Past Badger Recruits

UPDATED December 7th, 2003

In retrospect, which recruting classes turned out to be outstanding and which turned out to be duds? Well, I did a little number crunching to come up with the following evaluations.

Here is how I evaluated each class. I gave each player in a particular recruiting class a numerical grade based on how they produced over their careers as a Badger.
If the player was a star, one of the best to play at Wisconsin, an All-American they received an "8".
If the player was an all-conference performer, NFL type player, they received a "6".
If the player was a full time starter, they received a "4".
If the player was a part-time starter, they received a "2".
If the player was a reserve and contributed here and there, they received a "1".
All players who quit, transferred, never got off the scout team, etc. before contributing received a "0".
In the most recent classes, we know very little about where most of the players will end up grading out at because they simply havent had an opportunity to fulfill their potential yet. So, most of the current freshman/sophomore class presently grades out as a 0 (because they havent contributed yet...not because they won't).
Then, once each player was graded, I tallied how many TOTAL CONTRIBUTION POINTS each class was worth. This is often more a measure of a class quantity rather than individual quality. To measure quality, I have given an AVERAGE SCORE for the class as a whole. You might be surprised to see that the average grade for most classes ends up being around a "2" (part-time starter status). It just goes to show how many recruits wind up doing absolutely nothing on the college level.
Here are the UPDATED individual ratings if you are interested.
Individual player ratings
This entire exercise is of course, very inexact and subject to my personal evaluations of players, but I thought it would be interesting nonetheless. Now, for the results and comments:

1997: 65 points, 3.1 AVG/player
Key Players: Chambers, Stemke, Echols, J. Fletcher, Knight, Kuhns, Sigmund, Anelli, McGrew
Comments: Mark Anelli and Michael Echols' senior seasons pushed this group past the '96 group and almost to the top of the ratings. Their depth is excellent, just a tad behind the '96, but the quality is right there with the best of Alvarez's classes. Taken with the '96 group, not too shabby. One can see why they had so much success.
1990: 78 points, 2.6 AVG/player
Key Players: Dawkins, Montgomery, Fowler, Shackerford, Burgess, Roan, Verstegen, Rudolph, Moss, Thompson, Messenger, Panos, Tucker
Comments: Stunning. Alvarez's first class, arguably remains one of his best. Granted, the fact that they were his first group gave them a leg up as they were granted tons of immediate playing time. Still, you can't underestimate what this class did for the program. Note the walkon influence was good with Panos, Hein, and Zullo.
1996: 74 points, 2.5 AVG/player
Key Players: Favret, Rabach, Dayne, Costa, Janek, Ferrario, Ghidorzi, Kolodziej, Thompson, Mahlik, Doering, Davenport, Pisetsky
Comments: A truly marvelous class. This class was deep and talented and formed the nucleus of the Rose Bowl Champion teams of '99 and '00. Even the walkons in this class were good. Tremendous.
1998: 61 points, 2.4 AVG/player
Key players: Boese, Bollinger, Bennett, Greisen, Bryant, Herbert, N. Davis, Sprague, A. Johnson, B. Johnson, Bry. Thompson
Comments: A good solid group that held the program together through some poor classes that followed. The class could have been even better if not for the losses of Terry Stephan and Clink Bakken.
1992: 62 points, 2.3 AVG/player
Key players: Vanderveldt, Bevell, Hall, Castro, Jurewicz, Engler, Weems, Gales
Comments: Good overall class with a lot of depth, especially in the line. This class provided much of the depth for the '94 Rose Bowl and Hall of Fame Bowl teams. A solid group. Did not have a lot of NFL type talent, but certainly got a lot of their ability.
2000: 61 points, 2.3 AVG/player
Key Players: Broussard, D. Jones, An. Davis, D. Buenning, Clinkscale, Aiello, Jefferson, James, Welsh, Lorenz, Paciotti
Comments: This group made another incremental jump this year. However, there are only a couple more players that will have a chance to pick up starter points, which means that for this class to make much of a step up, it will have to get some star points among guys like Clinkscale, James, Jones, etc.
1991: 52 points, 2.2 AVG/player
Key players: DeRamus, T. Fletcher, Reese, Raymer, Nyquist, Maniecki, Stark, Veit, Unverzagt, Bryan
Comments: Like the '90 group, this group had the benefit of immediate playing time due to the new coach. However, they also had some NFL type talent on board and decent depth. They will be hard pressed to stay in their current position down the road, but it was still a solid class.
2001: 55 points, 1.9 AVG/player
Key Players: Starks, Hawthorne, Charles, Orr, Docherty, Allen, Leonhard, Morse, Raiola, Bernstein
Comments: This group has achieved most of their "starter points". They will continue to rise if/when they start receiving some star accolades. Right now, it looks like an ok class, though Hawthorne and Leonhard are the only impact players to this point. Also of note is that they have a number of walkons who have added to their value. (I put McCorison here because this is the year he entered the program from what I can gather.)
1993: 42 points, 2.1 AVG/player
Key players: Saleh, Simmons, P. Monty, Brady, Carter, Lysek, Suttle
Comments: This class had some quality but without the depth of some of the other classes. A very top heavy class with some excellent players but quite a few non-performers which brought down the overall score. This class was hurt by defections, as players like Reggie Torian, Royce Roberson, and Rob Lurstema did not fulfill their early promise.
1994: 33 points, 2.2 AVG/player
Key players: Campbell, Hayes, Samuel, Adamov, Martin, Taylor
Comments: The "infamous" post-Rose Bowl class that supposedly wasnt as good as it needed to be. This was the year in which Alvarez had the fewest number of scholarships to work with (only 13 players on the official list). Actually, the quality was decent, with most of the players contributing. It gained some as guys like Taylor and Adamov added a some points late in their careers. The only big timer in retrospect was Hayes. A fair class given the raw numbers, but given the circumstances, it did not hit a "home run" like some had hoped.
1995: 35 points, 1.4 AVG/player
Key Players: McIntosh, Gibson, Burke, Merritt
Comments: This class rates as the second worst of Alverz's tenure so far. What is amazing is that there are three studs in the class accounting for a gob of "recruiting points". Poor depth despite the obvious attributes of the stars. This should have been the real year when Wisconsin should have cleaned up, with the opportunity to recruit this batch for a full year following the first Rose Bowl year. This group was the main reason why so many freshmen and sophomores had to play in '97. Ironically, this class was rated very highly by the "experts".
1999: 30 points, 1.5 AVG/player
Key Players: Evans, Mack, Sorgi, B. Tucker, M. Davis
Comments: What a disaster. Terrible depth and terrible star power. Only Lee Evans is saving this class from total disgrace. Morgan Davis hypothetically could still add a couple points, but that is doubtful so the book has been written on this group.
2002: 27 points, 1.3 AVG/player
Key Players: Watkins, D. Smith, B. Williams, A. Lewis
Comments: This group scored a lot of true freshman points, though they did not make a big jump in their second year in the program. Next year is a key year for guys like Brandon White, Tony Moss, Mark Gorman, Reggie Cribbs, and Levonne Rowan. They should pass '99 next year, but they have a ways to go to be considered a good class.
2003: 4 points, 0.3 AVG/player
Key Players: Mason, Rogers, J. White, J. Thomas
Comments: Like most groups of true freshmen, it is way too soon to make any kind of evaluation.
Return to Badgermaniac.com