Dr. Green and White Sports Authority

Over the past month and six articles, we have examined the details of MSU and college football recruiting from about as many different angles as I could imagine. We surveyed the stars , considered the classes , analyzed booms and busts , and scrutinized schools , states , and position groups . It has been a fun ride. But, there is one topic that I have barely mentioned, and that is the simplest and most important metric in all of college football, or any sport for that matter: wins.  We can talk about stars, All-Conference teams, and the NFL, but at the end of the day, it's "just win, baby". So, the final question that I wold like to ask is how does the strength of a team or roster, on paper, correlate to actual on-field success ? In all of previous pieces in this study, I have focused on individual classes, somewhat in a vacuum.  However, a college football team is built based on a series of several consecutive classes.  Any given team is likely composed of players from

Everybody probably has their favorite position. Some prefer the strong leadership qualities of the quarterback. Others may prefer the big uglies, like linemen. Some like a super athletic type, such as a running back or linebacker. Still others would choose someone with a bit more skill, such as a wide receiver or defensive back. Here is Big Ten country, pretty much everybody likes a nice tight end. Throughout this month-long exploration of the college football recruiting landscape, we have explored quite a few topics. In Part One , we learned how to properly count star ratings. In Part Two , we reviewed the past decade of MSU recruiting classes. Parts Three and Four examined the output of MSU players compared to UofM and the rest of the country. In Part Five , we specifically looked at the role of geography and found that some areas of the country seem to produce high school football talent at a more efficient rate (as measured by the NFL draft) than others. Up until now, all recruit

Throughout this month of May, we have taken a long journey through the history of MSU recruiting and beyond. In Part One , we learned about the quantitative value of stars. In Part Two , we used this new star counting method to put MSU's recruiting history into context. In Parts Three and Four , we made a pivot to deeply analyze the output of MSU recruits over the past decade compared both to Michigan (in detail) and to the rest of Big Ten and nation (with a broader brush.) In Part Four 's analysis of the Power Five, some interesting trends appeared in the national data. Recruits that committed to Big Ten and ACC schools appear to get drafted at a higher rate compared to similarly ranked recruits that commit to SEC schools and a lot higher rate than Pac-12 or Big 12 commits.  What is going on here? In the real estate business, the old saying is that the three most important factors are location, location, and location. How much does geography matter in football recruiting? For