Started By
Message
re: Georgia lost. Some of you forgot.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:28 am to BhamDore
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:28 am to BhamDore
quote:
The research says that recruiting rankings are close to 20% accurate. That's awfully low to put so much stock in.
Link it. That's an awfully simplistic attempt to quantify the accuracy of recruiting. It's much more involved.
1
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:31 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
and this year’s recruiting class had an average player rating that is better than several of those number one classes.
And here I thought this didn't matter.
quote:
Please explain your logic.
But I agree with your overall logic. 7 classes does not matter as none of those first three classes are still in the system. However, it will definitely take more than 1 or 2 good recruiting years to over take Alabama. You guys clearly have the best talent, coaching, facilities.....in short everything. That is why Alabama dominance will continue for the foreseeable future. Right now we are hoping to take a title in a year Alabama falls short. (Even Alabama can't win them all) then after Saban is gone maybe turn the heat up and win a few more.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:32 am to TrendingRight
quote:
Georgia lost. Kirby didn't forget.
fify,
Be afraid, be very afraid
Kirby Smart: "I think everybody can see that Georgia is going to be a force to be reckoned with. We're not going anywhere."
2017 #3 class
2018 #1 class
2019 Current #1 class, 7 commits, three 5*s, four 4*s
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:33 am to DawgsLife
quote:
And here I thought this didn't matter.
Only in the context of the post I quoted - somehow suggesting the level of talent of the players we signed had in some way dropped off, which it didn’t.
This post was edited on 2/9/18 at 8:33 am
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:34 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
Only in the context of the post I quoted - somehow suggesting the level of talent of the players we signed had somehow dropped off.
The only thing that dropped off was the number of players Alabama signed. And with a talent rich crop coming up for 2019, that will allow Alabama to sign more players. Saban staying ahead of the game.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:35 am to DawgsLife
A #1 recruiting class doesn't translate into a National Championship contender. Don't use Bama as your example, we're an anomaly.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:38 am to BhamDore
quote:
The research says that recruiting rankings are close to 20% accurate.
How are they measuring accuracy?
The teams that rank high in recruiting rankings tend to win the most. That isn't coincidence. One team has won a title in the modern era without a top 5 class on the roster. That was Clemson, who recruits around the top 10 generally and who had a transcendent QB at the time.
This post was edited on 2/9/18 at 8:39 am
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:38 am to Mobtro
quote:
A #1 recruiting class doesn't translate into a National Championship contender. Don't use Bama as your example, we're an anomaly.
No one is saying it's automatic, but it damn sure helps.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:40 am to Mobtro
quote:
A #1 recruiting class doesn't translate into a National Championship contender. Don't use Bama as your example, we're an anomaly.
Okay. (Not sure if you are serious)
Assuming you are:
a#1 class does not guarantee a National Championship. No. It does give you a better chance to win one. There has never been a National Champion that was devoid of talent. It takes talent, coaching, luck and a whole host of other things. But if you think Alabama would have all those talents if they had been pulling in #20 classes you are mistaken.
In short...no. A #1 does not guarantee anything, but it sure does help.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:40 am to TrendingRight
quote:
The game. For the Natty. Georgia lost. Georgia got outcoached, outplayed, and beat. Some pu&&y a&& Georgia fans forgot.
Plus they lost 81 seniors on the two deep. One hit wonder.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:41 am to Mobtro
quote:
A #1 recruiting class doesn't translate into a National Championship contender.
Can you show me a team that has had a #1 class that has not been a contender?
(Also, to clarify, define what you mean by contender as it seems everybody has a different definition)
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:43 am to DawgsLife
quote:
(Also, to clarify, define what you mean by contender as it seems everybody has a different definition)
SECRant definition of contender: team that won national championship in blowout fashion. Nothing less.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:45 am to djsdawg
This is one way to prove recruiting rankings are much more than mumbo jumbo BS:
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:47 am to BhamDore
quote:
Alabama has not had some huge talent advantage over LSU, Florida, or Georgia.
Lord this idiotic.
Did you see how many kids we had drafted off last years team?A grand total of 1 and he was a junior and in the 5th round.
How many did Bama have drafted and how many 1st rounders?
quote:
Alabama wins because they had by far the best coaching staff in college football
So THIS is what the whole discussion revolves around?
Recruiting rankings "don't matter" because it somehow diminishes what your Lord and Savoir has accomplished?
This post was edited on 2/9/18 at 9:38 am
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:49 am to Mobtro
quote:
A #1 recruiting class doesn't translate into a National Championship contender.
Of course not on the face of it, but it's simple logic that if you have uber talented players, your odds are much better.
Going back the last 10 football seasons, Clemson and Auburn are the only 2 teams that did not have a top 2 recruiting class nationally in the cycle leading up to their title. In other words, 80% of the last 10 national champs had a top 2 class the years leading up to that national championship.
Nobody is saying "UGA signed the #1 class, therefore we are guaranteed to win a title in the next 4 years", but I mean I'd obviously rather have the top ranked class than any other ranked class.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:49 am to Mobtro
quote:
A #1 recruiting class doesn't translate into a National Championship contender.
A higher ranked group of players who are well coached will more often beat a lower ranked group of players. For example, That explained the outcome of the 2017 season playoff games.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:51 am to BhamDore
quote:
Those kids are ranked mostly on what schools or coaches are recruiting them
Yea and these big schools are usually the best at evaluating talent and have hired loads of administrative assts to do exactly that.Hell,Saban wad the first coach to do it.
Did you not read any of the blue chip ratio article linked?
This post was edited on 2/9/18 at 8:52 am
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:51 am to TeLeFaWx
quote:
I think everyone in the world would take Georgia's last two classes over Bama's last two classes. Bama had a great 17 class, but if you have to take Bama's 18 class with it? No thanks.
I'd take the 2017 class combined with Ole Miss' 2018 class. That's how good the 2017 has already proven to be.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:55 am to Razor Dawg
quote:
Recruiting rankings "don't matter" because it somehow diminishes what your Lord and Savoir has accomplish?
It's bizarre. Alabama's obscene recruiting over the past decade is a credit to Saban, if anything.
Posted on 2/9/18 at 8:55 am to BhamDore
quote:
Recruiting rankings create false expectations and get coaches fired.
[i]"Despite some obvious, anecdotal exceptions, on the whole recruiting rankings clearly are useful for creating a realistic baseline for expectations."
"Overwhelmingly, setting aside every other conceivable factor that determines success and failure -- injuries, academics, even coaching -- individual players and teams tend to perform within the very narrow range their initial recruiting rankings suggest. '
Coaches failing to maximize the talent they sign is what gets them fired.
Page 4 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News