They SAY they watch lots of grainy footage on old school projectors and we take their word for it…got it. Analysts and directors are accountable for their success or lack therof. Their W-2’s serve as their RANKING. I quibble with your “years of success” as applied to nerds perusing high school all-star lists and designating which ones get the predetermined number of stars allowed. Football’s been around a long time and sorry…RECRUITING was a vital part of it. Long before this “specialty” carved out it’s role. Leach didn’t instantly jump from his law degree to Air Raid guru. He was RECRUITED to play football at BYU. Injuries derailed that and he played rugby instead. IN THE MEANTIME he practically lived in Lavell Edwards film room. You know Lavell Edwards? Pretty heady football guru if there ever was one. So at least six years of that direction and then 10 seasons COACHING at smaller institutions before Kentucky. Give me something even closely approximating that with these nerds and I’ll appreciate them. Not at your devoted sycophant level, of course. I don’t discount the usefulness of services. You get names for targets…that’s valuable. But the best coaching staffs work them out on their own grounds and devise their recruiting strategy from THAT. Bama, UGA, Clemson…Ohio State all included. Services are remora eels who subsist off that work product imo.
I'm certain there's plenty of guys with unimpressive W-2's working for UT and other athletic departments in scouting. Probably plenty of guys making 40k a year who work under our recruiting director. But that's not really the heart of the matter.
Yes, recruiting existed before any online service started ranking players. Not sure what you think that proves, but yes. I agree.
Yes, Leach (like all coaches for the most part) came up slow and likely improved over the years (the recruiting services have improved too). I know Edwards well. The West Coast and Air Raid were two of the first things I studied when I went into coaching over a decade ago.
Those nerds have been doing this for over 10 years and have been successful at it. You can't claim to not discount the usefulness of their services while openly mocking the services as nerds who don't know what they're doing.
Literally no one is saying that our staff or any other staff just follows 247.
You seem to be all over the place (W2s, staffs doing their own scoutings, etc) without ever getting to the heart of the argument. No one is arguing any of that. I don't care who makes more (I don't actually know either). I don't claim UT or anyone else just follows 247.
So now that we've wasted time on that nonsense, this is the heart of the debate. You believe in a conspiracy. The conspiracy is that the services just follow who Bama/Georgia (or input anyone else into your theory you prefer) offers and then gives guys higher ratings based on that. If that were true, why can I name numerous 3* players who have signed with those programs?