forums

Recruiting Rankings are Garbage

Liberty City El said:
The rankings aren't the problem, the problem is the fans.

Not all rankings sum up what a player is or will be, some 5-stars bust & some 3-stars outplay their ranking. Just because a player isn't ranked a 4-star doesn't mean he sucks & just because a prospect is ranked a 4-star doesn't mean he's good.

There are things that no recruiting site can predict about a player, like heart, desire to be great & work ethic. Your best bet is to stop worshipping rankings & trust your own eyes.

Not saying they don't matter, but people just set themselves up when they put too much stock in rankings.
Click to expand...
I just brought it up because I think it's an interesting topic. I think it does matter because so much is made out it by the media. We have people earning a living ranking kids. What happens is that it projects onto the school's perception of getting or not getting elite athletes. It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy because a kid sees that certain schools have so many highly ranked guys they are more likely to go to that school.
 

Advertisement
The way I look at a ranking is I look at a player's rating then I watch the film to see if they look like a player I would consider a 3, 4, or 5 star player.
 
Number1CanesFan said:
We all know how Miami recruits seem to be given rankings well below their ability and talent. Guys rated 3 stars, but have 10+ offers in which half are from elite schools. In my opinion, ESPN is the worst at ranking players. Like CMR said, "there are so many talented players in South Florida that a 3-star could be a 5-star anywhere else in the country." Translation: There are so many talented kids we can't give them all 4 and 5 stars.

Case in point, WDE Jahfari Harvey (Miami recruit) is rated as a 3-star prospect, 463rd best player, and 35th (247 Sports) at his position and NOT even listed in the top 100 DEs on ESPN''s recruiting website. Yet, he is the 59th best player in Florida. His 247 Composite ranking 652 nationally, 48th WDE, and 88th best in Florida. Wait a minute. That doesn't add up. Let's assume that each position on offense and defense takes up a spot in the rankings. That would mean in the state of Florida, of the 66 best players ( (11-Offense + 11-Defense) x 3 = 66), Harris would be the 3rd best WDE in Florida. Even as the 88th best player in Florida, he would be the 4th best WDE in the state of Florida. Your telling me that the 3rd or 4th best WDE in the whole state of Florida is a 3-star recruit? Worse yet, the 3rd best WDE in Florida is the 48th best WDE in the country? He has 19 D-1 offers including Miami, Georgia, Michigan, NC State, etc. I cry bull****!!!

Your thoughts on recruiting ranking in general? What players do you feel are underrated?
Click to expand...
My thoughts are that you shouldn't quit your day job, and definitely don't have a future in logic based professions.
 
canewave said:
I have long taken recruiting rankings with a grain of salt. A number of years ago I read an article reranking the ratings of the 1998 class which was largely the basis of the 2001 UM championship team. The Canes were originally ranked a composite 10th with Notre Dame and Texas at the top if my memory is correct. What actually happens to those classes on the field is what counts and it usually takes a few years to fully appreciate how good any class is.
Click to expand...

The rankings have come a long way since the 90s. If you look at 5 star recruits from the late 90s and early 2000s 50% of them ended up drafted. 5 star kids from 2010 to present had over 80% chance of being drafted. The services have hired a lot more people and pay better know. Just because they weren't accurate in the past doesn't mean you should still be biased today.
 
Advertisement
westcoastcanes said:
My thoughts are that you shouldn't quit your day job, and definitely don't have a future in logic based professions.
Click to expand...
I guess you can say that to CMR, because I quoted him. I also have a Master's degree in Engineering. You don't have to agree with me about rankings being garbage, but denying what I presented is nonsensical.
 
The rankings are incredibly accurate. All studies show that.
But it's way too early to be worried about the rankings. Half these 3* players will end up 4* by the time December rolls around.
 
Advertisement
Man star rankings are and are not accurate. Some players go to these events where they can be ranked or improve there rankings and there on field play back it up others have coaches handlers etc. PAY for there rankings dont be nieve and think this doesn't happen.. Trust the film vs quality of comp and let the film speak for itself.

Jordan Miller didn't have a ranking commited to Miami :15 min later a 3 🌟
 
mossmadness said:
The rankings are incredibly accurate. All studies show that.
But it's way too early to be worried about the rankings. Half these 3* players will end up 4* by the time December rolls around.
Click to expand...

Incredibly accurate for what?

For 5*? yes. But it's pretty easy to identify the top 30 players in the country. That's probably true out to the top 100-150

Its a lot more difficult to rank between say #250 and #750, even though that has a huge impact on where a team's recruiting ranking will fall
 
mossmadness said:
The rankings are incredibly accurate. All studies show that.
But it's way too early to be worried about the rankings. Half these 3* players will end up 4* by the time December rolls around.
Click to expand...

