(01-27-2015 01:21 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 12:48 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 06:32 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 06:27 PM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 05:42 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  Rivals. I dont trust 247 at all when they have editors who have no inside connections. Plus, there is no reason a US Army All American should be a 3*.

247 is more legit then Rivals. Not that it really matters.

Not for Temple, it's not. Explain to me how someone with offers from Florida, Michigan State, Clemson, Duke, BC, Indiana, GA Tech, Louisville, Nebraska, Maryland, UNC, Northwestern, PSU, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, UVA, WVU, Wisconsin, Temple, UConn, Iowa, Purdue, and is an All American is a 3*?

Look there is no perfect science. Rivals and 247 was started by the same people where I live. 247 was started because Rivals was going down the tube and not putting in the work, amongst other issues.

End of the day, doesn't matter anyway.

Neither site really has the resources to slap a rating on a kid and make that rating comparable to a kid somewhere lose in the nation. Lots of Tulsa guys are just not evaluated on one site or the other. Tulsa has (probably) the best returning receiver on Keevan Lucas and he was a rivals two star who had two listed offers... Tulsa and La Tech .

Agree completely. A lot of guys will drop if they sign with a G5 school. There is a lot of bias, and most NFL guys are lower rated out of HS.

(01-26-2015 11:42 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 11:30 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  USF #1 as of now. Bring it home Willie.

Not for long. I know of 3 silent recruits that will put us head and shoulders above USF. Juuuuust wait.

It's gonna be awesome if we actually land all of the targets we think we are gonna get. If we do, definitely #1 class. All signs looking really good as of now. But its recruiting so I'd expect some surprises.

(01-26-2015 11:42 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 11:30 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  USF #1 as of now. Bring it home Willie.

Not for long. I know of 3 silent recruits that will put us head and shoulders above USF. Juuuuust wait.

USF has more scholarships to offer/sign in this class...as if/when they sign 4-5 more players than UCF...that will probably keep them at #1 for this class as every recruiting services gives credit/bonuses based on quantity signed (even over 25).

Of course...a real class rankings should always be which players actually enroll come August...but recruiting sites earn a majority of their $$$ that peaks on national signing day in Feb...even though August admissions are much more important than winning a battle on paper in Feb.

Taking out the three commits that aren't commits for Temple and the avg composite ranking jumps to 81.12. A solid 4th place at the moment...

Also, late commits tend to always have more "offers" listed and seem like better recruits. Temple always gets recruits that commit in the early summer that pick up offers that never show in their profiles because they are committed to Temple.

These sites are what they are...about subscription $$$$

(01-27-2015 09:42 AM)templefan1 Wrote:  Taking out the three commits that aren't commits for Temple and the avg composite ranking jumps to 81.12. A solid 4th place at the moment...

Also, late commits tend to always have more "offers" listed and seem like better recruits. Temple always gets recruits that commit in the early summer that pick up offers that never show in their profiles because they are committed to Temple.

These sites are what they are...about subscription $$$$

Yeah, but you act like this kind of stuff happens only to temple. This stuff happens at every school.

(01-27-2015 12:48 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  Rivals and 247 was started by the same people where I live. 247 was started because Rivals was going down the tube and not putting in the work, amongst other issues.

End of the day, doesn't matter anyway.

Wrong.

Rivals.com was sold to Yahoo back in 2007 for approx $100 Million...and those 2 former rivals.com founders had to wait 4 years with a non-compete clause before they could start up another "recruiting service website"...hence, 4 years later, those same 2 guys started 247.

The "hunger" for recruiting news online has exploded over the last 7-10 years...with scout, espn and 247 joining rivals in the mix.

Love the pissing contest. Everyone knows these rankings and stars are just opinions and mean nothing. Great for conversation but not much more. The facts usually happen in 2 or 3 years after these boys start turning into men, put weight/strength on and actually start playing in a real college game.

Until then we are trying to say someone is a stud when playing against high school players...99% of whom are not college level athletes themselves.

