October 28, 1999

17. Every year we get a lot of people on the Hive complaining that O'Leary "can't close the sale" or that Georgia signs a "higher-ranked recruiting class" than Tech. Do all these recruiting rankings mean anything?

1. In a word, no. The opinions of the recruiting "gurus" who rank the classes signed by the various colleges are about as substantive as a fart in a windstorm, to use the Old Testament phrase. This subject has been discussed to death on the Hive, but for the benefit of those who've been in a coma for the past five years, Dr. Football will list again the reasons why recruiting "gurus" have no credibility:
   1. They've hardly seen the players they are ranking in action. The "gurus" base their evaluations of a prospect on what other recruiters tell them, or on the basis of a three-minute video clip sent in by the player's high school coach. It's physically impossible for them to have actually scouted each of the players they rank - they're going strictly on the opinions of third parties with an axe to grind and a few seconds of videotape. All they are doing is echoing the opinions of recruiters and sportswriters, and we all know from reading the Atlanta Journal/Constitution how lazy and biased sportswriters can be.
   2. The "gurus" are more interested in telling their customers what they want to hear than in giving honest evaluations. Most of the "gurus" are based in the South, and the bulk of subscribers to their newsletters are SEC fans. No surprise there. SEC schools have large enrollments and alumni/fan bases, and their fans are passionate about football. The "gurus" recognize which side their bread is buttered on and play up to the prejudices of their subscriber base. Add to that the fact that a lot of the "gurus" in this region are alumni or fans of SEC schools: Jamie Newberg is a Gator, Forrest Davis is a Crimson Tider, Max Howell leans to Auburn. You see this bias in effect every recruiting season. Anytime Georgia Tech signs a prospect who's highly rated by the "gurus," they automatically downgrade the kid's ranking by a point or two. It's not because the player has suddenly become less talented. It's because the "gurus" are telling their subscribers what they want to hear: "All the top talent goes to SEC schools; all the losers go everywhere else." The fact that this is not true is beside the point. The "gurus" are providing the product that their customers demand - and their customers do not want to hear an objective, unbiased evaluation of a player signed by their archrival.
   3. The "gurus" always rank their recruiting classes on signing day in February; those rankings do not change, even if half the players a school recruits never qualify academically. This happens year after year at Georgia. Jim Donnan signs a recruiting class that SEC-biased "gurus" claim is one of the top 5 classes in the nation. But 25 to 30 percent of those players never suit up because they can't qualify academically. Logic tells you that if you take a "Top 5" recruiting class and subtract one-third of the players who don't make it into school, then you're left with a class that drops to, at best, a "Top 25" or "Top 35" class. But the "gurus" never acknowledge this. What good is a Super Prep All-American if he never plays a down for you? Let's look at it from this angle: Georgia signed Reggie Brown and Durrell Robinson, two wide receivers who were Parade All-Americans, Super Prep All-Americans, Journal/Constitution Super 11s, you name it. Neither player could get into school; neither one is playing for Georgia this season. Kelly Campbell wasn't a Parade or Super Prep All-American or a Journal/Constitution Super 11 player. He was just an obscure player from Mays High School who signed late in the recruiting season, wasn't at the top of any recruiting guru's list, and "couldn't even make Georgia's scout team," according to all those geniuses on the Vent. Now, tell me this: Who's caught more passes this season, Kelly Campbell or Reggie Brown? Who's scored more touchdowns, Kelly Campbell or Durrell Robinson?
   4. Just because a player is a high school All-American doesn't mean he's going to be a success at the college level. And there are a lot of players who aren't high school All-Americans who do very well in college. Tech fans will remember that Donnie Davis was considered one of the top three high school QBs by the recruiting gurus in 1990. Donnie started a couple of years at Tech, but he never quite lived up to his high school rep. Collins Peaden was a Journal/Constitution Super 11 lineman when Tech recruited him a few years back. He never played and quit the program after a year or two. Keith Brooking, on the other hand, was a skinny linebacker out of East Coweta High who developed into a first-round NFL draft pick. Kelly Campbell, as I just mentioned, was a lightly regarded player in high school who's now become a deep threat comparable to Dez White and Peter Warrick. Craig Page was just another transfer from Louisville, but he developed into an All-American center at the Flats. Look down the road to Athens: Patrick Pass was ranked as the best running back in the recruiting class of '95, but he couldn't even win a starting position at Georgia. Mike Usry, Daniel Cobb and Nate Hybl were all at various times hyped as being "the next Eric Zeier," but when's the last time you saw any of them on campus? Sterling Boyd, Marlin Carey and Odell Collins were all going to be "the next Herschel Walker" at running back, but none of them made an impact. I could sit here all night giving examples, but the salient point to remember is that the evaluations of recruiting gurus are not only biased, they're often completely wrong.
   5. A coach spends six to 12 months recruiting player. He spends four to five YEARS coaching him. The quality of coaching and teaching a player gets after he enters college has a huge impact on how much - or whether - he continues to develop his talents. To cite the Keith Brooking example again: a player of less than super talent who has coaches that are good teachers and motivators, who works hard to improve himself and who has the inner drive to be the best he possibly can be will often outplay the "Parade All-American" who thinks all he has to do is show up on game day. Sure, Rodney Garner is reputed to be a "super recruiter." But can anyone name a single unheralded player that Garner has ever developed into an all-conference or All-American through his on-the-field coaching?
   Bottom line, if recruiting class rankings had any correlation to on-field performance, Georgia would have won four or five national championships this decade. Can anyone remember when Georgia even made it to the SEC championship game? (Hint: never.)
   