No they aren't how do you explain so many 3 🌟 in the early rounds of NFL draft
 
Number1CanesFan said:
I guess you can say that to CMR, because I quoted him. I also have a Master's degree in Engineering. You don't have to agree with me about rankings being garbage, but denying what I presented is nonsensical.
Click to expand...

My apologies then. I did not realize you had a masters in engineering. In that case I will take everything you say as 100% fact. All of the best recruiting coaches like Saban, Kirby, Meyer, Dabo, etc. have masters in engineering.
 
Advertisement
TheRichtShow said:
LSU, FSU, and Michigan were National title contenders last year according to that ratio. Exactly why people need to stop taking rankings as gospel. They're important, but they're not dispositive of how a team will perform

And why not just cut the list to Alabama, Ohio St, and Clemson alone. It's those 3, and everyone else
Click to expand...

Except FSU had one bad season and it was partly due to an injured starting QB and a coach who checked out. LSU has one of the worst head coaches in college football. Michigan is an outlier and people are begging to realize Harbough is a fraud.
 
Just use Derick Hunter as an example, how is a DL with these testing #s a 4*, top-200 guy?

From March: 6'3.5" 276
5.39/40, 5.16ss, 25.3 vert, 41 powerball
sparq score 78.54

I mean, that's a joke, especially for a position where physical ability is so important.
 
Advertisement
TheRichtShow said:
LSU, FSU, and Michigan were National title contenders last year according to that ratio. Exactly why people need to stop taking rankings as gospel. They're important, but they're not dispositive of how a team will perform

And why not just cut the list to Alabama, Ohio St, and Clemson alone. It's those 3, and everyone else
Click to expand...

How can this possibly be all you take from this article?

First of all, this is a strawman. No reasonable person takes rankings as "gospel." Yes sometimes low rated players out perform higher rated players. But over a representative sample of prospects the 4 and 5 stars will be better than the 3 and 2 stars.

Of course there will be outliers. There are always outliers. But...

"It boils down to teams that sign more four- and five-star recruits than two- and three-stars, over the previous four recruiting classes. That’s an exclusive club, usually consisting of the top 10 percent of FBS programs. All of the national champs over the last decade-plus have accomplished it, and often, the team taking home the trophy has signed many more elite players."

In order to win the national title you need to recruit more blue chip prospects than not. This has been proven time and time again. The year a team wins a national title without doing that then MAYBE we reconsider looking at rankings like this. But until then it is perfectly reasonable to take these rankings seriously.
 
TotesMagotes said:
How can this possibly be all you take from this article?

First of all, this is a strawman. No reasonable person takes rankings as "gospel." Yes sometimes low rated players out perform higher rated players. But over a representative sample of prospects the 4 and 5 stars will be better than the 3 and 2 stars.

Of course there will be outliers. There are always outliers. But...

"It boils down to teams that sign more four- and five-star recruits than two- and three-stars, over the previous four recruiting classes. That’s an exclusive club, usually consisting of the top 10 percent of FBS programs. All of the national champs over the last decade-plus have accomplished it, and often, the team taking home the trophy has signed many more elite players."

In order to win the national title you need to recruit more blue chip prospects than not. This has been proven time and time again. The year a team wins a national title without doing that then MAYBE we reconsider looking at rankings like this. But until then it is perfectly reasonable to take these rankings seriously.
Click to expand...

The problem is there are not just 1 or 2 outliers, there are always a lot.

The article could have just said to have a decent chance of winning the national title you have to recruit like Alabama (#1 class every year).

And recruiting rankings have only been around 20 years, so again, acting like it's been this way for the past 100 is just laughable. And even then, just look at our own history. The best string of classes we had was during Coker's tenure, and those 5* and high 4* players ended up sliding us to mediocrity.

It seems you are obssessed with the national title as the only barometer of success. But there is a ton a space between a national title and going 6-6. Recruiting rankings do an okay job of predicting that success, but they're far from being gospel
 
OriginalGatorHater said:
My apologies then. I did not realize you had a masters in engineering. In that case I will take everything you say as 100% fact. All of the best recruiting coaches like Saban, Kirby, Meyer, Dabo, etc. have masters in engineering.
Click to expand...
I can appreciate your sarcasm of me presenting 100% fact. However, what I present is an opinion based on the numbers that these recruiting services provide. I applied simple mathematical logic to what they present. I didn't make up the numbers. I simply applied logic to it. You can disagree with me, just don't insult my intelligence in the process.

The purpose of the thread is for expression of opinion on the recruiting rankings.

I view rankings as just a gauge for entertainment purposes the same way they have pre-season polls and polls throughout the season. The only poll that matters is the one the CFP Committee puts out in late October/early November.

The debate is whether these recuiting services are good at what they do.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Back
Top