Roster Talent put into Perspective!

[DanceAppreciationTA]

Using 247 composite data:

Rutgers has 77 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.8297

Maryland has 77 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.8443

Iowa has 70 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.8347

OSU has 84 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.9143

Washington has 83 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.8562

*This doesn't account for unrated JUCO transfers.

Ratings/Rankings may not mean a lot to folks but it's our best way of evaluating talent IMO. Based on these numbers, we are quite a distant away from these teams...even Maryland. To make matters worse, a lot of the current roster talent doesn't fit the new offensive schemes. (Unfortunately our staff is being stubborn in adjusting their playcalling). Also, we must have the most true freshmen and walk-ons playing as starters

On the bright side, there's been progress and signs of hope on the defensive side of the ball. Our recruiting has also been off to a good start and the 2018 rumblings are good to hear as well. I'm excited to see how we play against teams after Michigan! -

 

[DanceAppreciationTA]

PSU has 79 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.8717

 

[Ataylor1989x]

The formula seems to be: talent plus coaching plus depth......divided by culture would equal your program status, because even if culture is particularly good, it rarely makes a difference if you're severely outmanned.

 

[DanceAppreciationTA]

Illinois has 80 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.8225

Minnesota has 91 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.8111

Michigan has 82 rated players on their roster
Avg rating: 0.8970

 

[Mr_Twister]

Need to factor in coaching. None of the last three coaches hired had a minute of Div-1A head coaching experience. Likewise with ADs. You just do not sign up to be an AD. When is the last time a Rutgers administrator had a role on a national committee (for instance, post season selection and policy-making committees)?

 

[RUSK97]

It's a bit hard to put in perspective...I mean what is a statistically significant? To me, RU at 0.8297 doesn't seem a whole lot worse than Iowa at 0.8347. I mean, what's 0.0050? But when we lost, there were tons of 'talent differential' complaints.

So once we're past the Michigan pasting, our talent should be on par with Illinois and Minny?