The Myth Of A Widening Recruiting Gap - Part II

In Part I, it was shown, using 5-year rolling averages of ranking data obtained from Scout.com that the gap between UM and MSU recruiting rankings was actually following a closing trend. This contradicts the chUMp claims that the gap is widening.

At the end of Part I, an interesting trend was mentioned concerning the numbers of recruits in those recruiting classes. A hypotheses was proposed that the trend involving the numbers of recruits might actually prove to show the gap was closing even more than was initially calculated.

In fact, it is.

Before proceeding, we must note that after the 2006 class, Scout changed its algorithm for computing the recruiting class scores. Therefore rankings were used rather than the class scores. Using the rankings imposes a quantification effect. What this means is that the difference between numerically sequential ranks could be caused by a delta score of just 1 or of 1 million. This means that the delta scores between ranks is not uniform. That is always true with any system that ranks scores.

Not sure what that means? Let's look at a simple example.

Rank  Score  Delta (Score)
1         3401         -
2         3290     111
3         3289         1
4         3100     189
5         3005       95

The ranks are evenly spaced, but the scores associated with the ranks are not. This is a quantization effect.

The reason to mention this is not that it is significant to the analysis. It is actually useful. It allows the different scoring algorithms to be neutralized.

To analyze the hypothesis that normalizing the rankings based on the number of recruits was tested. Since the chUMps declared UM was superior the decision was made to leave the UM data as the baseline and normalize the MSU recruiting data to the number of UM recruits.

The math is simple.

MSU SCORE / # MSU RECRUITS * # UM RECRUITS = normalized MSU SCORE

The normalized scores were computed for each year and a new ranking for MSU was obtained from the Scout.com data base using those normalized scores. The Scout.com limit of 25 recruits per class was included in the analysis.

The results, again using 5-year rolling averages of the class rankings:

Years    UM    MSU  delta
02-06     8.6    49.8   41.2
03-07     6.8    53.0   46.2
04-08     6.4    43.2   36.8
05-09     8.2    47.2   39.0
06-10   10.2    42.6   32.4
07-11   14.2    38.0   23.8
08-12   13.0    32.2   19.2
09-13   12.2    25.6   13.4
10-14   10.8    20.8   10.0

Scout.com uses a scoring system that has factors that resemble exponential funcions. Mentioned above was how integer rankings quantizes scores. Scout.com has a scoring system that puts that on steroids.

Stars  Points
    5      200
    4      120
    3        40
    2        20
 NR          1
 JC           1
 PG          1

To the aggregate star score is the top 100 points. This means that the higher up in the rankings, the more points it takes to achieve the next higher ranking position.

Since UM is generally ranked higher than MSU over the 9 data sets, it seemed worthwhile to reverse the normalization and alter the UM data based on the MSU number of recruits.

The results are interesting.

Years    UM    MSU  delta
02-06     7.4    46.2   38.8
03-07     5.0    48.6   43.6
04-08     7.4    40.6   33.2
05-09     8.8    45.4   36.6
06-10   12.4    43.8   31.4
07-11   13.2    40.6   27.4
08-12   13.2    37.8   24.6
09-13   11.6    35.6   24.0
10-14   12.2    31.8   19.6

The trend is not as steep as when the MSU number of recruits is normalized.

While it is clear that the analysis supports the hypothesis that normalizing the number of recruits would show that the trend in the gap between the recruiting class rankings is narrowing faster, the algorithm Scout employs for calculating class ranking scores does not support a rigorous analysis leading to a definitive answer.

Perhaps the rolling 5-year averages of the win loss records and margins of victory over the same time frame will illuminate. MoV is MSU score minus UM score regardless of winner.

Years   WL%   MoV
02-06  0.0000  -16.4
03-07  0.0000    -8.0
04-08  0.2000    -3.8
05-09  0.4000    -1.0
06-10  0.6000   +3.0
07-11  0.8000   +9.4
08-12  0.8000   +9.8

The trends are clear. The gap is closing. The only question that remains indeterminate is: by exactly how much.

And for how long. The last time we saw these kinds of trends was in the late 1940s when Biggie Munn was transforming MSU (nee MSC) into the Nation's Football Factory.

Part I

Tweet ------------- Remember to check Spartan Headline links, updated real time, at the bottom of the page. -------------- Please click on COMMENTS below the post to enter and view reader comments. ***If you are receiving this post via automated email, ***you need to go to the site to view headline links and embedded videos in this post: http://spartanresource.blogspot.com/