Building a Fence: Washington and the Magnificent Seven – UW Dawg Pound

In the first Building a Fence: Keeping Washington Blue Chips Home, I looked at how good of a job UW was doing keeping their top players at home since 2000, counting all 4- and 5-star players in the 247 database as "blue chips." To sum up, it turns out the answer is pretty darn good, with 56.16% of all Washington state blue chips in those 22 classes playing for UW. The numbers drop some when you focus on the most elite players, with UW taking in 66.7% of all the "low 4-stars" (those with a decimal rating below the mean of all blue chips), dropping to 42% of high 4/5-star players and 36% of 5-stars alone.

The obvious follow-up question, though, is whether those percentages are actually good compared to other states and schools. I mean, getting more than half of ALL the blue chips in our state over a 22-year period certainly sounds pretty good, but how does it stack up to other schools and states, especially those that are in comparable situations to Washington. Let's take a look.

Note: While the UW-only deep dive in the previous post went back to 2000, for this comparison I'm only going back to 2010. In part this is so we can focus only on the recent and present moment without getting too deep into ancient history, but also to cut in half the amount of work! This study covers 12 recruiting classes, from 2010 to 2021 (JTT is the only as-yet-uncommitted player from this year's class from any of the states I studied; I'm willing to accept that outlier and move on).

WHAT IS WASHINGTON'S SITUATION?

The state of Washington ranks #13 in population among all states, estimated just under 7.7 million people in July 2020. The final census figures aren't in, but since all states are using the same estimates it's a fair point of comparison. The state also has two Power 5 universities in UW and WSU, one of has been historically much more successful than the other, but both have been to multiple bowl games in the last decade, so neither one is a total train wreck.

What other states have a similar situation?

Washington is the 13th-most populous state in the USA, so I looked first at the states right above and below them Virginia at #12 (with UVa & VA Tech) and Arizona at #14 (with AZ and ASU). Arizona is very close to WA in population, 7.4M to WAs 7.7M and a Western state to boot, so it's easily the best single point of comparison.

VIrginia is farther away population-wise, with 900K more people than WA, but it's the closest to WA on the upper end. Its two P5 schools aren't hugely different in terms of success; Virginia Tech has been better, but not light years better. Still, it's within shouting distance so it's on the list.

That population difference is substantial, though, so I looked for a state that was a similar amount smaller than WA. Massachusetts is about 800K smaller than WA but only has one Power 5 school (Boston College). At first I was going to leave it out but I decided to include it just for regional balance.

Tennessee is almost exactly the same population as Massachusetts, though, and has two P5 teams (Tenn and Vanderbilt), so that gave us another "southern" state to kind of balance VA. Neither has been great lately, but historically speaking UT has absolutely been the "big brother" school to Vandy. It works.

Indiana is almost exactly 900K smaller than WA (as much smaller than WA as Virginia is bigger, population-wise), so I ended up looking at them as well. They are a special case, since they technically have only two Power 5 schools (Indiana and Purdue), neither of which is usually very good, but of course they also have Notre Dame. ND recruits a lot nationally rather than close to home, though, so I figured Id count the ND/UI/Purdue troika as about the same as two typical Power 5s (one stronger than the other).

(FWIW, theres a batch of states in the 5.6-6.1M range that only have one P5 school Missouri, Maryland, Wisconsin, Colorado, Minnesota which might be an interesting comparison in a different way, to see whether having a smaller population base balanced out having only one local school, but they were just too far outside the range Im looking for in population and I wanted to keep the 2-P5-school apples-to-apples comparison.)

Lastly, I rolled in Oregon, which has a much lower population than WA (4.2M, ranked 27th among states), but is right next door and the most geographically and culturally similar to Washington. The Oregon/OSU dynamic is also very similar to the UW/WSU dynamic in terms of historical success.

Review of the Magnificent Seven

Counting Washington, Ill be looking at seven states. None of them are legendary talent hotbeds like CA/TX/FL (which are, frankly, the 3 states with the highest population anyway the only 3 states over 20M people this isnt rocket science as to why they produce the most CFB talent). Other than Oregon, their population is within 1M people of Washingtons, so in sheer potential talent based on how many people live there, they should be comparable (Indiana lowest at 6.8M, Virginia highest at 8.6M). They have fairly similar arrangements of P5 teams (exceptions noted above), and they're spread pretty well around the country.

