Ever since the recruiting business began to take off online around 2003, there has been a healthy debate about whether "stars" or recruiting rankings matter when it comes to winning championships. Fans of storied programs say they do, which makes sense because they are usually toward the top. The rest of the CFB landscape likes to believe they don't, which I believe is mostly wishful thinking.
Personally, I believe that stars absolutely matter. If you look at the AP top 10 you'll generally see the teams that make up the top 10 in recruiting. That should tell you everything you need to know, but inevitably there are naysayers that point to schools like TCU, Boise State, and even 2014 MSU as proof that rankings are faulty. To me, those are outliers; exceptions that prove the rule. Nevertheless, I decided to take a look at the rankings a little deeper to figure out if anything solid stood out.
Because I needed data from 4 consecutive classes, I started with the 2006 BCS National Championship and logged data all the way through the 4 teams that made up the 2014 CFP. Here's what I discovered...
EVERY national champion from 2006 to 2014 has fielded, at the very least, TWO recruiting classes that ranked in the top 5. Many had 3 or even all 4 in the top five. Only once did any national championship winner have a class outside the top 20. 2007 LSU (22)
EVERY national championship runner-up fielded a team with at least TWO recruiting classes in the top 15. Some had classes ranked but higher but the constant was at least two in the top 15.
The 10 teams that have competed for a national title from 2006-2014 have pulled in 120 total classes. Only THREE out of 120 were ranked outside of the top 25. 2003 OSU (41st), 2010 Oregon (32nd), and 2014 Oregon (26th).
At the end of the day, highly ranked recruiting classes don't guarantee championships by any stretch of the imagination, mainly because of coaching changes, attrition, or bad luck, etc. However, as you can see, without fielding consistent top 25 classes with a few in the top 15 or top 10, you probably won't win a national title. It has yet to be done.
According to Rivals, Ole Miss will field a team of classes that ranked 40th, 7th, 19th, and 21st. Can we buck the trend?
Personally, I believe that stars absolutely matter. If you look at the AP top 10 you'll generally see the teams that make up the top 10 in recruiting. That should tell you everything you need to know, but inevitably there are naysayers that point to schools like TCU, Boise State, and even 2014 MSU as proof that rankings are faulty. To me, those are outliers; exceptions that prove the rule. Nevertheless, I decided to take a look at the rankings a little deeper to figure out if anything solid stood out.
Because I needed data from 4 consecutive classes, I started with the 2006 BCS National Championship and logged data all the way through the 4 teams that made up the 2014 CFP. Here's what I discovered...
EVERY national champion from 2006 to 2014 has fielded, at the very least, TWO recruiting classes that ranked in the top 5. Many had 3 or even all 4 in the top five. Only once did any national championship winner have a class outside the top 20. 2007 LSU (22)
EVERY national championship runner-up fielded a team with at least TWO recruiting classes in the top 15. Some had classes ranked but higher but the constant was at least two in the top 15.
The 10 teams that have competed for a national title from 2006-2014 have pulled in 120 total classes. Only THREE out of 120 were ranked outside of the top 25. 2003 OSU (41st), 2010 Oregon (32nd), and 2014 Oregon (26th).
At the end of the day, highly ranked recruiting classes don't guarantee championships by any stretch of the imagination, mainly because of coaching changes, attrition, or bad luck, etc. However, as you can see, without fielding consistent top 25 classes with a few in the top 15 or top 10, you probably won't win a national title. It has yet to be done.
According to Rivals, Ole Miss will field a team of classes that ranked 40th, 7th, 19th, and 21st. Can we buck the trend?
Last edited:
