Would be interesting to come up with a WAR (Baseball) like statistic for average recruit and go off of how many above avg recruits are in each area. I know this is going to vary a bit more year to year opposed to recruit distribution across the states which I assume is preset within ranges by WIS, but just an interesting thought to maybe add.

Big 10 in Bryant is basically 100k+ bonus a year which is going to run around 30-60% budget increase most years I think. I find it hard to believe all the big 10 schools are this far down with the exception of PSU moving back up in your latest run. Still leaving OSU, mich, ND, minn all 17+ purely on location seems a bit low considering I usually find Midwest to have decent depth in the field. Marquette also has a decent location carved out given the Minn recruits as well as more reach into the Midwest while still being far enough away from having to deal the entire Big 10. I know its crowded in the midwest but seems odd that penalty would be harsh enough to keep big 10 down a bit when it doesnt seem to have as much effect on the NE although the NE does have a higher density I would assume.

I did my own ranking formula. The formula came down to how many recruits with 70th percentile in 250 mile radius is favored by the school. The points = a 25% boost from that number for elite status. You can add additional 25% for schools in mega conferences like big East Wilkinson. The recruits within the 250 were weighed depending on rivals within the 250 as well. So for Texas they got 80% of the pool. UCLA and USC split 60/40. So for every cycle Penn State has 16 healthy options within the 250 mile radius that they can consider there’s without battling. If you have a class size of 12-13, that’s considered healthy. Add on the elite status advantage as well. This formula isn’t perfect because I haven’t figure out how to weight recruits that are not in anyone’s 250 mile radius. For example a 5 star recruit in North Dakota. Minnesota should be favored to get that but not counted in this formula.

1. Penn State 16 (20 points) ??
2. Temple 18 (18 points)
3. Texas 14 (17.5 points)??
4. Boston College 17 (17 points)
5. Tennessee 13 (16.25 points)??
6. Rutgers 16 (16 points)
7. USC 12 (15 points)??
8. Minnesota 15 (15 points)

1. UConn 14 (14 points)
2. Alabama 11 (13.75 points)??
3. Ohio State 10 (12.5 points)??
4. Notre Dame 10 (12.5 points)??
5. Michigan 10 (12.5 points)??
6. Miami 10 (12.5 points)??
7. DePaul 12 (12 points)
8. North Carolina 12 (12 points)
9. California 12 (12 points)
10. West Virginia 12 (12 points)
11. LSU 8 (10 points)??
12. Oklahoma 8 (10 points)??

Ok I did one more tweak, which is that I forgot to add the extra recruiting money to each team at the end (17% on average for a power team). The list now looks like this and I think its pretty good. There will be things people disagree with, but I think in terms of data its probably mostly right based on what we all know as well as the raw data from WIS itself.

I'd challenge folks to un-think about the worlds theyre in and which teams have user coaches, and instead think about how each team would perform under different distributions of user coaches across the world (this assumes that 100% of elites are filled, 60% of power6 non-elites are filled, and 10% of non-power leagues are filled. For the 60% and 10%, its uniform distributed). However, if you think about the game as a whole, this represents the best schools for recruiting talent & recruiting money.

Use it wisely, my friends!

