re: Some more Rivals math....

quote:

---

And we don't need to be a top10 recruiting team, but we DO need to be a top 20 recruiting team consistently, unless you're satisfied with 3rd in the West and Sugar Bowl losses once in a blue moon.

---

Nutt out recruited Petrino, on average, according to the recruiting rankings 27th nationally, 8th in the SEC with aTm and Mizzou included compared to Petrino's 31st nationally 10th in the SEC while Petrino had something Nutt never did, a top 20 class.


Petrino also had something Nutt never did, a class outside the top 30, several of them.

Recruiting rankings do not guarantee success or failure, if I wanted to waste my time to prove the point I could pick out just as many teams who averaged a top 20 class who were terrible this past season over the past five years like Auburn, Tennessee and then could find just as many who averaged outside say the top 40 in the recruiting rankings who have finished inside the top 15 the season like Kansas State, just off the top of my head.

Yes, there are just so many 5 and 4 star players to go around and the recruiting rankings will reflect on the teams who sign these players, the real world results will come down to the 3 stars as every team outside of SC this year will sign these players, the majority of their rosters end up be comprised of these players in most instances. What it really comes down to is a coaching staffs ability to evaluate these players and develop these players as you will have 5 and 4* bust, people notice these and point to them, just as you will have the 3 and 2* guys who become super stars, those are the exceptions to the rule, the coaches make their money developing the 3* guys as often times they are more valuable than many realize in terms of depth, special teams, etc in add up to wins in the big scheme of things.