Rivals Rankings...WTF?

#76
#76
At the end of the day, all that really matters is how the class performs over four years so we won't know the answer to how good this class is until the end of 2017. Each of these rating systems jockey for attention from college football fans like us but regardless of the system used, each one only is a subjective assessment. The enduring test is wins on the field. Coaches earn big bucks for being able to better assess talent than these rating systems. So as long as we have confidence in the coaches to know the talent required for each position, ensure that we have the players for each position, and how to coach them up to play as a team to win ball games, it really shouldn't matter where we rank, whether 2, 5, 9, etc. Probably the only thing we all can agree on this board is that this class appears to have the qualities to be something really special, the Brick by Brick foundation to Rise to the Top. Time will tell.
 
#77
#77
TVA said:
From the beginning of Rivals explanation:

Rivals Rating (RR) Scale (Top 20 rated commitments)

(Rivals Rating = Points)

6.1 = 150 points
6.0 = 135 points
5.9 = 120 points
5.8 = 105 points
5.7 = 90 points
5.6 = 75 points
5.5 = 60 points
5.4 = 45 points
5.3 = 30 points
5.2 = 15 points

How many Top 20 commits are ranked at 5.2?
Click to expand...

I don't know....go ask on the Vandy boards. :peace2:
 
#79
#79
This is why I pay little attention to the recruiting rankings. Out of every class, there are some huge busts with 5 stars, and there are lower rated guys who take the world by storm. Just seems foolish for someone to get their panties in a bunch over it.
 
#80
#80
madbamahater said:
Recruiting sites are pointless. I do look at them to see the players UT has verbals from and who they are targeting. That's about all they are good for

Some of the classes that Fulmer signed and then flopped (largely his fault, but still...) were top 5 in the country. Know what I mean? So I've always taken those sites with a grain of salt.

Then they lost all legitimacy to me after Kiffins class. None of those kids amounted to squat compared to what they were hyped to be....
Click to expand...

Not sure that all of the blame for their failure to produce was entirely their fault. They came into a real "fubar" situation and certainly did not receive the best of coaching for their 4 years.
 
#81
#81
Rankings do not matter. What matters is if you would trade this class for either TAM or OSU. We need bodies to fill a depleted roster and the higher # of recruits, although may bring our average down, is what we need NOW. Bottom line we end up with more 4 & 5 stars and fill needed spots with some other talent that can be developed.

Be happy. Very impressive that we are wrapping up as high as we are in rankings given our recent history. Much more remarkable of a feat that a big name like Urban 'fake an illness' Cryer w/ 2 national championships pulling in a team with slightly higher rivals score.

Expect we will not be able to have as many recruits next year for sure. Proof of Butch's staff's recruiting ability is if they can have a repeat top 5 class next year. If they can, then expect us to have a very productive 2015 on the field.

So far I am impressed. This whole recruiting ranking thing is as subjective as scoring figure skating in the Olympics. Let it play out on the field where the points really matter.

Tennessee will be getting some kudos and free media on NSD. All is good Vol fans. Sleep well.
 
Last edited:
#82
#82
VOLorNuttin said:
They have Ohio State at #2 and us at #4....ok let's do some math, here.

Tennessee has 2 Five Star commits/signees + 15 Four Star commits/signees

Ohio State has 1 Five Star and 12 Four Stars

Go figure! They have 22 commits. We have 33! WTF, over? We get penalized because WE HAVE MORE 3*s?...simply because it brings our average down? How much sense does that effectively make? If we have more blue chip players than they do...and A&M, too...and have more 3* athletes...that benefits US, not them!!!

These recruiting ranking really are a farce.
Click to expand...

I agree it messed up how they figure these rankings up
 
#83
#83
I'm willing to bet the OP didn't have any problem with Rivals ranking system when UT was ranked #1 or #2. But now there's a problem!

The real rankings that matter won't be seen until 2016-17 when they're upper classmen and playing the games on the field and not on paper/computer.
 
#86
#86
Has anyone started a "Real Clear Recruiting" site that takes the poll of the polls or in this case a ranking of the rankings?
 
#87
#87
VOLorNuttin said:
They have Ohio State at #2 and us at #4....ok let's do some math, here.

Tennessee has 2 Five Star commits/signees + 15 Four Star commits/signees

Ohio State has 1 Five Star and 12 Four Stars

Go figure! They have 22 commits. We have 33! WTF, over? We get penalized because WE HAVE MORE 3*s?...simply because it brings our average down? How much sense does that effectively make? If we have more blue chip players than they do...and A&M, too...and have more 3* athletes...that benefits US, not them!!!

These recruiting ranking really are a farce.
Click to expand...

It definitely doesn't make sense. But...who cares? This is the first time in several years where it looks like UT is getting both quality and quantity.

The biggest recruiting story, at the end of the day, will be how (and if) the Vols get 34 new players on the roster within the confines of the rules.

I suspect that, in the aftermath, the NCAA will make some rule changes. Whatever they come up with to inhibit a class size of 34 or 35 will probably be called the "Butch Rule"

(Won't it be cool to finally have a new rule named for one of our coaches after they did something monumentally beneficial for the program, as opposed to getting screwed over?)
 