Arizona (Southwest)Indiana (Midwest)Massachusetts (Northeast)Oregon (Northwest)Tennessee (Southeast)Virginia (Mid-Atlantic)Washington (Northwest)

That feels like a fairly representative slice of states around the country, so it should be a reasonable purposive sampling for comparing to how Washington is doing keeping the blue chips at home.

METHODOLOGY

I used the 247 recruiting database for the years 2010-2021. Scout, Rivals, and others may differ; these are the numbers I used because they were easy to access. I counted all 4- and 5-star players as "blue chip" players, which typically includes those with a decimal ranking of about 0.8900 or above, usually around the top 350-ish players in each class. I included the decimal rating and ordinal ranking of players along with their star rating, plus their year, position, and which school they signed with.

NOTE: These rankings ONLY consider how they were ranked coming out of high school.

How they did in college, whether they were an All-American, a good player who got hurt, a nondescript JAG (Just A Guy) who filled a roster spot with basic competence and not much more, or a total bust for any number of reasons does not matter for this review. This is only about getting the big fish into the boat and protecting your fishing waters from other people poaching.

A little statistic I've added for each state is BCPM (Blue Chips Per Million). It's exactly what it says on the tin: How many blue chip players did your state produce during this 12-year period per 1 million citizens. It just seemed like an amusing bit of trivia to normalize the data across states that are similar but certainly not identical.

Fair warning: There are going to be a lot of tables. Feel free to scroll past if you're not interested in the minutiae of how we got here. If you like the sausage-making, it's on display. Conclusions come toward the end. We'll take the states in alphabetical order.

ARIZONA (Arizona, Arizona State): Blue Chips 64 (5.33/year), BCPM 8.62, 5-stars 7, Top 10 3, Highest #4 Kelee Ringo), Average Rating 0.9363, Average Ranking 165

Table 1a: Arizona Blue Chips by Year

Table 1b: Where Did Arizona Blue Chips Sign?

INDIANA (Indiana, Notre Dame, Purdue): Blue Chips 49 (4.45/year), BCPM 7.25, 5-stars 4, Top 10 1, Highest #2 Jaylon Smith), Average Rating 0.9302, Average Ranking 180

Table 2a: Indiana Blue Chips by Year

Table 2b: Where Did Indiana Blue Chips Sign?

MASSACHUSETTS (Boston College): Blue Chips 15 (1.36/year), BCPM 2.18, 5-stars 0, Top 10 0, Highest #122 Armani Reeves), Average Rating 0.9155, Average Ranking 232

Table 3a: Massachusetts Blue Chips by Year

Table 3b: Where Did Massachusetts Blue Chips Sign?

OREGON (Oregon, Oregon State): Blue Chips 28 (2.33/year), BCPM 6.60, 5-stars 3, Top 10 0, Highest #17 Owamagbe Odighizuwa), Average Rating 0.9278, Average Ranking 196

Table 4a: Oregon Blue Chips by Year

Table 4b: Where Did Oregon Blue Chips Sign?

TENNESSEE (Tennessee, Vanderbilt): Blue Chips 101 (8.42/year), BCPM 14.67, 5-stars 6, Top 10 0, Highest #14 Trey Smith), Average Rating 0.9288, Average Ranking 189

Table 5a: Tennessee Blue Chips by Year

Table 5b: Where Did Tennessee Blue Chips Sign?

VIRGINIA (Virginia, Virginia Tech): Blue Chips 117 (9.75/year), BCPM 13.62, 5-stars 16, Top 10 4, Highest #5 Da'Shawn Hand), Average Rating 0.9348, Average Ranking 170

Table 6a: Virginia Blue Chips by Year

Table 6b: Where Did Virginia Blue Chips Sign?

And, of course, saving the best for last...

WASHINGTON (Washington, Washington State): Blue Chips 50 (4.17/year), BCPM 6.5, 5-stars 7, Top 10 4, Highest #3 J.T. Tuimolau), Average Rating 0.9334, Average Ranking 178

Table 7a: Washington Blue Chips by Year

Table 7b: Where did Washington Blue Chips Sign?

