Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

1066

TOP 15 G5 Recruiting Classes from 247

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, madmartigan said:

I don't fully buy the recruiting rating systems. A lot of kids that G5 schools pickup just aren't fairly rated due to lack of exposure. Stars matter at the higher end but at 2, 3 and unrated, I don't know how accurate it is. 

We (SDSU) have seen with our own eyes that we had a kid on iur team who was originally rated 2 stars and transferred to a Pac team and became a 3 star.  I too believe Rocky.  What he really implied was recruits east of the Mississippi are overrated.  I think mainly because it sells subscriptions to those recruiting services.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Rocky frequently mentions the kids west of the Mississippi are frequently rated lower due to lack of exposure.  Any recruiting junky have any thoughts on that?

Scout does a fairer job.  Certainly true with Rivals and ESPN, which influences 247's composite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Fort Fun said:

We can nitpick those sites all day, and it's pretty much impossible for them to accurately rank and monitor thousands of high school football players, and it is in their best interest to deliver good news to their subscribers... but... more often than not they get the big picture right.

For example, BSU and SDSU usually have the best classes in the MWC and they're usually the best teams in the MWC. Most of the MWC teams have recruiting classes ranked towards the bottom of the country and most MWC teams suck at football. So people can cry about their rankings all they want and they certainly and legitimate beefs in specific cases, but the results on the field speak for themselves.

 

I generally agree with your views on this matter. Sticking to the G5 only it is clear that universities which have the highest ranked recruits year to year also have the best teams year to year. Yes there are exceptions and one year wonders of course but as you say "more often than not they get the big picture right." This is perhaps more true of football than basketball but even in basketball these recruiting rankings generally hold water.

As to the superiority of the rating sites I must believe that Rivals is generally the worst. I suspect that 24/7 should be the best because of their composite ranking system which includes information from all three sites, however I will not swear to that of which I am uncertain.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aztech said:

We (SDSU) have seen with our own eyes that we had a kid on iur team who was originally rated 2 stars and transferred to a Pac team and became a 3 star.  I too believe Rocky.  What he really implied was recruits east of the Mississippi are overrated.  I think mainly because it sells subscriptions to those recruiting services.    

We just had one of our commits flip to Nebraska this week and he gained a star. 2 ⭐️ for UW = 3⭐️ for the Huskers. Cause you know Nebraska would have offered if he wasn't a 3 ⭐️ Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Fort Fun said:

You guys might not end up in the basement, but with all those 2-star JUCOs already signed, the math really doesn't work in your guys' favor. Regardless, UNM recruits a specific kind of athlete on the offensive side of the ball and will usually get dinged in the recruiting rankings.

That's another thing recruiting sites are too lazy to rank most JUCOs, most of these 2 star JUCOs the Lobos signed were 3 stars coming out of HS. They only went the JC route to get their grades in order and they stood out when they played that's why they were re-recruited. Look at JUCOs east of the Mississippi they are ranked, very few on the left (out) coast are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those that complain about a 2* player becoming a 3* when another schools offers a recruit are not giving consideration to how the rankings work. If school-A is the only offer for a recruit and then school-B makes an offer, the ranking will be higher. More schools think the recruit has value.

It also matter who the sachools are. If Troy is the only offer and Ohio offers, the ranking will probably not increase much if any.

If a top-10 school is the second offer, the ranking will increase. Why, because the top-10 school has many greater opportunities and chose the recruit.

If 5 G5 schools offer, the recruit is not going to have a 5* ranking. If 5 top20 schools offer, he will be.

The ranking system is not perfect, but it provides fairly accurate numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stars are for entertainment purposes. Boise St walked into Atlanta and waxed Georgia who had 5 star players all over the place. Boise had better OL/DL and were pretty much better everywhere. Georgia went to the SEC title game that year.

 

Obviously a special team but still mostly 2-3 stars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Rocky frequently mentions the kids west of the Mississippi are frequently rated lower due to lack of exposure.  Any recruiting junky have any thoughts on that?

I have also noticed that ESPN and 24-7Sports will lower a recruit's rating if they flip from a P5 to G5 school and conversely raise a recruit's rating if they flip to a P5.  

24570143_BSUBACKGROUNDBANNERANDY1AWELCOME.png.5fa1e131a0fec4c26c0be2f4d0a420eb.png

망치를 가진 남자에게는, 모든것이 못처럼 보인다.

원숭이도 나무에서 떨어진다.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, (wyo)Ming the Merciless said:

We just had one of our commits flip to Nebraska this week and he gained a star. 2 ⭐️ for UW = 3⭐️ for the Huskers. Cause you know Nebraska would have offered if he wasn't a 3 ⭐️ Right?

Now you know why some P5 transfers can't even make a G5 starting lineup.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, since1670 said:

Those that complain about a 2* player becoming a 3* when another schools offers a recruit are not giving consideration to how the rankings work. If school-A is the only offer for a recruit and then school-B makes an offer, the ranking will be higher. More schools think the recruit has value.

It also matter who the sachools are. If Troy is the only offer and Ohio offers, the ranking will probably not increase much if any.

If a top-10 school is the second offer, the ranking will increase. Why, because the top-10 school has many greater opportunities and chose the recruit.

If 5 G5 schools offer, the recruit is not going to have a 5* ranking. If 5 top20 schools offer, he will be.

The ranking system is not perfect, but it provides fairly accurate numbers.

I think everyone agrees with you, and that is the problem with these rankings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, since1670 said:

Those that complain about a 2* player becoming a 3* when another schools offers a recruit are not giving consideration to how the rankings work. If school-A is the only offer for a recruit and then school-B makes an offer, the ranking will be higher. More schools think the recruit has value.

It also matter who the sachools are. If Troy is the only offer and Ohio offers, the ranking will probably not increase much if any.

If a top-10 school is the second offer, the ranking will increase. Why, because the top-10 school has many greater opportunities and chose the recruit.

If 5 G5 schools offer, the recruit is not going to have a 5* ranking. If 5 top20 schools offer, he will be.

The ranking system is not perfect, but it provides fairly accurate numbers.

Sure this is correct but it is also the definition of circular reasoning. These ranking have some value but mostly as composite measure, if you are pulling in a lot of kids that have 15-20 offers from power programs you are doing very well. Staffs that do their own evaluations and are confident in what they are looking for is a key for the success of smaller schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IanforHeisman said:

What offers they have is a better measuring stick.

That's not even a good measuring stick.  A lot of times kids get non-commitable offers from schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, k5james said:

That's not even a good measuring stick.  A lot of times kids get non-commitable offers from schools.

It's impossible to tell if they are though. A lot of times kids will get an offer in August but by December the spot is filled but they still list the offer.

 

ill take that over a 3 star kid with an offer from North Texas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NFL teams with scouting departments that probably have darn near unlimited budgets have trouble evaluating the cream of the crop of kids that have Several years of film on them in P5 conferences; but a bunch of guys watching highlight films on hudl and YouTube are going to accurately evaluate all the high school players in the country? No way. I mean don't get me wrong, they do a decent job and work really hard, but it's an impossible job. Just aren't enough hours in the day to do this job. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...