#88
#88
Doesn't matter. OSU still sucks. Looks to be a damned good class, filling a lot of needs and having depth. Just enjoy it.
 
#90
#90
Orange Bison said:
Why don't you string together a coherent sentence before you call out another poster's stupidity.
Click to expand...

He said "are" class is good...whutcha want?...a doctoral dissertation? :geek:
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#91
#91
VOLorNuttin said:
No...that wouldn't be enough to overcome the fact that we have one more 5*s and 3 more 4*s. It's because our higher number of 3*s pulls the overall percentage down.

It should be based on the SUM of all the numbers....not an average. It should be based exclusively on the basis of how much talent is an entire class bringing in. An average doesn't mean squat to a coach. Sheer #'s do.

More 5*s. More 4*s. More 3*s....game over.
Click to expand...

So we are trying to state the obvious and everyone gets it except Rivals. I mentioned this last night that WTH, we get a 4* commit and dropped to 4th. Doesn't make sense and I really never put much stock in those idiots anyway. I always look at who we have and who wanted them! That tells me allot about the type of recruit the kid is. Nothing else really matters!

:good!:

Tennesseeduke
 
#92
#92
Volunteer_Kirby said:
qKOQz.gif
Click to expand...

I don't know about all this recruiting stuff, but you get one huge 'like' for this. I don't know why, but every time I see it, I can't stop laughing. My family thinks I'm crazy. Hope she's ok.
 
#93
#93
GBO97 said:
Screw rivals. Their ranking isn't all that important, our class this year is still amazing whether it's rated #2, #4, or #50 by recruiting services.
Click to expand...
Yeah...I just looked at Scout. And they seem to calculate differently. Basically, we get points based on the number of 5, 4, and 3*s we have collectively. That puts us ahead of a few teams that have more 5*s than we do.

In fact, we are pretty close to TAM in 5-4 star commits, but we are WAY ahead of them in # of 3*s and that puts us over the top.

Scout.com: Football Recruiting

I don't think it matters a whole lot, whether we are rated 1 or 5, but it does seem to have a bearing on how this program is viewed publicly, by the media (they always talked about CBJ's No.2 recruiting class during the games, this year), recruits and fans.

I see how important "perception" is in the software industry (namely Computer Graphics, in my case). Many people simply won't give a good piece of software the time of day, if there isn't a lot of hype and marketing to drive some buzz about it.

So, in recruiting circles...coming away with a No.2 class rather than lets say No.8, carries a certain amount of momentum with it. It did for FSU. They were in the doldrums much like we were....but they started killing it in recruiting. A few years of that and look what happened.
 
#94
#94
Cartervol said:
This class will end up somewhere between 5-8. I fully expect LSU and maybe Florida to pass us as well. Top ten class 5 or 6th in the SEC. That's why it's the toughest conference out there.. A&M i'm not worried about.. For some reason all the recruiting services think Texas talent is the best. I think it's overrated.. Georgia may make a late move also.. Not going to be a top 5 class after all.. Still going to be very good considering where we've been over the last 5 or 6 years..
Click to expand...

Give yourself a deserved pat on the back, well sort of since you samy will end up between 5-8 then later say not a top 5? Close enough though.
 
Last edited:
#95
#95
MWAVolfan said:
Please understand the ranking rules before commenting.

They only count the top 20 guys per class. This way a team with 33 recruits dont get counted higher than a school with 21 recruits. Typically the number of recruits you have is a function of how many spots you have open, not a measure of how many kids want to go to your school (unless your name is Derek Dooley).

Next, the caliber of player going to Ohio State is higher than the players going to UT. You say things like "we have this many 5* and 4* and they only have this many. But the reality is that the sum total of their 20 best recruits is better than ours.

Put it in perspective, you bash Rivals.com, yet they have us ranked higher than both 247sports and ESPN. Rivals says we have 2 5* players and other recruiting rankings say that we have ZERO 5* players. So, not all 5* or 4* players are equal. Also, some recruiting rankings go by what your rank is for your position. So if you have two 4* running backs, but one is considered the #1 RB and the other is considered the #10 running back, the #1 running back will be much more highly valued from a points perspective, even though they both count as a 4* player.

Its not bias and its not hate, its just simple math.

We have a good recruiting class when compared to other schools, and a great recruiting class by UT standards. There has been a ton of hype, but the final rankings will put this class in its proper place. I think UT wont finish in the top 10 unless butch gets one or two more really highly ranked players (like top 50 in the nation players).
Click to expand...

How did the simple math go wrong as no top 50 players were added?
 
#96
#96
Go figure not all 4 stars are equal. A marginal 4 star should not count as much as the guy who is a 4 star on the cusp of being a 5 star.

Look at the rival ranking number for a quick guestimation of where a player is ranked. Anywhere from 5.8 - 6.0 is 4 star, but obviously the 6.0 guys are ranked higher.

Average RR ranking for tOSU - 5.8261 UT - 5.7806
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top