Do Uniforms Influence Recruits?
To investigate whether recruits pay attention to uniforms, especially if they are attracted to modern alternate uniforms, we launched the Twitter-based Recruits’ Interest in Alternate Uniforms study. In the summer of 2015, we opened a new Twitter account, @SUunistudy. We established the sample of recruits we would be studying using the 24/7 Composite recruiting rankings for the recruiting class entering college in fall 2016 (aka 2016 Class). The 24/7 Composite rankings use data from several different recruiting rankings to establish a consensus ranking. Recruiting rankings are regularly updated, so we established our sample using the Top 100 recruits in the 24/7 Composite rankings in mid-August 2015. The list of recruits we studied is below.
After establishing our sample we followed all of the recruits on Twitter. We were able to find and follow Twitter accounts for all Top 100 recruits, though a few of the accounts were rarely (publically) used. Some recruits appeared to have two accounts so we followed both until we discovered which was the real or regularly-used account.
During the 2015 college football season, our researchers monitored the tweets from our Top 100 sample of recruits. We paid closest attention to tweets that took place while games were actually being played, and most of these were on Thursday and Saturday nights, with a few games on other odd nights. We captured any tweet from a recruit fell into one of two categories: a tweet that indicated the recruit was watching a college football game (in-person, via a live broadcast, or replay/highlights), or a tweet where the recruit commented on football uniforms.
Analytical Considerations
Our Twitter-based study of the Top 100 recruits provides only one perspective on recruits’ attitudes toward uniforms. A number of limitations must be considered. First, Twitter is only one platform for gauging recruits’ reactions to uniforms. Recruits may prefer other social media platforms and some avoid Twitter and/or social media altogether (some in our sample certainly fit this bill). Nevertheless, Twitter is frequently used in the college football recruiting world and it is telling that every one of these recruits at least had an account. Second, the Top 100 recruits may be systematically different from other recruits. These recruits were disproportionately considering the most powerful programs in CFB and well-established programs may be less likely to experiment with new uniforms, preferring to stick with their traditional look. Or perhaps these elite recruits were more concerned with “professional” aspects of recruiting (e.g. how well the coaches would prepare them for the NFL) rather than “pageantry” aspects. Note, however, that the converse case could be made as well; these recruits have their pick of the top programs already, so they can focus on more “frivolous” aspects when selecting a program. Third, it may be that recruits pay less attention to uniforms during the season, when they are more interested in the actual game. If they are influenced by uniforms at all, they pay more attention to them during the off-season when uniform companies introduce the new uniform combos or when the recruits take off-season visits to prospective campuses and get to try on the uniform.
After establishing our sample we followed all of the recruits on Twitter. We were able to find and follow Twitter accounts for all Top 100 recruits, though a few of the accounts were rarely (publically) used. Some recruits appeared to have two accounts so we followed both until we discovered which was the real or regularly-used account.
During the 2015 college football season, our researchers monitored the tweets from our Top 100 sample of recruits. We paid closest attention to tweets that took place while games were actually being played, and most of these were on Thursday and Saturday nights, with a few games on other odd nights. We captured any tweet from a recruit fell into one of two categories: a tweet that indicated the recruit was watching a college football game (in-person, via a live broadcast, or replay/highlights), or a tweet where the recruit commented on football uniforms.
Analytical Considerations
Our Twitter-based study of the Top 100 recruits provides only one perspective on recruits’ attitudes toward uniforms. A number of limitations must be considered. First, Twitter is only one platform for gauging recruits’ reactions to uniforms. Recruits may prefer other social media platforms and some avoid Twitter and/or social media altogether (some in our sample certainly fit this bill). Nevertheless, Twitter is frequently used in the college football recruiting world and it is telling that every one of these recruits at least had an account. Second, the Top 100 recruits may be systematically different from other recruits. These recruits were disproportionately considering the most powerful programs in CFB and well-established programs may be less likely to experiment with new uniforms, preferring to stick with their traditional look. Or perhaps these elite recruits were more concerned with “professional” aspects of recruiting (e.g. how well the coaches would prepare them for the NFL) rather than “pageantry” aspects. Note, however, that the converse case could be made as well; these recruits have their pick of the top programs already, so they can focus on more “frivolous” aspects when selecting a program. Third, it may be that recruits pay less attention to uniforms during the season, when they are more interested in the actual game. If they are influenced by uniforms at all, they pay more attention to them during the off-season when uniform companies introduce the new uniform combos or when the recruits take off-season visits to prospective campuses and get to try on the uniform.