Started By
Message
Recruiting Rankings since 2020 averaged (Both High School and Combined HS + Portal)
Posted on 8/1/25 at 1:01 am
Posted on 8/1/25 at 1:01 am
This surprisingly only took me about 40 minutes to make. Data is sourced from 247 composite rankings, so I believe it takes into account every recruiting service ranking. Furthest right column shows what their average class has been in the last 3 years.
Bottom part of picture is most accurate as it combines both high school and transfer classes ranked, or overall.
You can see how much NIL benefit programs such as Oregon and Texas. On their own standalone merit, they finished a lot lower than when they were able to buy players. Oregon making a serious jump solely due to Nike. When the house settlement finalizes, Texas and Oregon may go back to their former class rankings, around 11th or 12th, once everyone is supposedly on an equal playing field, but we shall see.
TAMU is actually ranked 13th in the "Since 2023 average" column for High School + Transfers. That #1 class weighs them up a ton in that since 2020 average. I'm surprised they are not higher with NIL. I think those alumni got very salty after spending all that money to get the #1 class of 2022, then have crap results in Fall of 2022, so stopped donating on recruits after that. Because in the end, all of those players left anyways.
Bottom part of picture is most accurate as it combines both high school and transfer classes ranked, or overall.
You can see how much NIL benefit programs such as Oregon and Texas. On their own standalone merit, they finished a lot lower than when they were able to buy players. Oregon making a serious jump solely due to Nike. When the house settlement finalizes, Texas and Oregon may go back to their former class rankings, around 11th or 12th, once everyone is supposedly on an equal playing field, but we shall see.
TAMU is actually ranked 13th in the "Since 2023 average" column for High School + Transfers. That #1 class weighs them up a ton in that since 2020 average. I'm surprised they are not higher with NIL. I think those alumni got very salty after spending all that money to get the #1 class of 2022, then have crap results in Fall of 2022, so stopped donating on recruits after that. Because in the end, all of those players left anyways.
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 1:51 am
10
Posted on 8/1/25 at 1:08 am to Saunson69
So you are a USCe fan?
Posted on 8/1/25 at 1:17 am to kilo
quote:I think he just stopped after he got through the top 10 SEC teams in both rankings. Was weird seeing USCw shortened to SC though. Never seen anyone write it like that. Would make more sense to shorten USCe to SC
So you are a USCe fan?
Posted on 8/1/25 at 1:26 am to Who_Dat_Tiger
I changed it to USC. I've always known USCw as USC, and just know USCe as South Carolina. I've never seen it as USCe outside this website.
No, I am not a South Carolina fan at all. I just grabbed the Top 20 classes at the specific year I was looking at, listed them on excel, and then found the rankings of those 20 since 2020.
SEC makes up 8 of the top 12.
No, I am not a South Carolina fan at all. I just grabbed the Top 20 classes at the specific year I was looking at, listed them on excel, and then found the rankings of those 20 since 2020.
SEC makes up 8 of the top 12.
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 1:53 am
Posted on 8/1/25 at 1:37 am to kilo
TAMU actually ranks 13th in the "Since 2023 Average" combined HS + Transfer rankings. That #1 2022 class weighs it up a ton, but since 2023, they rank 13th overall. I'm surprised they are not higher with NIL. I think those alumni got very salty after spending all that money to get the #1 class of 2022, then have crap 4-8 results in Fall of 2022, so stopped donating. It shows in this picture after that 4-8 year, they stopped spending.
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 1:47 am
Posted on 8/1/25 at 2:03 am to Saunson69
quote:
No, I am not a South Carolina fan at all.
Wasn't taking a shot at you at all. Was just curious. Good stuff.
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 2:05 am
Posted on 8/1/25 at 2:22 am to kilo
This also shows just how important recruiting is. The top 5 teams have 15 of the last 22 Nati's, and 5 of the last 6. The recruiting rankings really do matter. They are definitely wrong a lot of the time singularly, but they still stand the test that on a mass scale, they are generally correct. As shown above having 70% of last 22 Nati's.
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 2:29 am
Posted on 8/1/25 at 5:10 am to Saunson69
quote:
You can see how much NIL benefit programs such as Oregon and Texas.
Yes, Texas NEVER had good recruiting rankings before NIL.
You stopped at 2020.
2019 - #3
2018 - #3
2017 - #25 * Herman
2016 - #7
2015 - #10
2014 - #17 * Strong
2013 - #17 with 15 Commits
2012 - #2
2011 - #4
2010 - #2
2009 - #6
2008 - #8
2007 - #3
2006 - #6
2005 - #13 with 14 commits
2004 - #9
2003 - #8
2002 - #1
Yeah, that is horrible. Thank goodness for NIL.
Do you always just make shite up or are you just stupid?
Posted on 8/1/25 at 5:57 am to BigBro
Mack 2002-2013 *
Avg 4.9
Strong 2015-2016 **
Avg 8.5
Herman 2018-2020 **
Avg 5.0
Sark 2022-2025 **
Avg 3.75
* not counting the 2 small classes with 15 recruits or less
** not counting the first transition year of a coaching change
Recruiting rankings have never been the problem at Texas.. The problems at Texas have mostly been in development once the recruits got to Texas.
Sark has completely flipped that script. 28 guys drafted the last three years, 23 just the last two years. The current roster has at least 25-30 NFL guys imo, and possibly a whole lot more..