(01-26-2015 06:31 PM)DowdyPirate Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 05:42 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 05:33 PM)zfred12 Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 05:18 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  Temple is working on a 2nd 4*. Give us another day or two.

As far as I can see, UCF is the only school with a 4 star on 247. Are you talking about rivals 4 star?

Rivals. I dont trust 247 at all when they have editors who have no inside connections. Plus, there is no reason a US Army All American should be a 3*.

Inside connections? Like bribing dudes to boost your rating? 247 is far more fair, extensive, and accurate

This. Not even close. Rivals does a poor job outside the top 35 or 40 programs

(01-27-2015 10:11 AM)panama Wrote:  Not even close. Rivals does a poor job outside the top 35 or 40 programs

Depends on publisher/owner...same for every other recruiting services.

(01-27-2015 09:54 AM)isidnirb Wrote:  Love the pissing contest. Everyone knows these rankings and stars are just opinions and mean nothing. Great for conversation but not much more. The facts usually happen in 2 or 3 years after these boys start turning into men, put weight/strength on and actually start playing in a real college game.

Until then we are trying to say someone is a stud when playing against high school players...99% of whom are not college level athletes themselves.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football...on-defense

Quote:As a result, many of the prospects that Patterson targets come from small schools, previously played different positions or were considered undersized. Sometimes, it's all three.

Take former star Jerry Hughes, for instance. Considered a two-star prospect out of Fort Bend Austin in the 2006 class, Hughes was an oversized running back and All-District kick returner. But Patterson saw a future defensive end in Hughes, and molded him into a consensus All-American and first-round draft pick.

Current leading tackler Paul Dawson, a linebacker, has a similar story. Now listed at 6'2, 230 pounds, he was a 6', 190-pound wide receiver at state high school power Dallas Skyline with a sole offer from Colorado State before enrolling at Trinity Junior College in 2011 and then making his way to TCU. Now he's making game-changing plays like his interception return for a touchdown late against Oklahoma that helped the Horned Frogs upset the heavily-favored Sooners.

Second-leading tackler Marcus Mallett checks off the categories of receiving an early offer, being undersized and coming from a small school -- the Cleveland (Texas) product stands only 6'1 and chose the Horned Frogs just after National Signing Day in 2009 over offers from Baylor and Houston, though schools like Arkansas, Colorado, Oklahoma State and Wisconsin eventually began recruiting him.

Nickel back Sam Carter had offers from Baylor, Louisville, Miami and Oklahoma State as a dual-threat quarterback out of Alief (Texas) Hastings in the 2010 class, but committed to TCU and made the move to defense even though he was told during the recruiting process that he would have a chance to play quarterback.

Then there's junior safety Derrick Kindred, who started the last three games of last season and has two interceptions this year. He was a two-star recruit rated by only one service whose only other offer was from UTSA.

(01-27-2015 09:54 AM)isidnirb Wrote:  Love the pissing contest. Everyone knows these rankings and stars are just opinions and mean nothing. Great for conversation but not much more. The facts usually happen in 2 or 3 years after these boys start turning into men, put weight/strength on and actually start playing in a real college game.

Until then we are trying to say someone is a stud when playing against high school players...99% of whom are not college level athletes themselves.

The more opportunities to select top HS seniors increases the odds that those players will be better in 2 or 3 years then those who were deemed less talented or less size and speed in HS.

For example, the Alabamas of the college football world can afford to miss the "sleeper" stud since they have so many studs to begin with.

Sure, developing HS players in the system that fits them best, along with top notch coaching is the equalizer that G5 teams have going for them if they do their job well.

(01-27-2015 09:49 AM)zfred12 Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 09:42 AM)templefan1 Wrote:  Taking out the three commits that aren't commits for Temple and the avg composite ranking jumps to 81.12. A solid 4th place at the moment...

Also, late commits tend to always have more "offers" listed and seem like better recruits. Temple always gets recruits that commit in the early summer that pick up offers that never show in their profiles because they are committed to Temple.

These sites are what they are...about subscription $$$$

Yeah, but you act like this kind of stuff happens only to temple. This stuff happens at every school.

