Started By
Message
re: Recruiting rankings are meaningless
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:37 pm to deeprig9
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:37 pm to deeprig9
quote:
it's about evaluating players, recruiting them, and then properly developing/coaching them. It's not one or the other, it's all of the above
This. Also, it's more important than ever not to just get the highest starred guys, but to get the ones who have enough maturity and character to stick through adversity and understand that what you have is an opportunity, not a guaranteed starting position. Signing a bunch of prima donnas who transfer out doesn't work.
0
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:38 pm to JTA1985
Terrible take. I can't really think of many national champions that weren't won on the shoulders of elite recruiting classes. Maybe 2010 Auburn? The evidence is overwhelming that national champions usually have an average of top 10 recruiting classes the 4 years preceding it. You have your head so far in the sand you might reach the earth's core if you think it's "meaningless"
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:39 pm to JTA1985
quote:
Recruiting rankings are meaningless
Give me a team full of 5* and I can beat a nick saban coached team full of 1* walkons.
They aren't the end all be all but they damn sure aren't meaningless. More times than not the teams with the most talent rise to the top.
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:44 pm to JTA1985
Looks like a high correlation between recruiting rankings and wins to me.
This post was edited on 1/26/22 at 3:46 pm
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:44 pm to cas4t
quote:
Amazing that this had to be said
Said... and then promptly ignored by OP... Shocked I tell you.
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:45 pm to WG_Dawg
you have 150 top players coming out of high school every year. I'm saying these recruiting sites cannot judge these players with any accuracy.
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:47 pm to JTA1985
quote:Um... LSU made sure O is an unemployed multi-millionaire.
did not help lsu the past 2 years. O had top 5 recruiting classes the last 3 years
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:53 pm to lsufball19
quote:
you also aren't going to develop a team full of 2 and 3 stars to win at an elite level either with any consistency.
Consistency being the keyword.
Pinkel wasn't much of a recruiter but seemed to get a lot out of his players.
Here were his classes leading up to what was perhaps his best season:
2013...rank 43...0 five stars...2 four stars
2012...rank 33...1 five stars...3 four stars
2011...rank 56...0 five stars...1 four stars
2010...rank 21...0 five stars...6 four stars
2013 Season Final AP poll number 5
The next year however MU fell to 14th in the final AP poll and finished unranked in 2015.
This post was edited on 1/26/22 at 3:59 pm
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:55 pm to JTA1985
It’s about all 3
Posted on 1/26/22 at 3:57 pm to WaterLink
quote:
Maybe 2010 Auburn?
2007 - 7th
2008 - 20th
2009 - 19th
2010 - 4th
Posted on 1/26/22 at 4:02 pm to DaWGfan01
So A&M has been putting players in the pros ever since they got Jimbo and this was with less talent. Takes Jace Sternberger from Kansas and gets him drafted. It’s going to be fun watching what he does with even more talent!
Posted on 1/26/22 at 4:05 pm to JTA1985
I agree with you on this. But it’s also more on some places over ranking certain schools classes. Do you think Texas is really that bad at player development. Maybe they are. Or maybe all their players get rankings bumps.
Posted on 1/26/22 at 4:14 pm to Whentheleveebreaks
I think you can take the top 300 or so HS players each year and allot of those players are gonna be on the top 300 from the various recruiting websites, players go to camps all over the country and get their measurables tested, there is way more HS game film out there for recruiting sites to watch.
Having top 5-10 recruiting classes on a consistent basis of the only way to win CFB Championships
Having top 5-10 recruiting classes on a consistent basis of the only way to win CFB Championships
This post was edited on 1/26/22 at 5:17 pm
Posted on 1/26/22 at 4:26 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
2007 - 7th
2008 - 20th
2009 - 19th
2010 - 4th
So average of 12.5, falls just outside of the top 10 like I said, but obviously had a couple of really strong ones included. Either way you slice it, recruiting rankings definitely have a lot of meaning, even if not 100% accurate all the time.
Posted on 1/26/22 at 4:54 pm to CelticTiger
quote:
Consistency being the keyword.
Pinkel wasn't much of a recruiter but seemed to get a lot out of his players.
Here were his classes leading up to what was perhaps his best season:
2013...rank 43...0 five stars...2 four stars
2012...rank 33...1 five stars...3 four stars
2011...rank 56...0 five stars...1 four stars
2010...rank 21...0 five stars...6 four stars
2013 Season Final AP poll number 5
The next year however MU fell to 14th in the final AP poll and finished unranked in 2015.
He did great with the talent he had to work with, but he also had a ceiling with that talent. That ceiling was not winning conference and/or national titles. As others have mentioned, there hasn't been a single national champion and very few P5 conference champs who have accomplished those feats without highly ranked recruiting classes. At a certain point, you have to have talent to win big regardless of how good you are developing the players you have.
But you are right that consistency is very important in what I said. Coaches may have some bounces go their way and have a season where the have a top 5-10 finish with 3 star talent, but there is no staying power in the top 10 without signing those 4 and 5 star kids.
People, far too many times, see these outlier overachievers or blue chip busts and somehow come to the conclusion that because outliers exist that recruiting doesn't mean anything. There's a reason why the teams you see winning year in and year out aren't just trying to find diamond in the rough players no one else is recruiting. Why is that? Because, on average, player evaluations are accurate more than they aren't.
This post was edited on 1/26/22 at 4:58 pm
Posted on 1/26/22 at 4:54 pm to JTA1985
With all due offense, you're a moron.
Posted on 1/26/22 at 4:57 pm to JTA1985
quote:
u have 150 top players coming out of high school every year. I'm saying these recruiting sites cannot judge these players with any accuracy.
They do a pretty good job of it.
Posted on 1/26/22 at 4:59 pm to JTA1985
quote:
you have 150 top players coming out of high school every year. I'm saying these recruiting sites cannot judge these players with any accuracy.
with any accuracy? It's one thing to say subjective rankings aren't an exact science because they aren't. But to say they have no accuracy is just a very ignorant take. ESPECIALLY with all the exposure kids have now. It's a lot more difficult for players not to be seen now with all these recruiting sites, youtube, hudl, etc.
This post was edited on 1/26/22 at 5:00 pm
Posted on 1/26/22 at 5:08 pm to djsdawg
JMO but trying to slot the 3* and 4* might be the most difficult.
Don't discount the 3* guys.
Don't discount the 3* guys.
Posted on 1/26/22 at 5:11 pm to JTA1985
quote:
you have 150 top players coming out of high school every year. I'm saying these recruiting sites cannot judge these players with any accuracy.
Quick survey of the 247 top ten from 2017 has 7 out of 10 players going in the first two rounds of the NFL draft. It’s a small sample size but that’s all the effort I’m going to put in to calling you moron.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News