Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/22/13 at 7:42 pm to scrooster
Moral of the story:
While teams that win titles usually are loaded with blue chippers, simply having a lot of talent does not guarantee success.
See: Texas, USC
While teams that win titles usually are loaded with blue chippers, simply having a lot of talent does not guarantee success.
See: Texas, USC
Posted on 5/22/13 at 9:23 pm to Reginald C Perrin
quote:
See: Texas, USC
Thank you - exactly. As I stated in my original post, SoCal, Texas and FSU are all good examples.
Posted on 5/23/13 at 10:02 am to scrooster
Not sure if you are being intentionally argumentative or what. I completely understand your section about Saban's recruiting passing Richt. What I am saying is that you are incorrect in stating Richt was the top recruiter before Saban was at Bama.
Please revisit the numbers I posted from Scout's archives.
Richt has never had a #1 SEC recruiting class or a top 3 national recruiting class. This includes the period when Saban was at LSU, the period when Saban was in the NFL and the period where Saban is at Bama.
Can you now see how this sentence of yours is flat out wrong?
It's not complicated.
Please revisit the numbers I posted from Scout's archives.
Richt has never had a #1 SEC recruiting class or a top 3 national recruiting class. This includes the period when Saban was at LSU, the period when Saban was in the NFL and the period where Saban is at Bama.
Can you now see how this sentence of yours is flat out wrong?
quote:
(Mark) Richt, UNTIL (HE) WAS JUST RECENTLY SURPASSED BY (NICK) SABAN AT BAMA, consistently averaged the highest recruiting ranking in the conference and for many years the (entire) country (of the U.S. of A.), yet he has very little to show for it.
It's not complicated.
Posted on 5/23/13 at 10:34 am to Dawg in Beaumont
quote:
Can you now see how this sentence of yours is flat out wrong?
No, because from 2000-2009 Georgia had the highest cumulative average recruiting ranking in the country ... you did the Richt years but the time frame I was citing was a particular decade and an article that came-out a few years ago - I think they used an aggregate of all recruiting services even though, if I remember correctly, ESPN only started theirs in 2006.
I dunno, it doesn't matter. It's a catch 22.
Posted on 5/23/13 at 10:37 am to scrooster
I suppose that is possible based on a cumulative average, but I'm quite skeptical that UGA had the absolute highest average in the country over that span. Got a link?
Posted on 5/23/13 at 10:43 am to roadGator
quote:
No one has an entire team of 5 and 4 star rated players.
Give us 3 more years...
Posted on 5/23/13 at 11:16 am to Fipitan
This link shows a lot of different recruiting stats, most pertinent to our debate is the cumulative averages.
Net change in recruiting rankings
They are divided up from 02-06 and 07-11
UGA averaged 5.6 from 02-06 and 8.6 from 07-11
USC averaged 3.6 from 02-06 and 4.8 from 07-11
Net change in recruiting rankings
They are divided up from 02-06 and 07-11
UGA averaged 5.6 from 02-06 and 8.6 from 07-11
USC averaged 3.6 from 02-06 and 4.8 from 07-11
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News