   The larger point here is that everyone should take a big chill pill and keep all the recruiting class "rankings" in their proper perspective. To this end, Dr. Football is indebted to Bob Hersom, who wrote a column earlier this year reminding readers of a few important facts, to wit:
   
   

   Fourteen of the last 16 Heisman Trophy winners (including Ricky Williams) were NOT Parade All-Americans. And, remember, Parade's picked 915 All-Americans over the past 16 years.

   Only four Heisman winners have been Super Prep All-Americans, and Super Prep's picked 2,792 "All-Americans" in the last 14 years.

   Of the 227 players named to the last nine AP All-America teams, 37 were Parade All-Americans, which means that 190 weren't.

   Super Prep has picked 1,197 All-Americans the past five years. Yet one-half (13) of the AP All-Americans this year and also last year were not SP picks.

   Among those who weren't Super Prep All-Americans: UCLA quarterback Cade McNown and Texas A&M linebacker Dat Nguyen.

   The past 13 years, Super Prep has profiled 8,428 prospects. Among those not mentioned at all: four of the last eight Heisman Trophy winners (Desmond Howard, Gino Torretta, Charlie Ward and Eddie George) and two of the best pass receivers in recent years (Terry Glenn and Keyshawn Johnson).

   Kansas State's recruiting classes have been rated 32nd, 23rd, 43rd, 37th and 40th the last five years.

   Unbeaten Tulane? The Green Wave's fourth- and fifth-year seniors (in 1998) came in classes rated 15th and 16th - of the 16 Dixie area teams. Tulane's never had a Top 50 class.

   Last season's final AP Top 10, in order, and their recruiting class ratings of four seasons before: 18th, 28th, 2nd, 32nd, 3rd, 14th, not in top 50, 17th, 25th and 37th.

   In 1987, neither Colorado nor Georgia Tech had a Top 20 recruiting class. Four seasons later, they were co-national champs.

   In '88, the Washington and Miami classes were rated 17th and 18th. Four seasons later, they were co-national champs.

   In '89, Alabama had an unranked class for the second straight year. Four seasons later, 'Bama was the national champ.

   In '90, the Auburn and West Virginia classes were ranked 20th and 22nd. Four seasons later, they were 11-0 and 11-1.

   In '91, Nebraska had its lowest (28th) rating in Super Prep history. Four seasons later, the Cornhuskers were national champs.

   In '92, Nebraska's class was rated 14th. Four seasons later, the Cornhuskers were national champs.

   In '93, Florida was rated eighth in recruiting. Four seasons later, the Gators were national champs.

   In '94, Nebraska's class was rated 20th. Four seasons later, the Huskers were national champs.

   In '95, the Tennessee and Ohio State classes were rated 18th and 28th. Four seasons later, they finished 1-2 in The Associated Press poll.

   To sum up: the rankings of recruiting "gurus" don't mean schitte. Dr. Football wishes everyone would keep that in mind. But he knows they won't.

1. Well, yes. In 1998. Have you already forgotten that Tech lost its top two tight ends (Mike Lillie and Chris Myers) before the season even started? Charles Wiley, one of the top running backs, was gone from a knee injury after the N.C. State game. Tech lost two starting linebackers, Matt Uremovich and Matt Miller, for varying periods. Among the wide receivers, Mike Sheridan missed three games because of injuries and Jon Muyres missed the whole season. Jason Burks was out several games because of injuries and Jerry Caldwell didn't suit up for the New Mexico State game. That's a lot of players and a lot of missed games. Yet, Tech still finished 10-2. The reason was depth: Coach O had quality backups who could step in and replace the injured players. Thus, Joe Burns filled in nicely for Wiley, Dez White and Kelly Campbell picked up the slack from Sheridan and Muyres, Noah King replaced Burks, Chris Young subbed for Caldwell, and yada-yada-yada. Does O'Leary have the same kind of quality depth this season? With games coming up against N.C. State, Clemson and Virginia, we'll soon find out. Of course, if Joe Hamilton goes down to injury, all bets are off.

1. Quincy reportedly was hit so hard that he forgot to pick up his weekly check from Rodney Garner.

1. Like a lot of other Tech fans, Dr. Football has made more than his share of Clemson jokes over the years, but let's give credit where credit is due: the Tigers played a helluva game against the Criminoles and deserved to win. They were obviously fired up and ready to play; it was just as obvious that Tommy Bowden knew what would work against his daddy's team. Props to the Tigers for a great effort. It's too bad they fell a little short.