Another interesting development is that Sark has been recruiting quite a bit outside of the state of Texas, and I think that plays a big role as well. Texas high school players are well coached and have access to very advanced strength and conditioning programs, and I think a lot of of those kids have reached their potential or close to it before they ever make it to a college campus.
That’s clearly not the case for all of them, but it seems a lot of Texas high school players bust at a higher rate than other states.
Either way, Texas has never recruited out of state like they have the last 3-4 years.. perhaps NIL does help with these players, but it doesn’t change the recruiting rankings..
At the end of the day, there is a lot to sell in Austin right now.
1. A chance to win.
2. A place to get developed.
3. A bigger city with a lot of NIL opportunities, actual NIL, not collectives
4. One of the best public schools in the nation.
5. It’s not cold like up north.
6. Attractive women, all races and plenty to go around.
Honestly, there isn’t much negative recruiting that can be done against Texas right now. The only thing I can think of is that it might take a little bit of time to get on the field. That’s a good problem to have..
Avg 4.9
Strong 2015-2016 **
Avg 8.5
Herman 2018-2020 **
Avg 5.0
Sark 2022-2025 **
Avg 3.75
* not counting the 2 small classes with 15 recruits or less
** not counting the first transition year of a coaching change
Recruiting rankings have never been the problem at Texas.. The problems at Texas have mostly been in development once the recruits got to Texas.
Sark has completely flipped that script. 28 guys drafted the last three years, 23 just the last two years. The current roster has at least 25-30 NFL guys imo, and possibly a whole lot more..
Another interesting development is that Sark has been recruiting quite a bit outside of the state of Texas, and I think that plays a big role as well. Texas high school players are well coached and have access to very advanced strength and conditioning programs, and I think a lot of of those kids have reached their potential or close to it before they ever make it to a college campus.
That’s clearly not the case for all of them, but it seems a lot of Texas high school players bust at a higher rate than other states.
Either way, Texas has never recruited out of state like they have the last 3-4 years.. perhaps NIL does help with these players, but it doesn’t change the recruiting rankings..
At the end of the day, there is a lot to sell in Austin right now.
1. A chance to win.
2. A place to get developed.
3. A bigger city with a lot of NIL opportunities, actual NIL, not collectives
4. One of the best public schools in the nation.
5. It’s not cold like up north.
6. Attractive women, all races and plenty to go around.
Honestly, there isn’t much negative recruiting that can be done against Texas right now. The only thing I can think of is that it might take a little bit of time to get on the field. That’s a good problem to have..
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 6:02 am
Posted on 8/1/25 at 7:09 am to Saunson69
I believe it was Mullen's 2019 class when 13/25 signed either never made it on to campus or were gone after 1 season.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 8:36 am to Saunson69
This is very interesting. It is clear some teams have outperformed their talent levels while others have underperformed.
It is interesting to see LSU at #5 after seeing LSU fans here, one in particular, claim that LSU’s problem the last 5 years has been lack of talent.
It is interesting to see LSU at #5 after seeing LSU fans here, one in particular, claim that LSU’s problem the last 5 years has been lack of talent.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 9:43 am to Saunson69
Your argument is flawed based on the reason for recruiting success. You don't consider any other factors except NIL. While a factor, it is not the only factor. Logic 101.
Perhaps a coach leaves and the new coach recruits at a higher level...or vice- versa.
Perhaps a coach leaves and the new coach recruits at a higher level...or vice- versa.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 9:49 am to Saunson69
Most people out west call USC west as "SC"
Posted on 8/1/25 at 10:11 am to BigBro
Excellent breakdown. Ppl just can't accept Texas good again. They blame NIL and money. Even if that was the case you still need good coaching.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 10:18 am to captdalton
quote:
It is interesting to see LSU
It always is, isn't it cap?
Posted on 8/1/25 at 10:19 am to BigBro
quote:all those recruiting classes and only one Championship
2019 - #3
2018 - #3
2017 - #25 * Herman
2016 - #7
2015 - #10
2014 - #17 * Strong
2013 - #17 with 15 Commits
2012 - #2
2011 - #4
2010 - #2
2009 - #6
2008 - #8
2007 - #3
2006 - #6
2005 - #13 with 14 commits
2004 - #9
2003 - #8
2002 - #1
Posted on 8/1/25 at 10:52 am to AuburnTigers
Auburn with the 12th most talented roster has had 4 straight losing seasons.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 10:53 am to Harry Boutte
quote:
It always is, isn't it cap?
You have to keep your eyes peeled or you will step in it.
Posted on 8/1/25 at 3:55 pm to captdalton
This list reveals some things:
1) Bryan Harsin was terrible
2) Eliah Drinkwitz has his program punching well above their weight.
3) LSU, TAMU, what are you doing with all that talent? Aside from BKs first year there isnt even an SEC ship appearance between the two.
1) Bryan Harsin was terrible
2) Eliah Drinkwitz has his program punching well above their weight.
3) LSU, TAMU, what are you doing with all that talent? Aside from BKs first year there isnt even an SEC ship appearance between the two.
This post was edited on 8/1/25 at 3:58 pm
Posted on 8/1/25 at 4:04 pm to Saunson69
That's weird. captainDolton said Harsin was recruiting just as good as Freeze at Auburn.
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News