Online Now 3294

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 1983
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3422
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

What's the best way to rank a recruiting class?

  • The current systems use a dual system but ranks the class by total points which is flawed cause huge classes get huge totals. Why can't they just average the total and divide by the total number of recruits. Wouldn't that be more accurate to determine the quality of the class?

    signature image

    I dream of a day when chickens can cross the road without having their motives questioned.

    Gfortress5

  • The current system doesn't just help huge classes...It only ranks the top 17 from each class.

    Playsignature image

    mpcoan ●

  • mpcoan said...

    The current system doesn't just help huge classes...It only ranks the top 17 from each class.

    For realz?

    signature image

    I dream of a day when chickens can cross the road without having their motives questioned.

    Gfortress5

  • Put bama at the top and go from there

    signature image signature image signature image

    @BillyEN4C

    BillyEN4C ●

  • Gfortress5 said...

    For realz?

    Hit the "i" bubble above the top ranked class and beside "Football Team Rankings."

    JC has said that 17 is the magic number, and you can see that on the graph.

    2013 Football Recruiting Team Rankings

    http://247sports.com/Team/Ranking

    247sports.com
    Playsignature image

    mpcoan ●

  • Gfortress5 said...

    The current systems use a dual system but ranks the class by total points which is flawed cause huge classes get huge totals. Why can't they just average the total and divide by the total number of recruits. Wouldn't that be more accurate to determine the quality of the class?

    Wait 3 or 4 years see how they pan out. shrug

    Slugjuice

  • mpcoan said...

    Hit the "i" bubble above the top ranked class and beside "Football Team Rankings."

    JC has said that 17 is the magic number, and you can see that on the graph.

    It still weighs the top of your class much more heavily than the remaining. Some schools have a very good top 1/3, but are otherwise unremarkable (bunch of 2 stars in the bottom 1/3). I feel like that fails to give credit to schools that recruit a full class of consistent players (for example, a pretty good top 1/3, but no significant drop-off in the bottom 1/3). It may not be the most exciting class in the country, but it builds solid depth and minimizes the chances of big-time letdowns.

    Final Countdown ●

  • mpcoan said...

    The current system doesn't just help huge classes...It only ranks the top 17 from each class.

    It may have started out that way but it got changed a while back. It's why Miami somehow had a top 10 class last year.

    Rivver

  • Slugjuice said...

    Wait 3 or 4 years see how they pan out. shrug

    roflmao

    signature image signature image signature image

    Now knowing what 1995 is like all over again! Thank you 247 technology!!

    InTenSity

  • Team needs should be a small factor. Star average as well.

    Twitter: @ProducerAP

    Theta ●

  • Slugjuice said...

    Wait 3 or 4 years see how they pan out. shrug

    Interesting.

    Guess the 2008 and 2009 Alabama classes were spot on then as the best.

    Good job guys!

    BetterOff

  • BetterOff said...

    Interesting.

    Guess the 2008 and 2009 Alabama classes were spot on then as the best.

    Good job guys!

    No argument here.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Now knowing what 1995 is like all over again! Thank you 247 technology!!

    InTenSity

  • Final Countdown said...

    It still weighs the top of your class much more heavily than the remaining. Some schools have a very good top 1/3, but are otherwise unremarkable (bunch of 2 stars in the bottom 1/3). I feel like that fails to give credit to schools that recruit a full class of consistent players (for example, a pretty good top 1/3, but no significant drop-off in the bottom 1/3). It may not be the most exciting class in the country, but it builds solid depth and minimizes the chances of big-time letdowns.

    Yes and no to that notion.

    Take QB especially, but most positions as well.

    You can have 3 RBs or 4 CB in a class, but only 1 or 2 will be on the field. It gives credit to teams that fill all positions and does penalize teams for having a large number at one position.

    Stanford for instance signed 7 OL last season with 5 of them being at the tackle position. Even if 3 of them switched to another position, only 5 can see the field and more than likely only a few of them will in the long run, so no, all 7 OL shouldn't count the same, IMO. Equation awards elite talent and balance equally, IMO.

    BetterOff

  • BetterOff said...

    Yes and no to that notion.

    Take QB especially, but most positions as well.

    You can have 3 RBs or 4 CB in a class, but only 1 or 2 will be on the field. It gives credit to teams that fill all positions and does penalize teams for having a large number at one position.

    Stanford for instance signed 7 OL last season with 5 of them being at the tackle position. Even if 3 of them switched to another position, only 5 can see the field and more than likely only a few of them will in the long run, so no, all 7 OL shouldn't count the same, IMO. Equation awards elite talent and balance equally, IMO.

    So would the current 247 rankings penalize a school that takes too many of one position? Is that part of the equation?

    Final Countdown ●

  • Final Countdown said...

    So would the current 247 rankings penalize a school that takes too many of one position? Is that part of the equation?

    I am not 100% on it, but I believe so. Honestly never looked that much into it, but I have read staff say something along those lines. Not sure if it is after a certain number or what.

    BetterOff

  • BetterOff said...

    I am not 100% on it, but I believe so. Honestly never looked that much into it, but I have read staff say something along those lines. Not sure if it is after a certain number or what.