1. Team elite power recruit_ratio

2. 1 USC 1 1 528.130919

3. 32 LSU 1 1 362.543153

4. 17 Penn State 1 1 304.031976

5. Boston College 0 1 303.447243

6. 16 Miami (FL) 1 1 282.740013

7. 0 Temple 0 1 267.430672

8. 10 Connecticut 0 1 265.152393

9. 11 Rutgers 0 1 252.735477

10. 19 Nebraska 1 1 228.626273

11. 8 Texas 1 1 222.581432

12. 5 Oklahoma 1 1 222.414722

13. 41 Syracuse 0 1 215.452341

14. 84 Army 0 0 214.009804

15. 79 Maryland 0 1 167.149159

16. 42 Ohio State 1 1 165.266853

17. 52 Navy 0 0 157.340256

18. 14 Florida 1 1 150.887142

19. 4 UCLA 0 1 150.422602

20. 22 Florida State 1 1 146.425012

21. 6 Notre Dame 1 1 146.110328

22. 36 Tennessee 1 1 145.650296

23. 20 Michigan 1 1 144.055441

24. 45 Minnesota 0 1 134.491714

25. 7 Alabama 1 1 130.479800

26. 70 Houston 0 0 99.235002

27. 73 Rice 0 0 99.235002

28. 35 Marquette 0 1 98.142088

29. 39 Stanford 0 1 97.151513

30. 86 Iowa State 0 1 95.986173

31. 105 Wisconsin 0 1 94.834489

32. 82 Arizona State 0 1 94.493916

33. 68 Virginia 0 1 93.284517

34. 30 California 0 1 90.403069

35. 49 Missouri 0 1 83.342070

36. 90 Buffalo 0 0 82.607480

37. 67 NC State 0 1 81.356438

38. 9 Pittsburgh 0 1 80.981276

39. 27Colorado State 0 1 79.569665

40. 25 Air Force 0 1 79.569665

41. 53 West Virginia 0 1 77.923335

42. 93 Duke 0 1 77.898199

43. 111 Fresno State 0 0 76.833293

44. 87 Iowa 0 1 76.194244

45. Central Michigan 0 0 75.831925

46. 74 Nevada 0 0 75.036905

47. 88 South Carolina 0 1 73.893433

48. 77 Virginia Tech 0 1 73.359174

49. 101 San Jose State 0 0 71.849531

50. 23 North Carolina 0 1 71.267187

51. 46 East Carolina 0 0 70.129487

52. 38 Washington 0 1 69.425884

53. 37 Texas A&M 0 1 67.918497

54. 116 Wake Forest 0 1 66.167309

55. 56 Baylor 0 1 65.869991

56. 43 Louisville 0 1 65.449479

57. 21 Arizona 0 1 64.645714

58. 80 Arkansas State 0 0 62.567659

59. 120 Arkansas 0 1 61.422159

60. 50 Illinois 0 1 61.209971

61. 109 Purdue 0 1 57.329026

62. 40 BYU 0 1 57.306704

63. 51 Oregon State 0 1 57.244793

64. 99 Northwestern 0 1 57.201054

65. 13 DePaul 0 1 56.554534

66. 103 Oregon 0 1 55.818265

67. 12 Cincinnati 0 1 55.387978

68. 98 Ohio 0 0 55.052463

69. 118 San Diego State 0 0 54.275213

70. 69 Akron 0 0 53.740918

71. 119 Kent State 0 0 53.240466

72. 54 Michigan State 0 1 53.068943

73. 48 Georgia 0 1 52.299291

74. 44 Clemson 0 1 52.199632

75. 106 UNLV 0 0 50.240683

76. 58 Indiana 0 1 49.278348

77. 83 Memphis 0 0 46.896825

78. 64 Central Florida 0 0 45.596532

79. 92 Western Michigan 0 0 45.450998

80. 89 Bowling Green 0 0 45.434060

81. 125 Northern Illinois 0 0 44.809290

82. 117 Toledo 0 0 44.726222

83. 55 Texas Tech 0 1 44.687826

84. 15 North Texas 0 0 44.646541

85. 108 Georgia Tech 0 1 43.880097

86. 66 Kentucky 0 1 43.648709

87. 100 Marshall 0 0 42.969927

88. 121 Tulane 0 0 42.599580

89. 47 South Florida 0 0 42.575316

90. 96 Southern Methodist 0 0 42.118222

91. 95 Eastern Michigan 0 0 41.910872

92. 81 Louisiana Monroe 0 0 41.247472

93. 65 Louisiana Lafayette 0 0 41.239140

94. 113 Utah State 0 0 41.211795

95. 18 Miami (OH) 0 0 40.153713

96. 91 Louisiana Tech 0 0 38.979588

97. 75 Colorado 0 1 38.445627

98. 31 Auburn 0 1 38.197015

99. 76 Washington State 0 1 38.099855

100. 102 Vanderbilt 0 1 37.724167

101. 122 Ball State 0 0 37.582937

102. 60 Mississippi State 0 1 36.444851

103. 61 Kansas 0 1 36.439762

104. 85 Utah 0 0 36.294397

105. 59 Kansas State 0 1 36.283325

106. 112 Texas Christian 0 0 36.092158

107. 57 Ole Miss 0 1 35.876840

108. 62 Alabama Birmingham 0 0 35.394323

109. 110 New Mexico State 0 0 35.332564

110. 63 UTEP 0 0 34.928087

111. 104 Middle Tennessee 0 0 34.487262

112. 115 Boise State 0 0 34.119798

113. 97 New Mexico 0 0 33.980952

114. 94 Troy State 0 0 33.956828

115. 34 Southern Mississippi 0 0 33.692904

116. 33 Oklahoma State 0 1 33.460794

117. 124 Tulsa 0 0 31.626285

118. 107 Wyoming 0 0 27.865983

119. 123 Idaho 0 0 27.071242

120. 78 Montana 0 0 20.668372

121. 29 Hawaii 0 0 20.000000

Posted by realist9900 on 12/29/2023 5:04:00 PM (view original):
Getting better. I still would take either Arizona schools over Rice or Houston

While this could be wrong, I think what the model may be keying in on is that Arizona, if both schools were taken by humans, doesn't have enough recruits for both schools to be decent. Rice/Houston, on the other hand, have enough recruits regardless of humans to support a quality team. Houston is the #1 city in the game for # of recruits (about 20/season in Houston proper alone). That said, would love to learn more about WHY you think Arizona > houston area so I can try to work that in.

