Talent of the rest of the SEC has also increased to the Conference has come one of the worst in College basketball to one of the best.I agree...but we also can't assume that we're in a vacuum on talent level in SEC. Barnes crept up on every one two years ago...but talent across the board continues to get better and better, matching the better coaches being hired by most all SEC schools. It's going to get tougher and tougher. I really like where Barnes has brought the team, on the shoulders of lower rated, but well developed players...however, you get to the post season, and you start to see where teams like Auburn and KY had superior athlete depth, which paid off. We need to keep pace, but just think, unless Grant and/or Bone comes back, we're probably looking at a 4-6th finish in SEC next year, unless something changes with another addition or two (when Grant/Bone declare). We aren't going to be able to bang away at everyone w/ Admiral and probably Grant gone, and we don't have an outstanding perimeter game, as it stands right now. We aren't devoid of talent, but Barnes has his work cut out for him.
Barnes doesn't play defense. These guys were lazy to many times on defense.Barnes underachieved in the NCAAT in back-to-back years. Should have gone at least to Sweet 16 previous season and Elite 8 this past season. Barnes has historically not done well in the NCAAT. That has always been a knock on him.
Except we just had the best 2 year run in program history with a roster primarily made up of 3 stars, hmmm.
Honest question, would you rather Barnes have a bunch of 4&5 stars like his late years at Texas and be winning 20-24 games a year and getting bounced in the first or second rounds??? Or winning 30 games and making the S16?
My point being if his model is producing results I’m not sure why we ask him to change it?
as pointed out above your math needs a lot of work153+150= 303/2= 110
See how easy that was.
as pointed out above your math needs a lot of work
the 24/7 composite looks at a number of rankings not just 247/espn and scout
from 247 site
The 247Sports Composite Rating is a proprietary algorithm that compiles prospect "rankings" and "ratings" listed in the public domain by the major media recruiting services. It converts average industry ranks and ratings into a linear composite index capping at 1.0000, which indicates a consensus No. 1 prospect across all services.
The 247Sports Composite Rating is the industry's most comprehensive and unbiased prospect ranking and is also used to generate 247Sports Team Recruiting Rankings.
All major media services share an equal percentage in the 247Sports Composite Rating.
Wow...there’s clearly a glitch in his composite ranking then
From personal experience in the metrics industry (I'm a server admin for a company that uses metrics of this sort but in the financial realm) their other sources likely come from the exact opposite of billy jo bob sites. There are more "pro" level scouting services out there that me and you don't have visibility on behind paywalls. These are the sources that Universities and pro teams are looking at for their reports.Yes we have all read this.
The question is “what sites are giving these rankings?” If rivals has at 150, and 247 has at 153.........then some unheard of site has him at what #33 in the country?
Even if they were using 10 other “billy jo bob” sites then all 10 of them would have to have him ranked at like 100..........that’s some 50 spots better than rivals and 247 (known trusted sites).
as pointed out above your math needs a lot of work
the 24/7 composite looks at a number of rankings not just 247/espn and scout
from 247 site
The 247Sports Composite Rating is a proprietary algorithm that compiles prospect "rankings" and "ratings" listed in the public domain by the major media recruiting services. It converts average industry ranks and ratings into a linear composite index capping at 1.0000, which indicates a consensus No. 1 prospect across all services.
The 247Sports Composite Rating is the industry's most comprehensive and unbiased prospect ranking and is also used to generate 247Sports Team Recruiting Rankings.
All major media services share an equal percentage in the 247Sports Composite Rating.
From personal experience in the metrics industry (I'm a server admin for a company that uses metrics of this sort but in the financial realm) their other sources likely come from the exact opposite of billy jo bob sites. There are more "pro" level scouting services out there that me and you don't have visibility on behind paywalls. These are the sources that Universities and pro teams are looking at for their reports.
By averaging them out it gives a more usable number as each site will have logistical issues getting info on every prospect. giving the public visibility of these sources in most cases is not productive. But as an example if you look back historically on the 247 composite even compared to 247's own rankings its more accurate than the others because it takes them all into account and corrects a lot of regional bias. but like any of the charts the further u get from that top 10 or so the more inaccurate its gonna be. The more data points u have the more accurate the list gets but always the further down the list u go the more drift you have.
If you got together a room of for instance 1000 NFL fans and asked them to all list all teams in order by record from last season very few of them would get it right. Aggregate all 1000 and chances are the final list will be correct.