It is widely held that Stanford is beating us in recruiting.
I have no data but I don’t see many recruiting battles coming down to ND and Stanford and say 1 more where the kid picks Stanford. More often there is some 2-3 Star Stanford kid we passed on who kills us, or west coast kids who didn’t look at us.
And we seem to win battles with Stanford too.
Seems to me we lose a lot more to tOSU and UM.
But this is a lazy arm chair, anecdotal opinion.
Do any of you math wizards track this?

I happen to have these easily available on some spreadsheets I put together for 18S work - I didn't use the same spreadsheet format for prior years and it takes a lot of work to put it together, which is why I'm not going back farther. But the point doesn't really change.

In the 2018 cycle, we offered 49 of the top 100 recruits in the 247 Composite, 70 of the top 150, 94 of the top 200, and 108 of the top 250. So in all categories, just under half of the total guys available in each bucket.

In the current cycle, we've offered 51 of the top 100, 69 of the top 150, 89 of the top 200, and 112 of the top 250. More offers will go out, of course, but the ratios won't materially change - again, roughly half or slightly under of the total guys available in each bucket.

Why are we not offering those guys? I can assure you that it's not because the staff doesn't want good football players. Many are not remotely an academic or culture fit. Of those that are left, many aren't interested in leaving the South, Texas, or California. We offer many in this second group guys but the offer typically goes right into the circular file. You can't club them over the head and make them come to South Bend.

That leaves a very small pool of elite talent that (a) we can actually recruit and (b) actually has some level of interest above zero. If you look strictly at five stars, the rate pretty much holds - in fact, this year we've offered 13 out of 34 Composite five-stars. Here's the list, in ranking order:

- WDE Kayvon Thibodeaux, #1: From So Cal, probably headed to USC, never even paid us lip service.

- WDE Zach Harrison, #3: Lives 15 minutes away from Ohio State. Great fit for ND but was never going to happen.

- OLB Owen Pappoe, #8: Lives 45 minutes from Georgia and is very likely headed there.

- RB Quavaris Crouch, #11: LOL. Not even remotely interested in pretending to be interested in ND. From North Carolina, likely headed to Clemson.

- OT Kenyon Green, #14: Texas kid who is leaning to A&M. Sense a theme?

- SDE Chris Hinton, #15: Son of Pro Bowler and Northwestern alum of the same name, had some interest early but Michigan got him before last season started. The stink of 2016 was possibly a factor, or maybe he just liked Michigan that much.

- WR Bru McCoy, #17: Mater Dei kid who just watched JT Daniels and ASB sign with Southern Cal. So...

- S Brian Williams, #20: Texan who would've been ours if Elko had stayed, instead he's committed to A&M.

- DT Faatui Tuitele, #21: Hawaii kid who will likely end up at USC. Polian is trying, but you know how that goes.

- CB Derek Stingley, #25: Baton Rouge kid who was committed to LSU and could very well end up back in their class.

- ILB Brandon Smith, #28: In a dogfight with Penn State but legitimately at the table thanks to Clark Lea. Stay tuned.

- OLB Henry To'oto'o, #32: De La Salle kid who is widely considered to be leaning to UCLA.

- ATH Isaiah Williams, #34: St. Louis kid who Lovie Smith somehow convinced to commit to Illinois; I think the big selling point was that he'll get a shot at QB there, while everyone else wanted him as a WR or DB.

Out of those 13, I'd say there are 2.5 that we had/have a reasonable shot at - Brian Williams, Hinton, and Smith (Williams is the 0.5 because he really committed to a coach, not a school). Last year we offered 17 out of 29 five stars, and I'd say three of them gave us anything more than a cursory glance - NPF, Salyer, and ASB. That's not for a lack of trying - these kids just aren't interested in what ND's selling, at least not enough to leave home or choose the more difficult path than Giant State U.

IMO Stanford is virtually a non-factor in our inability to land five stars; yes, they've landed guys like Solomon Thomas and Foster Sarell, who were great fits for ND, but generally we recruit better than they do and the guys they take from us aren't the five stars.

Our problem with signing five stars is primarily geography and fit. If we won consistently we could overcome those factors to a degree, but we'll never be able to stockpile elite guys like Ohio State, Alabama, Clemson, and USC do. USC can land three California five stars a year by putting a sock monkey in charge of recruiting. Meyer, Saban, and Swinney all have assembled elite winning AND recruiting machines that get to work with an unrestricted pool. We can't match that even if we're winning 12 games a year because we start out unable to recruit at least half of the elite guys.

I think it'll be incredibly difficult for to sign more than one or two five-stars in any given cycle, and even that would probably need the support of consistent 10-win seasons. So that's a big part of the goal, of course, and then I think the other part is beating the competition in evaluation and development.

--
"Being Irish, he had an abiding sense of tragedy, which sustained him through temporary periods of joy." - Yeats

The landscape of college football is so incredible different now in 2018 than it was in 1988 that it's not worth the navel-gazing worrying about it.

For example, recruiting services basically did not exist in 1988, the height of the Holtz era.

(1) that forces its football players to also be actual students and (2) that doesn't reside in an particularly appealing location for 17-year-old kids with an endless number of options. And as noted, it doesn't win quite as big or often enough to make up for (1) and (2). If we strung together a couple of playoff appearances -- say, 2 in 3 years -- I suspect that we would get more traction with the top kids without making a major change to the staff. But we haven't broken through that ceiling, and so we're sort of stuck in no man's land. Good enough to be in the conversation and to land and develop a handful of truly excellent football players, but not good enough to get over the hump and attract recruits that would turn rebuilding into reloading.

It's worth remembering that "Clemsoning" was still a thing when we lost to them down there three years ago in a game we could have rightfully won. How much different might things be today for the two programs if ND had somehow pulled out a win?

on the oline? Sam Young? Mike Rosenthal?

Every single one of our 1st round NFL draft picks under Hiestand weren't plug and play guys.

Zack Martin, Quenton Nelson, Mike McGlinchey? All redshirted. Ronnie Stanley would have too were it not for a play against Michigan where he had to spell for either an injury or equipment change.

The transition between high school and college is the most dramatic along the oline. The speed and strength. Olinemen almost have to spend that entire first year working on technique because they we so easily able to dominate in HS based purely on strength and ability.

Now if you want to criticize about other positions and Kelly's success luring immediate impact players, I'd agree. But I don't think Kristofic's commitment is where this criticism fits.

I've picked up from various pressers and such that there was a shift in recruiting emphasis two seasons ago, after a number of our recruits washed out for various reasons. There's much more of an emphasis on institutional fit than there was. As a result, we probably filter out a good number of the highest profile recruits automatically.

They came in a flurry after the season for the most part. Despite the fact he is the only 3 star among the OL commits and likely commits, word is he was THE most coveted OL by the staff. The kid can move for a guy his size and plays with a high level of intensity.