Posted by johnalanharr on 12/29/2023 6:38:00 PM (view original):
One additional follow up is how you handle the Big East - In those 2 worlds it has earned its Power designation you give it but for the game as a whole it seems like it is viewed as lesser than the Power 5 but greater than the Sun Belt, MAC, WAC, and USA - But that's qualitative analysis in knocking of Sims in Recruiting

Just for questions sake - Whats the Standard Deviation for the dataset as a whole? Find it interesting the gap between 1 and 2 is the same as about 2 and 15

Standard deviation in my metric is 81.

Theres essentially USC on their own, then a pool of 13 additional schools, ending with army. Then everyone else.

It may be that Hawaii is so unique that it can't be accounted for in a model like this, but the model criminally undersells Hawaii. Even though there are low numbers of local recruits, no other school is within 2k miles of you, so you have no competition for any local recruit. I don't think that's true anywhere else in GD. Schools with Hawaii's prestige have about a zero percent chance of getting top recruits on the mainland, but any top recruit that generates in Hawaii is going to Hawaii.

Posted by greener10 on 12/29/2023 10:10:00 PM (view original):

Posted by realist9900 on 12/29/2023 5:04:00 PM (view original):
Getting better. I still would take either Arizona schools over Rice or Houston

While this could be wrong, I think what the model may be keying in on is that Arizona, if both schools were taken by humans, doesn't have enough recruits for both schools to be decent. Rice/Houston, on the other hand, have enough recruits regardless of humans to support a quality team. Houston is the #1 city in the game for # of recruits (about 20/season in Houston proper alone). That said, would love to learn more about WHY you think Arizona > houston area so I can try to work that in.

I believe any school that has a dedicated 180 has an advantage. That is a recruit within their 180 that isn't in anyone else 180. Very very rarely will human coaches be on both Arizona schools. So you will get a half dozen or so players that can be really good in your 180. Then you can spread out to New Mexico and west texas. Also pick up some scraps from California. Same reason Minnesota can be good.

Rice and Houston will not have any dedicated players in their 180. Any player that is will also be inside either Texas 180 or LSU 180. Rice or Houston won't be getting any of those. Also, it's good to have available players less than 1400 miles away. They are not terribly expensive at 1300 per scholarship. The problem is there are no players south of Rice/Houston. So the area of their circumference is much smaller than schools not on a border.

Also I don't think Miami is that great. They do have their own dedicated area, but it is small. If they go north they are blocked by 2 elites. South? Cuba doesn't have football players, just baseball.

Posted by jtwhiz on 12/30/2023 6:02:00 AM (view original):
It may be that Hawaii is so unique that it can't be accounted for in a model like this, but the model criminally undersells Hawaii. Even though there are low numbers of local recruits, no other school is within 2k miles of you, so you have no competition for any local recruit. I don't think that's true anywhere else in GD. Schools with Hawaii's prestige have about a zero percent chance of getting top recruits on the mainland, but any top recruit that generates in Hawaii is going to Hawaii.

There is a reason no coach in the history of the game has won with Hawaii. Yes, they get their local players. Unfortunately, they are rare. Like you say, distance is the big problem. A small school that isn't elite or in a power 5 pays a premium on any recruit. Where an elite can turn a recruit green with 8 campus visits it will take Hawaii 15+ (bshumacher would know better) 15 CV to the mainland will cost 30k+

interesting discussion

anyone whose number one thing is natties though

a hashup of wins and natties is the way to go

so USC & USC

this argument / analysis is about second and so on



i mean USC sits atop a eiffel tower oasis of recruits in a desert of elites

I disagree. USC has had the easiest route to the national championship before the playoff system was installed. What are they ranked during the playoff era Vs bowl system? All of the other elites had to play elites in conference to get to the natty. Also USC may be isolated from other elites but if it’s a bad batch out west, especially if UCLA is occupied they are stuck with a recruiting class. Where other teams have options like Penn State and Temple. Texas. Etc. So no, don’t go pointing at national titles as the only metric. The landscape has changed so analysis with all metrics is worth looking at.

greener, can you incorporate a team's 1400 into your formula? One of the things that makes west coast recruiting tough is how few recruits are in your 1400. Teams on the east coast have a good 1400 and for teams in the big 10 and sec it's even better

Posted by sportsdouche on 12/30/2023 11:20:00 PM (view original):
greener, can you incorporate a team's 1400 into your formula? One of the things that makes west coast recruiting tough is how few recruits are in your 1400. Teams on the east coast have a good 1400 and for teams in the big 10 and sec it's even better

easily. will get back to you w/ results. Ill probably end up weighting 180 like 40%, 360 40%, 600 20%, and then 1400 10%. So it will assume you get 10% of your recruits from the 1400.

No real difference in cost between 361 and 1400. I wouldn't waste your time on 600. It's a useless marker.

This is great stuff! I'm curious to know if you would be able/interested in doing something similar for HD?