<
        >

          Player rankings a numbers game

          • Tom LuginbillJun 6, 2013, 03:00 AM ET
            Close
            • Senior National Recruiting Analyst for ESPN.com
            • Coached in four professional football leagues
            • Graduated from Eastern Kentucky and Marshall
            Follow on X

          We're back with another edition of the #AskLoogs Twitter mailbag. If you missed last week's discussion, check it out here.

          This week, we're looking at keys to evaluation, how much difference there is between players in the rankings, what to do about players wanting out of their letters of intent, and what can be done to get Colorado back up and rolling, among other things. No more delaying, let's get right to your questions.

          This is where the inexact science of rankings truly comes into play. In all reality, there really isn't any difference between No. 7 and No. 11 or No. 2 and No. 9, let alone No. 35 or No. 51. What we have always tried to do is set up a set of critical factors as a guide to place premiums on how some positions impact the game in comparison to others. While we cannot rely upon this solely and sometimes we must use our gut or base things purely off what we see, it has generally served us well.

          You may have noticed over the years that we have placed a premium on four positions -- QB, CB, OL, DE. Pass rushers, cover corners (particularly tall ones) and offensive tackles are all going to be given extra value. Look at how few wide receivers we have had in the top 10 over the years. It's because wide receivers are growing on trees. More supply, less demand. The same can't be said for the Jadeveon Clowneys and Robert Nkemdiches of the world. They are in high demand and limited supply. Unfortunately we have to rank and grade far more players than college programs do at each position, so the inexact science of it becomes even more magnified. We do the best we can with the information we have and then we live with it. I tell our guys all the time that you are going to be wrong on a kid; don't be afraid to be. Believe it, own it and dig your heels in. This is very difficult to do, however, even at the NFL level.

          It is a combination of both. Highlight tapes are an early indicator of what you think a player might be. However, highlight tapes can be very, very deceiving because if they are made properly, they are designed to mask or hide weaknesses. We have found that making a cut-up reel, or as we call it, "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly" reel, gives us a real and fair glimpse of a player.

          In making a cut-up reel we are purposely looking for great plays, mediocre plays and downright poor plays from a given prospect. Make no mistake, even the best of players can look very bad on film at times and it is healthy and good for the process to evaluate this and ensure it is not a trend for the given player. Highlight tapes are the core component for unworthy or unjustified hype that usually happens on the Internet. They are a terrific tool for the early assessment in determining how to pursue or whether to pursue a particular player.

          This answer could literally be 2,000 words, but we will keep it condensed. I'm sure you have heard the en vogue slogan, "All In"? It seems to be a fixture in sports these days, but it does not apply when it comes to Colorado. I have relationships with former Colorado coaches as well as some coaches who interviewed for the head coaching job there, and let's just say it ain't the late '80s/early '90s anymore, to say the least. The long-term fortunes of the football program rely far more on the university as a whole than it does any single coach or administrator. Until Colorado understands financially that when football succeeds, the entire university benefits, it is going to continue to struggle. From admission standards to facilities upgrades to coaches' salaries to athletic budgets, this job for coach Mike MacIntyre is an entire overhaul from top to bottom. The question is whether or not he will be given the necessary resources to actually have a chance to get the job done.

          Personally, my tolerance for all of this backing out of the LOI stuff is running quite thin. These kids often times get such a bad rap for how they handle the process for 18-24 months and then when they can't handle the most important part of the process -- the end -- it makes the kids and the whole coverage of recruiting look even worse. I certainly do not want to generalize here, as that would not be fair to thousands of kids in each class, but these decisions are never easy and need to be taken much more seriously by many prospects. For some it is a game -- they live it, love the attention and exposure and know they can control the process. With all the unofficial visits, camps and official visits prospects are taking now, there should be no excuse for not making the right initial decision. When I say initial, I am referring to those saying they made the wrong choice and want out without even enrolling in the school.

          It is a very complicated issue and no two cases are the same. There can also be mitigating circumstances, to be fair to all parties involved. I know this -- if coaches start giving in and allowing kids to walk away free and clear it will set a bad precedent for college football. There is nothing perfect about the process and certainly not backing out of a signature. If you want out of the LOI and you have not yet enrolled in school, I believe there needs to be some penalty in place. For example, taking away the redshirt year could be a possibility.

          This is the single most deceiving aspect of the camp/combine circuit. This drill is rigged for the defense to win even with pads on, let alone in shirts and shorts. The defensive player has a two-way go and no run support responsibility, and he is the better athlete. The offensive guy is on his heels with no way of slowing down the pass rush. When you pay particular attention to the drill is when the offensive guy starts winning the matchups on a consistent basis. Now you actually have something to go on because it does not happen often. We take this drill with a grain of salt because it is often the biggest provider of unjustified hype bestowed upon a player on the Internet the very next day. The defensive guy is supposed to win, so why does everyone get so excited when he does?

          There is merit to the drill for both sides. Often times the single biggest revealing aspect is competitive temperament of the offensive player, which is always important. It is a much better drill in full pads as it gives the offensive player a chance to compete. I remember seeing DT/OL William Campbell (who went on to Michigan) at the Penn State NFTC a few year ago. We felt he was overhyped to start with, but he absolutely dominated this drill, causing everyone to go a little crazy. But we knew he did not play that way in games and we weren't falling for the banana in the tailpipe. Like so many things in player evaluation, this drill is a tool.

          Thanks to all the fans who sent in questions this week.

          Make sure to use the hashtag #AskLoogs to get in on our discussion next week. I'll answer fan questions on player rankings and scouting each Wednesday between 2-3 p.m. ET on Twitter, with the five best making it to this weekly mailbag.