THAT WAS A LOT OF TABLES

Indeed it was. Feel free to go grab a snack. 🙂

A Quick Comparison of States

Looking at these 7 states shows a pretty wide spread of production of blue chips. They're pretty similar to one another in terms of population, but the number of top-level players they produce is definitely not uniform. Ideally, we'd compare Washington to other states that produce about the same number of players per capita, but really in any study where you've got different angles to examine, you just gotta pick one and go with it. In this case, we chose states with similar population and similar distribution of in-state universities. You could slice it other ways, but let's roll with what we've got! What did we learn?

Table 8: State-to-State Comparison

Virginia comes out on top in total blue chips, total 5 stars, and number of top 10 players. They have the highest population, so thats not surprising in and of itself, but they produced more blue chips and 5-stars than Arizona and Washington combined. They might not be the first place you think of as a talent-producing powerhouse, but they are knocking out twice as many BCPM (Blue Chips Per Million) as states like Washington and Oregon, while also maintaining quality, ranking #2 in average rating and ranking of prospects.

As an aside, the 2021 recruiting class from Washington, our best by a mile in at least the past 22 yearsif not everwould be just an average year in Virginia. The three 5-stars we have this year is unusual, but Virginia turned the trick twice (2013 and 2014) and has had produced at least one 5-star in every single class except one (2012).

Tennesssee is the leader in BCPM (Blue Chips Per Million), outpacing Virginia on that score, but interestingly its mostly because they are an absolute factory of low 4-stars. Despite doubling up Washington in terms of overall blue chips, they actually have had fewer 5-stars than Washington, leading to an average rating and ranking about level with Oregon.

Arizona is not too far from Washington in total numbers, though they are equal or ahead in all categories except top 10 players. They lead all 7 states in terms of average rating and ranking, with proportionally speaking a lot of high 4-stars (the Byron Murphys and NKeal Harrys of the world) bringing their average up.

Washington is middle of the pack across the board except for top 10 players, where they tied Virginia for the lead (plus Max Browne just missed at #11).

Indiana is the closest comp to Washington, a tiny shade ahead on BCPM and a bit behind on average ranking and rating, mostly due to Washingtons edge in 5-stars and top 10 players.

Oregon produces blue chips at a near-identical rate to Washington (adjusted for their much smaller population base), but the lack of true top-end talent drags down their average scores.

Massachusetts is just sad by comparison. A state with a population nearly identical to Tennessee had 5 seasons with zero blue chips. More than half of the blue chips they did produce came in just two classes, with four each in 2012 and 2020. The other 10 years of the study produced only 7 blue chips, and in 12 years they never had a player ranked higher than 122.

How do Schools Do at Keeping their In-State Blue Chips Home?

The original question to answer was how good of a job is Washington doing at keeping the top in-state blue chips home. Sure, they kept 54% of them home and that sounds good, but how does it compare to other schools and states with comparable situationssimilar population and (mostly) a similar pair of P5 schools with a "big brother/little brother" dynamicsampled from around the country. Turns out theyre doing great by comparison, and it's not particularly close.

Table 9: Retaining Blue Chips by School

This might feel like it biases a bit to situations where one school dominates, so what if we combine all of the in-state schools together as states and compare how well they do at keeping their recruits? Turns out Washington is still at the top and its still not close.

Table 10: Retaining Blue Chips by School and State

What Can We Say About the States?

Overall, this is great. When the state produces top talent, we are getting it more than half the time. That is an absolute win. Percentages can be deceiving, though, as we said in our previous fanpost about the current surge in high school talent in Washington. The past two recruiting classes have produced 16 blue chips and UW has signed 7 (heres hoping for 8 when JTT decides). Thats 3.5 per season, which is great, but it also means 8 (or probably 9) went somewhere else. There are only so many in-state blue chips you can take for a variety of reasons, and if your state produces more top talent than you can absorb theres a rational limit to how many youre going to get. In those cases, your percentages will look bad even if youre pulling in a nice haul of local talent. Virginia and Tennessee are producing far more blue chips than Washington is, and Arizona substantially more. Is that whats happening? Signs suggest the answer is no.