    Hmm... interesting. Recruiting definitely has its intangibles: fitting the system, filling needs on the depth chart, understanding the program's culture, etc. Those things can't be assessed by recruiting rankings.

    Final Countdown ●

  • definitely wait a few years for the best results. You could have a revised summer ranking after kids failed to qualify or went 'zeke pike'.

    hubcitytider

  • Slugjuice said...

    Wait 3 or 4 years see how they pan out. shrug

    Lol. Amen to that. I'm a Fresno State fan, and I laughed so hard when I went back and looked at Ryan Mathews' evaluations.
    http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=8&c=1&nid=2409289
    http://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruiting/football/recruiting/player-Ryan-Mathews-49577
    http://espn.go.com/college-sports/football/recruiting/player/evaluation/_/id/40197/ryan-mathews

    Two stars, three stars (#69 RB) and 67 respectively. And he goes and leads the nation in rushing, gets chosen top 15 in the draft, and goes to the Pro Bowl in his second year in the NFL.

    While the various recruiting trackers are often right, players slip through the cracks so often it's crazy. One of our 2012 RB signees' situation is an exact clone of Mathews'.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by FailcopterRofl on 6/27/2012 at 6:42 PM

    FailcopterRofl

  • hubcitytider said...

    definitely wait a few years for the best results. You could have a revised summer ranking after kids failed to qualify or went 'zeke pike'.

    They used to come out with the enrolled rankings each year as well in August.

    BetterOff

  • BetterOff said...

    Yes and no to that notion.

    Take QB especially, but most positions as well.

    You can have 3 RBs or 4 CB in a class, but only 1 or 2 will be on the field. It gives credit to teams that fill all positions and does penalize teams for having a large number at one position.

    Stanford for instance signed 7 OL last season with 5 of them being at the tackle position. Even if 3 of them switched to another position, only 5 can see the field and more than likely only a few of them will in the long run, so no, all 7 OL shouldn't count the same, IMO. Equation awards elite talent and balance equally, IMO.

    I don't know taking a lot of people at key positions is always smart... More like for you to have an elite player in that group. If you get 3 5* OL you are likely to get a bust from 2 or even all of them but seven 4* OL or even 3* is better to me in certain positions. Taking 7QBs for instance would be stupid but with positions like OL,DL,DB,LB its always smart.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Walking up these hills you have no choice but to be fast!

    FSUTrackLoveFSU

  • FailcopterRofl said...

    Lol. Amen to that. I'm a Fresno State fan, and I laughed so hard when I went back and looked at Ryan Mathews' evaluations. http://recruiting.scout.com/a.z?s=73&p=8&c=1&nid=2409289 http://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruiting/football/recruiting/player-Ryan-Mathews-49577 http://espn.go.com/college-sports/football/recruiting/player/evaluation/_/id/40197/ryan-mathews

    Two stars, three stars (#69 RB) and 67 respectively. And he goes and leads the nation in rushing, gets chosen top 15 in the draft, and goes to the Pro Bowl in his second year in the NFL.

    While the various recruiting trackers are often right, players slip through the cracks so often it's crazy. One of our 2012 RB signees' situation is an exact clone of Mathews'.

    There are always exceptions to the rule, but looking at Mathews' offer list, it seems like that's right about where most coaches in major colleges had him ranked as well.

    He had a bunch of MWC / WAC type offers with Arizona St. and Colorado offering from BCS schools.

    signature image signature image

    Clarkw267

  • Gfortress5 said...

    The current systems use a dual system but ranks the class by total points which is flawed cause huge classes get huge totals. Why can't they just average the total and divide by the total number of recruits. Wouldn't that be more accurate to determine the quality of the class?

    Now that ohio isn't going to have "the most bestest class of all timezzzz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11" you want to move the goalposts. I see how it is.

    buttesnake ●

  • Clarkw267 said...

    There are always exceptions to the rule, but looking at Mathews' offer list, it seems like that's right about where most coaches in major colleges had him ranked as well.

    He had a bunch of MWC / WAC type offers with Arizona St. and Colorado offering from BCS schools.

    A lot of times it seems people don't evaluate the athlete's on field performance based of the teams talent in my opinion. Matthews had a terrible OL in High School and was always running from people in the backfield.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Walking up these hills you have no choice but to be fast!

    FSUTrackLoveFSU

  • Breaking classes down so micro is crazy. Every class is either Elite, Good, or Not good. We all generally know who's got what.

    As a rule I track what 3-4 teams were legitimately going after a kid the 2-3 months before he commits.

    A lot of kids get early offers which are no more then carrots to try and get a kid on campus to work out.

    fsufsu ●

  • fsufsu said...

    Breaking classes down so micro is crazy. Every class is either Elite, Good, or Not good. We all generally know who's got what.

    As a rule I track what 3-4 teams were legitimately going after a kid the 2-3 months before he commits.

    A lot of kids get early offers which are no more then carrots to try and get a kid on campus to work out.

    Don't tell Michigan State that... they recruit nationally you see. They like to "wait" on their kids to see who blows up their senior season. All of these teams that are filling up early are missing out on the true gems. loco

    signature image signature image

    Clarkw267

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports