The point of this isn't to counter all the quasi-rampant negativity on this site regarding Mason's recruiting, his coaching, or the administration's commitment (or lack thereof) to football. Everyone pays the same to be on here so if people want to do nothing but bitch, have at it!
But, I did want to take an honest look at Vanderbilt's performance on the recruiting front versus a group of real peers, which are not schools in the SEC.
So, I looked at VUs class ranking (via Rivals) vs a group of peers - schools of similar academic requirements, size, athletics budget, etc.
And, the data shows that in Mason's four full recruiting cycles, he's nicely in the middle of the pack. He is not under-performing Vanderbilt's peers at all. Excluding Stanford, which is the outlier, Vandy is getting the same type of kids as Northwestern, Georgia Tech, Wake and Duke.
So, Mason is doing his job adequately. He's not being out recruited by his peers.
18 17 16 15 Avg
VU 46 57 59 47 52
GT 52 41 67 39 50
NW 59 55 46 55 54
WF 60 74 61 50 61
Stan 62 19 19 18 30
Duke 64 46 31 62 51
To me, this implies (at least anecdotally) that the level of commitment from the Vandy administration is about the same as all these other schools, because despite different coaches, regions, conferences, etc. they're all getting about the same results. Again it's anecdotal, but this data does not imply, to me, that Vandy's administration supports the football program any less than the other schools. People can bring up lack of attendance, the stadium, etc. and that's fine - but on the recruiting trail, which I believe is a good barometer of the football program as a whole, Vandy is competitive with it's peers.
I'm not looking to start an argument here or get bashed by everyone who thinks that Mason sucks or Vandy's administration is a bunch of football apathetic progressives, but I thought the findings were interesting.
But, I did want to take an honest look at Vanderbilt's performance on the recruiting front versus a group of real peers, which are not schools in the SEC.
So, I looked at VUs class ranking (via Rivals) vs a group of peers - schools of similar academic requirements, size, athletics budget, etc.
And, the data shows that in Mason's four full recruiting cycles, he's nicely in the middle of the pack. He is not under-performing Vanderbilt's peers at all. Excluding Stanford, which is the outlier, Vandy is getting the same type of kids as Northwestern, Georgia Tech, Wake and Duke.
So, Mason is doing his job adequately. He's not being out recruited by his peers.
18 17 16 15 Avg
VU 46 57 59 47 52
GT 52 41 67 39 50
NW 59 55 46 55 54
WF 60 74 61 50 61
Stan 62 19 19 18 30
Duke 64 46 31 62 51
To me, this implies (at least anecdotally) that the level of commitment from the Vandy administration is about the same as all these other schools, because despite different coaches, regions, conferences, etc. they're all getting about the same results. Again it's anecdotal, but this data does not imply, to me, that Vandy's administration supports the football program any less than the other schools. People can bring up lack of attendance, the stadium, etc. and that's fine - but on the recruiting trail, which I believe is a good barometer of the football program as a whole, Vandy is competitive with it's peers.
I'm not looking to start an argument here or get bashed by everyone who thinks that Mason sucks or Vandy's administration is a bunch of football apathetic progressives, but I thought the findings were interesting.