Table 11: Raw Numbers of Blue Chips per Year

Tennessee is the only school besides Washington that is bringing in more than 2 local blue chips per year, and even at that theyre barely ahead despite producing double the number of in-state stars as Washington state does. They have little in-state competition (Vanderbilt 5, Memphis 1 over 12 classes), but 14 different out-of-state colleges have pulled multiple star players out of TN; by comparison, only four out-of-state colleges have pulled more than one player out of WA in the last 12 years. Im leaving off schools that have gotten just one player because fluky commitments happen (10 for TN, 8 for WA), but a school pulling multiple blue chips out of your state means they have established significant recruiting inroads there.

Thats exactly whats happened in Virginia and Arizona. Penn State and Ohio State are plundering Virginia on a regular basis. Florida State (7) and Clemson (6) are not far behind. You could excuse Maryland getting 2 players with the whole "DMV" recruiting area, but an equivalent "solid but nothing special" North Carolina team shouldnt be pulling out five top players. In all, 16 out-of-state colleges have pulled multiple blue chips out of Virginia. True, with all the talent there was no way VA and VA Tech were going to keep all those players at home, but averaging fewer than 2 per year with all that available talent speaks to the pipelines out-of-state schools have built in Virginia.

Arizona, though, is by far the worst, as both of the in-state schools are getting out-recruited by Oregon in their own state. Oregon has pulled as many blue chips out of Arizona as Arizona State and Arizona combined. UCLA has matched ASU all by itself, and both USC and Texas have matched Arizona for AZ blue chips. It was frankly shocking to see how few homegrown stars have stayed in Arizona. It wasnt just 12 schools pulling multiple blue chips out of the state but that ASU and AZ had so little gravity. They were the only state whose biggest recruiter wasnt one of their in-state schools. Heck, Boston College kept more Massachusetts kids (out of only 15 total, remember) than Arizona got from its own state with more than 4x as many blue chips. Michigan brought in as many blue chips from Massachusetts as Arizona got from its home state. Florida State got more recruits from Virginia than Arizona State got from their own state as the "big brother" in terms of size and success.

Indiana was kind of an open-ended scrum of the entire Midwest, with 21 of 49 staying in state, 12 more heading to Ohio and Michigan, 9 heading to the South, and the rest scattering. No school really dominated local recruiting.

Oregon was obviously the lead dog in their own state on their own, though more Oregon blue chips went out of state to other Pac-12 schools (13) than stayed in state (12), plus a handful leaving the West. By comparison, only 12 Washington blue chips left the state to go elsewhere in the Pac-12 despite there being nearly twice as many of them.

Massachusetts? Not much to say with just 15 blue chips, other than that Michigan apparently has connections there, nearly matching Boston Colleges recruiting total (4 vs. 5).

WHAT DOES IT ALL MEAN?

It means that UW has been and continues to do a terrific job at keeping the top home state talent at home. Other states with similar populations and generally similar setups of two P5 teams dont do nearly as well as we do at that task. Some states produce much more top talent than we do, but they are losing a ton of that talent out of state at a rate that just does not happen here.

If the current talent surge in WA continues, its likely that more players (in absolute terms) will choose to go elsewhere. You cant keep them all. At the same time, you want to keep the exceptions that dont stay home just that: the exceptions. "Building the fence" doesnt mean other teams never get players to leave the state; it just means that other states dont establish permanent pipelines into the state like a dozen or more states have done in Arizona and Virginia (and to a lesser extent Tennessee), where the numbers they are pulling in are rivaling the in-state schools.

We also want to make sure that as we cast our net wider and wider in search of out-of-state talent (the biggest failing in the 2021 Huskies recruiting class, with zero out-of-state blue chips) that we dont take our eye of the ball at home. Oregon may be guilty of this to an extent, as it fires off hundreds of offers around the country while more of its homegrown stars are leaving the state (and usually playing for conference rivals) than are staying home.

The 2022 recruiting class looks strong for Washington, with 6 blue chips in the current 247 rankings and UW considered the odds-on favorite to land more than half of them. Lets keep the borders strong and the purple flame burning bright as we look forward to a great crop of new Huskies next year!

Go Dawgs!

See the rest here:
Building a Fence: Washington and the Magnificent Seven - UW Dawg Pound