ADVERTISEMENT

Ketch's 10 Thoughts From The Weekend (The 2022 Super Blue Chip Rankings)

I'm sorry Ketch. I'm just going to have to disagree with you on including any of the sequels in your top ten. They were ill conceived trash. There is a reason people want them retconned. Top 3 were spot on though.
giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: ryano013
Ketch - I like and appreciate the analytical work you are doing. If I’m following you correctly, it is very binary, drafted or not drafted. If you dug deeper, would it warrant thinking about getting drafted in rounds 1 -3 differently than 4-7? Or even a different value for each round. It seems like that would yield a different conclusion than the 85th ranked recruit is essentially the same as number 248.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rubeng38
I have no issue with your Star Wars rankings.

As a recovering alcoholic myself, a possible benefit of having one as your head coach is their ability to do a self inventory. Good for Sark if he's able to do that.
 
Ketch - I like and appreciate the analytical work you are doing. If I’m following you correctly, it is very binary, drafted or not drafted. If you dug deeper, would it warrant thinking about getting drafted in rounds 1 -3 differently than 4-7? Or even a different value for each round. It seems like that would yield a different conclusion than the 85th ranked recruit is essentially the same as number 248.
Yes, there is a direct correlation between the super blues being drafted much higher than non-super blues.
 
Yes, there is a direct correlation between the super blues being drafted much higher than non-super blues.
Doesn’t this mean saying there is little difference between the 85th ranked recruit and 248th, potentially misleading? There is little difference in getting drafted, but could be a meaningful difference in playing in the NFL vs. getting drafted but not playing.
 
Doesn’t this mean saying there is little difference between the 85th ranked recruit and 248th, potentially misleading? There is little difference in getting drafted, but could be a meaningful difference in playing in the NFL vs. getting drafted but not playing.
I wasn't talking about those two rankings. (see the rounds those players that hit were drafted in).
 
Nice write up!💯👊🏼 Counting down the days to training camp.

I'm glad the elephants survived. Always had a soft spot for them🙂
 
Indeed. I just think they tell different, important stories.
To clarify, I’m mainly referring to the overall similarity between the Blue Chip Ratio Teams and the post-transfer column. Your graphic would seem to indicate that USC and FSU should outperform their blue chip ratio position. Michigan and Auburn should do worse. That would prove your point.
 
Great stuff Ketch. I love you deep dive into the recruiting rankings, it has peeked my interest since you began on this crusade and really reshaped my own view of recruiting. Appreciate your exhaustive search for the truth. Have a great rest of your Sunday, and enjoy your rogue shop
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Herk
Great stuff Ketch. I love you deep dive into the recruiting rankings, it has peeked my interest since you began on this crusade and really reshaped my own view of recruiting. Appreciate your exhaustive search for the truth. Have a great rest of your Sunday, and enjoy your rogue shop
Appreciate it! Birthday cake!
 
  • Like
Reactions: longhrns4life09
I tried to find the difference between your metrics and the blue chip ratio. USC and FSU are in your top team metrics but are not on the blue chip ratio. Michigan and Auburn are top blue chip ratio teams but not on the super blue chip metrics. IMHO, if USC and FSU outperform Michigan and Auburn this season that would be evidence that favors your metrics in this small sample size. Other than that, I noticed a lot of the same teams.
 
I tried to find the difference between your metrics and the blue chip ratio. USC and FSU are in your top team metrics but are not on the blue chip ratio. Michigan and Auburn are top blue chip ratio teams but not on the super blue chip metrics. IMHO, if USC and FSU outperform Michigan and Auburn this season that would be evidence that favors your metrics in this small sample size. Other than that, I noticed a lot of the same teams.
I don't think there's enough difference makers on those teams to warrant being in a top tier or tier that matters.

Development of the roster is critical.
 
11 of A&M's 19 have not played in a game yet because they just signed.
That was going to be my question. How many of A&M’s super blue chips are lower class men? Also, what is the position distribution? Are most of them along the d-line?
 
That was going to be my question. How many of A&M’s super blue chips are lower class men? Also, what is the position distribution? Are most of them along the d-line?
15 from the last two classes.

QB -1
RB - 1
WR - 2
TE
OL - 4
DL - 7
LB
DB - 4
 
  • Like
Reactions: Travis Galey
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT