I know many of you follow class recruiting rankings with anything from curiosity to fervor, and I have always maintained that the ranking services are guilty of putting too much weight on quantity in their rankings. I offer the following as more proof of my position.
But first, I want a disclaimer as regards the biased and fictional rankings of Espin, which, as no one understands, is still part of any composite ranking system. Rankings of schools in which Espin has no financial interest, are dragged down in the rankings by Espin, which is nothing more than a SEC propaganda machine. Now, on to my main point.
Using SC, because we all love SC, as the focal point, I will prove my point. SC: #11 with 14 signed or committed players, of which ONE is rated at 3*.
#4: PSU - 23 total - NINE 3*
#5 Miami - 21 total - 7 3*
#7: Oklahoma - 22 total and TEN 3*
#9: Notre Dame - 22 total - 11 3*
#13: WASHINGTON - 19 and 10 3*
#15: OREGON - 21 & 10 3*
#18: ucla - 18 with 10 3*
None of the above listed classes even approach SC's 4.+ class rating, yet four of them are ranked above SC as of today, and Washington and Oregon are ranked close because of quantity.
Not to diss 3* kids. These individual ratings are suspect in many cases, because of something as basic as eyeballing, and we know that some 3* kids become 4* or even 5* in the course of their college careers. But on average, a high * number for a class on a consistent basis, usually results in conference championships and beyond.
Alabama did not accomplish their current run on the backs of 3* classes. They combined quantity with quality, something SC is doing, except that the sanctions effected the amount of kids SC could bring in. But SC's classes have been among the highest, if not the highest, in quality, and have been denied the so-called #1 spot, solely on quantity.
But first, I want a disclaimer as regards the biased and fictional rankings of Espin, which, as no one understands, is still part of any composite ranking system. Rankings of schools in which Espin has no financial interest, are dragged down in the rankings by Espin, which is nothing more than a SEC propaganda machine. Now, on to my main point.
Using SC, because we all love SC, as the focal point, I will prove my point. SC: #11 with 14 signed or committed players, of which ONE is rated at 3*.
#4: PSU - 23 total - NINE 3*
#5 Miami - 21 total - 7 3*
#7: Oklahoma - 22 total and TEN 3*
#9: Notre Dame - 22 total - 11 3*
#13: WASHINGTON - 19 and 10 3*
#15: OREGON - 21 & 10 3*
#18: ucla - 18 with 10 3*
None of the above listed classes even approach SC's 4.+ class rating, yet four of them are ranked above SC as of today, and Washington and Oregon are ranked close because of quantity.
Not to diss 3* kids. These individual ratings are suspect in many cases, because of something as basic as eyeballing, and we know that some 3* kids become 4* or even 5* in the course of their college careers. But on average, a high * number for a class on a consistent basis, usually results in conference championships and beyond.
Alabama did not accomplish their current run on the backs of 3* classes. They combined quantity with quality, something SC is doing, except that the sanctions effected the amount of kids SC could bring in. But SC's classes have been among the highest, if not the highest, in quality, and have been denied the so-called #1 spot, solely on quantity.
