No you couldn't , you could post OUTLIERS, do you know what those are?
ON AVERAGE schools which recruit the best win the most. That is just a bar none fact. Denying it is foolish.
Except recruiting rankings do not guarantee success. There is an important factor you are ignoring in the process...
Two of the programs with the most wins in CFB since the rankings started happen to average classes in the 40+ range. More excuses will follow as to why this is true, but recruiting rankings =/= wins.
Again, this is untrue. Did Mustain drop when he signed with Arkansas? Did DMac? etc etc.
The truth is that it only APPEARS that kids from the big schools get a bump in ratings because those are the kids we hear about. But if you look at the actual numbers even schools like Alabama, USC, and Texas sign 3 star players, and they aren't being bumped to 4 stars simply b/c they signed with USC, or Bama, or Texas. Why is that, is there some formula which calculates which students get a bump and which don't?
Where did I say anything about bumps in rankings? I said the rankings reflect schools who sign the limited amount of 5 and 4 star players.
Now if you want to argue where the majority of these players come from and which programs have an advantage of signing these players due to proximity, that would be a better argument.
Rivals also started giving bonus points in their rankings a few years back for signing the top players from each state, you would get bonus points for signing the number one player from Alaska even if he was a 2* over a 4 star from Florida for example.
no doubt true here,but you still gotta have at least some superior talent on a team to win. Some kids that are just natural born athletes.
Even Nick Saban , the undisputed King of Coaches right now wouldn't win national titles without some star players.
Sure you have to have star players, every team has star players, but if you look up the past Heisman winners, you may be surprised at how many of them were 3* coming out of HS.
People put too much stock into the rankings, there really isn't that much difference in say the #5 class and the #15 class, but none of the rankings make a damn if a team isn't recruiting to fill their needs. A coach could sign a class full of 5* talent at the skill positions and not have the lines needed to get to a bowl better than the liberty bowl, but the recruiting rankings would have had that class in the top 5.
The whole idea that a group of people can take every prospect in America and rank them in order based on talent and potential is silly at best, a profitable form of entertainment for them just like wrestling has been for Vince McMahon but it still comes down to the 10 coaches for each university who are paid millions to do the jobs they are paid to do...