No I didn't...I was just using Temple as an example of why the rankings etc are sometimes flawed...

The fact is Temple only has one recruiting site that has a dedicated editor/staff that has connections to the program. IMO all the other websites for Temple are crap. As far as rankings go, the higher your subscription base, usually means upgrades with star rankings come signing day...

Computer rankings of college football recruits is so subjective. None of these kids have played one down as a college player. Once they play a full year, then let's rank them. Peace!

Memphis now ranked #72 nationally w/ one 4 star and thirteen 3 star recruits.

According to the 247 list the OP linked, UAB still has 3 commitments. That's what I call a solid verbal.

(01-27-2015 01:21 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 12:48 AM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 06:32 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 06:27 PM)tnzazz Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 05:42 PM)JHG722 Wrote:  Rivals. I dont trust 247 at all when they have editors who have no inside connections. Plus, there is no reason a US Army All American should be a 3*.

247 is more legit then Rivals. Not that it really matters.

Not for Temple, it's not. Explain to me how someone with offers from Florida, Michigan State, Clemson, Duke, BC, Indiana, GA Tech, Louisville, Nebraska, Maryland, UNC, Northwestern, PSU, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse, UVA, WVU, Wisconsin, Temple, UConn, Iowa, Purdue, and is an All American is a 3*?

Look there is no perfect science. Rivals and 247 was started by the same people where I live. 247 was started because Rivals was going down the tube and not putting in the work, amongst other issues.

End of the day, doesn't matter anyway.

Neither site really has the resources to slap a rating on a kid and make that rating comparable to a kid somewhere lose in the nation. Lots of Tulsa guys are just not evaluated on one site or the other. Tulsa has (probably) the best returning receiver on Keevan Lucas and he was a rivals two star who had two listed offers... Tulsa and La Tech .

We did get Lucas in, in December though because the bigger Texas schools started noticing him. I think if we hadn't gotten him in early Tech and Baylor both would have offered and we probably would have lost him.

(01-27-2015 12:01 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Memphis now ranked #72 nationally w/ one 4 star and thirteen 3 star recruits.

On rivals.com, they have Memphis with one 3 star recruit, and the other 20 recruits as 2 star or no star players.

https://rivals.yahoo.com/ucf/football/re...emphis-101

Talk about a huge difference between recruiting rankings.

NOTE: Rivals hasn't added the 3 star RB who has been committed to Fresno State to Memphis board as of yet but when they do, he will be the second 3 star recruit for Memphis out of their 22 verbals on rivals.

(01-27-2015 12:27 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 12:01 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Memphis now ranked #72 nationally w/ one 4 star and thirteen 3 star recruits.

On rivals.com, they have Memphis with one 3 star recruit, and the other 20 recruits as 2 star or no star players.

https://rivals.yahoo.com/ucf/football/re...emphis-101

Talk about a huge difference between recruiting rankings.

What's the deal with this kid since he was originally a class of 2014 recruit? How many years of eligibility does he have?

(01-27-2015 12:30 PM)zfred12 Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 12:27 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 12:01 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Memphis now ranked #72 nationally w/ one 4 star and thirteen 3 star recruits.

On rivals.com, they have Memphis with one 3 star recruit, and the other 20 recruits as 2 star or no star players.

https://rivals.yahoo.com/ucf/football/re...emphis-101

Talk about a huge difference between recruiting rankings.

What's the deal with this kid since he was originally a class of 2014 recruit? How many years of eligibility does he have?

What kid?

(01-27-2015 12:30 PM)zfred12 Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 12:27 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 12:01 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Memphis now ranked #72 nationally w/ one 4 star and thirteen 3 star recruits.

On rivals.com, they have Memphis with one 3 star recruit, and the other 20 recruits as 2 star or no star players.

https://rivals.yahoo.com/ucf/football/re...emphis-101

Talk about a huge difference between recruiting rankings.

What's the deal with this kid since he was originally a class of 2014 recruit? How many years of eligibility does he have?

He has 5 years to play 4. He went prep last year.