A look Back On 2012 Recruiting Class

[chatt-townVOL]

Originally Posted by FTCvol

Why, exactly, don't they count?

Going pro. Didn't drop out as "busts" like the others

[govols74n]

Originally Posted by Vol-in-Atlanta

But, I have to admit - I was really fooled by Dooley. I thought he was the guy.

Bwaaahahahahaha....
You, my friend, are very funny.

[voldawgforever]

Originally Posted by AshG

If you offer Alabama as proof to your argument, then I must offer USC for mine. Coaching is the biggest reason for the performance of both teams; not rankings provided by an external system. If your thesis held true, then Texas, Auburn, and USC should also have seen significantly higher rankings through the season.

Sir, you needs lots of 4 & 5 stars, and good coaching, to win championships.

I offered Alabama, and NOT Usc, for obvious reasons. Yes?

[AshG]

Originally Posted by voldawgforever

Sir, you needs lots of 4 & 5 stars who actually perform at the expected level, and good coaching, to win championships.

FYP.

How many potential 4 and 5 star players have been absolute busts? How many 3 star recruits have outperformed their recruiting rankings during the season and seen play time above their better marketed fellow athletes?

If these magazines and services offered a follow-up and actually compared rankings over time on a player-by-player and team-by-team basis, I might actually care for what they have to say. The fact that they leave these important metrics out tells me what they're about - subscriptions, sells, and site hits.

We're not going to come to a consensus on this topic, so I'll just bow out and leave it be. Sir.

[Titan&Volfan4life]

If all the overhype of class rankings and star ranking BS actually meant so much on the field then there's zero doubt that Texas and USC should play and become much higher ranked teams at the end of the season considering they've been top ranked recruiter/ high star gatherers for many years but reality shows FAILURE on the field despite all the future stars they have all over their rosters.

I agree this is all more BS that's created for marketing to simply make them more $$$$$.

VFL...GBO!!!

[voldawgforever]

Originally Posted by AshG

FYP.

How many potential 4 and 5 star players have been absolute busts? How many 3 star recruits have outperformed their recruiting rankings during the season and seen play time above their better marketed fellow athletes?

If these magazines and services offered a follow-up and actually compared rankings over time on a player-by-player and team-by-team basis, I might actually care for what they have to say. The fact that they leave these important metrics out tells me what they're about - subscriptions, sells, and site hits.

We're not going to come to a consensus on this topic, so I'll just bow out and leave it be. Sir.

It's an argument that originated in 275BC. Gladiators were ranked by Espn and Rivals. Spiculus was a 5*, while Spartacus was a mere 3*.

We ALL know how that worked out.

*Both had REAL girlfriends. IMOJMOTIFWIWBBQsRKEWL

[99gator]

Originally Posted by Titan&Volfan4life

If all the overhype of class rankings and star ranking BS actually meant so much on the field then there's zero doubt that Texas and USC should play and become much higher ranked teams at the end of the season considering they've been top ranked recruiter/ high star gatherers for many years but reality shows FAILURE on the field despite all the future stars they have all over their rosters.

I agree this is all more BS that's created for marketing to simply make them more $$$$$.

VFL...GBO!!!

Provide a list of teams that win despite getting out recruited by the competition they play on a regular basis.

It's a short list. Boise state and virginia tech out recruit most of the competition they play regularly.

Wisconsin is about it. Oregon too.

Everyone else pulls in a top 2 or 3 class in their league on a regular basis

[Bluetic]

Here we go...