The rich, still getting richer

In light of yesterday’s post about how the top tier recruiting talent is becoming more concentrated at the top programs with the 2021 class, I thought this was an interesting data point.

In fact, the top ten programs took a slightly higher share of elite talent in the year 2000 than 2020. Granted, there was a smaller share of elite talent in that year, which throws off the metrics. However, since 2002, the share of elite talent going to top 10 teams has hovered around 45%. From 2001-2013, the top 10 programs signed 45.9% of the elite recruits. Compared to the CFP era 2014-2020, this same tier of programs signed 44.2% of elite recruits.

Which begs the question — is the 2021 class an outlier, or the clear demarcation of a trend?  Someone raised a good point in the comments yesterday, that top recruits are looking for sure things right now, something that favors the big boys.  Part of that has to be a result of what COVID hath wrought, namely the lack of opportunity for in-person visitation and evaluation.  (To be fair, that sure thing cuts both ways.)  And, with the news that the NCAA is leaning towards extending the recruiting dead period again, the uncertainty is going to remain, at least for a while.


Filed under Recruiting

6 responses to “The rich, still getting richer

  1. rigger92

    I can relate to the recruits in their desire to all flock to the top 5 or 6 schools. Back in ‘92 I had graduated UGA and applied for graduate school at Northwestern, Michigan, and Indiana seeking a Master’s in trumpet performance. Most students seeking that degree would all apply and audition at these schools at the time because they were among the best options with relatively famous trumpet teachers on faculty. Hundreds would apply every year. I ended up somewhere else when the hard reality of facing 6 figure loan debt hit me, so, I went where the school paid me and waived my tuition. Wasn’t a big name school and the “in crowd” of the big schools remained a club that I never broke in to. If I had been able to attend Northwestern with a full scholarship I would have gone in a heartbeat and so would any other trumpet player in the country. Same goes for athletes.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Greg

      school ain’t cheap.

      Just had one graduate a major university and have another in her first year……we are paying for the both.

      Good for you, free tuition most all cases is the best choice imo.


  2. back9k9

    I also think the “one time transfer” rule will concentrate more top talent to sign with the top programs. There’s less downside if it doesn’t work out. If after 1 year or 2 years you’re struggling to crack the 2-deep and want playing time… Transfer and you don’t have to sit a year.
    Also, more players that maybe developed “after” high school can transfer into the top programs without sitting a year.
    But isn’t that the American way. Go where the opportunity is.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. stoopnagle

    And think: this is with USC treading water. If they ever get their act together, that might change some of the math.


  4. ASEF

    These kids congregate on all-star travel teams for 7 on 7 and the like. Same as AAU basketball. They get introduced early to the idea that playing next to elite athletes allows them to shine. No double teams, no guy next to you blowing it and making you look bad.

    That’s part of it as well.


  5. Hunkering Hank

    The NCAA can go FUCK ITSELF. That is all.