-four finishers.

It's the immediate-impact recruits, the primed high-quality guys in the pipeline, and well-developed former recruiting "projections" and overachievers who end up generating the most pointspread success for their teams over the course of a season.

Chuck Sippl is the senior editor of The Gold Sheet handicapping newsletter. For more insights and advice on sports betting, you can subscribe, or pick one up at your local newsstand. The Gold Sheet focuses on team chemistry, insider reports, key statistics, pointspread trends, and its widely followed power ratings. If you haven't seen The Gold Sheet and would like to receive a complimentary sample copy with no obligation, call (800) 798-GOLD (4653). You can look up The Gold Sheet on the web at www.goldsheet.com.