National Signing Day: Winners, Losers, and Observations

 Is there a direct correlation between a university's recruiting success and the wealth, number, and enthusiasm of its alumni? Take USC, for example (Trojans, not Gamecocks). Not only does USC have a large alumni base, but it also has enthusiastic alumni. Oh, and it also has wealthy alums (see George Lucas doing the coin toss at the 2006 Rose Bowl if you don't believe me). Even in the 1920's, USC alums in the movie industry were hiring football players for summer work (see John Wayne and Ward Bond if you don't believe me). Anyway, USC just missed out on the Number One recruiting class for college football yesterday, but still wound up Number Four after DeAnthony Thomas (aka the Black Mamba) did a last-minute switch from the Trojans to the Ducks of Oregon. Speaking of wealthy alumni, see the Ducks' Phil Knight. Oregon stands at Number Nine right now after signing day.

 Does the ranking of schools based on the recruiting of five-star, four-star, and three-star athletes really matter? Yes and no. It's true that some schools do well with their blue-chip athletes (see Alabama and Ohio State): they get better. It's also true that some schools get the great recruits and don't follow through with their development (see recent Notre Dame teams). How does one keep the pampered blue chipper hungry? That's just one of the challenges facing top college football coaches. Unlike their basketball counterparts, at least they're able to keep their players from turning pro for three years.

 On the other hand, some football programs have great success without landing a host of prep superstars (see Boise State and Air Force). Still others have bad recruiting classes and bad teams (see Washington State and New Mexico).

 Recruiting is only one aspect of coaching. Important, but not the only key to winning. Some coaches are repulsed by the recruiting process. They sicken of the kissing-babies, kissing-mothers, gladhanding fathers, promising-the-moon-to-prospects process and bolt to broadcasting jobs or the NFL while claiming they are doing it for the money, the challenge, or the family.

 With that in mind, here are a few observations about yesterday's signings. While one can state the obvious, that Alabama is the biggest winner since it finished Number One on the list, I propose Florida State was the biggest winner, as Jimbo Fischer has the Seminoles back on track. FSU finished Number Two overall. The biggest loser? A formerly dominant team that lost some recruits to Florida State: Florida. The Gators finished Number Fourteen overall, but the fall-off is significant and the trend is alarming for Gators fans. At least Urban Meyer won't be kissing any babies soon.

 While Cal-Berkeley had an awful season in 2010, they did muster up another Top 20 recruiting class, finishing Number Seventeen after signing day. We know the Golden Bears have an excellent strength and conditioning program and they recruit well since Jeff Tedford took over. What does that leave as a shortcoming? Just strategy, schemes, halftime adjustments, and attitude.

 The good news for Utah fans is that the Utes are still trying to land a better quarterback than the over-rated Jordan Wynn. The Utes' biggest signing was the great Norm Chow as the new offensive coordinator. The bad news for BYU fans is that the Cougars had a lackluster signing day, especially painful since the team is going independent this fall. While they scored the same as Boise State for blue chip recruits, we already know which program does the most in developing its athletes.

 Other big winners include Michigan, Clemson, Tennessee, and Stanford. Other big losers include UCLA, Iowa, Penn State, and Wisconsin.

 To really find out which school had the best recruiting year, check the won-loss records in 2014 and 2015. That's when injuries, lazy work ethics, spoiled attitudes, and bad coaching  will all factor in. That's when we find out the difference between a Terry Bradshaw/Ben Rothlisberger and a Ryan Leaf/Todd Marinovich.