Let's see. Lots to expand on here.
#1 my experiences with these various professionals and services possibly make me a lil jaded. But I'm curious what you feel entitles someone (in the high school recruiting/rankings world)the ability to be called a professional. For example people like Andrew ivins & this Gaby kid and Furman & so on & so on they all work directly for these recruiting services and have a certain amount of input in where these kids are rated. I'd take issue with anyone who calls these people qualified professionals. It's like being charged with murder and your highly paid lawyer calling inspector gadget in for testimony as a expert witness... So while yes what you're seeing now is far more access to kids and their tapes as a result of social media etc you still have to measure it effectively. That comes as a result of individual staff evaluations. That's leads us into the next topic
#2 individual staff input that relates to offers. Schools pay these recruiting sights decent money for their evaluation/rankings just like they did previously to individuals. Many staffs to this moment throughout the country rely heavily on those lists in order to make their offers. The elite ones take it as intended and do their own evals to compound it with on top of the rest available. However you'd be surprised how many schools really don't bother with much beyond those rankings. Camps have taken on far more meaning in this process and that's how most make evals. But camps are all about testing and don't provide any context beyond that. Numbers in plenty of instances are generated by simply asking a kid a question and then recording an answer without any form of verification.
#3 you mention 247 and how it's a composite of 4 sites etc and many individuals which is a fair assessment. Problem with that is 3 of the 4 sites that go into those evals are owned by the same group of majority investors... You don't see a problem with that? I know for a fact that group of individuals has a very vested interest in how those rankings break down and I also know for a fact they are being paid handsomely as individuals who work for that company and as a company as a whole to inflate particular kids rankings. This is done annually and it's not even up for debate.
So beyond that I'll say I'm very much into the value of words. Everyone keeps speaking on 2024 results... Problem with that is there is zero results for 2024. That's my only issue. If we land Scott,Stewart etc and u guys are ecstatic now but they flip last second well what then? Cormani we were all ecstatic with and we know how that worked out. That's results. December early signing day well see results. Now it's all momentum based and we're reeling. But it's momentum. That's all.
I won't defend any of the individuals you listed as "qualified" to offer evaluations on recruits. They are at best professional social media writers, not professional football talent evaluators. They certainly have some say, but it is my understanding these services (or, at least most of them) retain scouts/evaluators to do most of the heavy lifting on the rankings. And, again, the offers play a big role.
On your second point, any staff relying exclusively on a list is being foolish. I'll take your word on it being more than I would expect. And I agree camps are limited and don't paint a full picture, but my point was more about getting more eyes on more recruits in 2023 versus 2003. It's just another data point that exists today.
No argument on common ownership and profits playing some role in evaluations. All the more reason not to take them as gospel. But I don't think you throw the baby out with the bathwater because of a few politically motivated decisions. For example, if Arch Manning is listed as the No. 1 overall recruit for "reasons" when he shouldn't even be a 5 star, that doesn't change my opinion on every other ranking. It does means I should look more closely at the recruit and the offer list, though.
As to your last point, we will probably have to agree to disagree to an extent. A verbal commitment can flip, but it usually doesn't. And so while getting signatures on ESD is the ultimate destination, it's also true you don't just wake up with them on ESD. A football game isn't over until the end of regulation, but if it's 28-7 halfway through the 3rd quarter, I think it's reasonable to be concerned about our chances of winning. Recognize there is still clock and things can change, but also that the trend is not positive. Speaking in absolutes is usually a good way to look foolish, and people should recognize this is fluid and things can change (just like in the game situation, it's not over until it's over).
