Still #1 on rivals

#27
#27
Thrasher865 said:
We have the most commits in the nation. This means absolutely nothing. The only column that matters at this early stage is the average rating of our commits, which we fall behind a bunch of schools on.

We will probably wind up with a top 10 class, which is outstanding. I'm not trying to belittle what Butch has done at all. But there is almost no chance we wind up with the #1 class when all is said and done unless we land 2 or 3 5* recruits before it's all over.


Inb4 "negavol"
Click to expand...

Incorrect. Means a lot if advertised properly. If perception is reality, then a lot of kids, parents, high school coaches, etc. see Tennessee as the hot team due to being number 1 in the 2014 rankings. Very few people sit around and try to explain away as to why.

Besides a 5.5 3 star is way different than a 5.7 3 star. CBJ has brought in a lot of kids that had bog time offers from other schools, and to me that is more important than random guys who have never played or coached a down of football evaluating and grading talent.
 
#28
#28
sanddune50 said:
Incorrect. Means a lot if advertised properly. If perception is reality, then a lot of kids, parents, high school coaches, etc. see Tennessee as the hot team due to being number 1 in the 2014 rankings. Very few people sit around and try to explain away as to why.

Besides a 5.5 3 star is way different than a 5.7 3 star. CBJ has brought in a lot of kids that had bog time offers from other schools, and to me that is more important than random guys who have never played or coached a down of football evaluating and grading talent.
Click to expand...

You are correct. # of recruits does matter. Last year USC brought in 17 (i think) players. Now they were all 4-5* players, lots of skill there. Class ranked top 20. Just don't get injured, or this 4-5*s won't matter...no depth. Their * average was high...top 5 high IIRC. If # of players didn't matter they might have had the #1 class.

So at a time when quality depth is still in question for us, what better time could we be lined up to sign a huge class?
 
#29
#29
Not sure but I think Rivals only counts the top 20 recruits toward the total amount of points. So, any commitments after 20 don't count toward point total unless they are ranked higher than #20.
 
#30
#30
gatorhater5 said:
Not sure but I think Rivals only counts the top 20 recruits toward the total amount of points. So, any commitments after 20 don't count toward point total unless they are ranked higher than #20.
Click to expand...

the rivals rating (5.2-6.1 where you get points ranging from 15 to 150) only counts on the first 20 or best 20 i should say

now if you happened to have a class so good that you had more than 20 guys in the top 250 players in the country (unlikely) then for #21, 22, etc you would still get their bonus points for being in the top 250 even though you don't get points for the signing

since the limit is 25 you would think Rivals would have cut it off at 25 as opposed to 20 - kind of a random spot to cut it off imo
 
#31
#31
SCvol333 said:
the rivals rating (5.2-6.1 where you get points ranging from 15 to 150) only counts on the first 20 or best 20 i should say

now if you happened to have a class so good that you had more than 20 guys in the top 250 players in the country (unlikely) then for #21, 22, etc you would still get their bonus points for being in the top 250 even though you don't get points for the signing

since the limit is 25 you would think Rivals would have cut it off at 25 as opposed to 20 - kind of a random spot to cut it off imo
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up. Also, the 25 limit is only for SEC teams. It doesn't apply to the rest of the conferences. Each conference has its own policy but I don't think there is a 25 limit in the other conferences.
 
#32
#32
gatorhater5 said:
Thanks for clearing that up. Also, the 25 limit is only for SEC teams. It doesn't apply to the rest of the conferences. Each conference has its own policy but I don't think there is a 25 limit in the other conferences.
Click to expand...

you are right that it is a SEC rule - but the SEC was by far the worst at oversigning which led to that rule so 25 seemed like a good # to cap it at - you will see a handful of schools each year go over 25 but not too many

when you account for attrition and for jucos only having 2 years usually 20 just doesnt seem like a lot - after 4 years of 20 with no attrition, no jucos, and no redshirting you would be under the 85 limit

when you factor in the jucos and attrition if you don't get 23-25 a class you will not stay at your 85 limit

so i would give teams credit for the first 25 instead of 20 if I were doing the rankings - jmo though
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#33
#33
2010 - 25
2011 - 27
2012 - 21
2013 - 21

just as an example - here are our classes over the last 4 years - 94 signed, 23.5 per year, yet we are under 85 and will be adding a 25+ class this year after current guys graduate

just imagine if we only got 20 each of those years
 
#34
#34
I agree with you, and 25 is probably a better metric anyways because most teams sign more than 20. However, trying to get Rivals to do something is like pulling teeth.
 
#35
#35
SCvol333 said:
you are right that it is a SEC rule - but the SEC was by far the worst at oversigning which led to that rule so 25 seemed like a good # to cap it at - you will see a handful of schools each year go over 25 but not too many

when you account for attrition and for jucos only having 2 years usually 20 just doesnt seem like a lot - after 4 years of 20 with no attrition, no jucos, and no redshirting you would be under the 85 limit

when you factor in the jucos and attrition if you don't get 23-25 a class you will not stay at your 85 limit

so i would give teams credit for the first 25 instead of 20 if I were doing the rankings - jmo though
Click to expand...


Your last statement kinda goes with what my last post meant. Again, USC. They had a high star ranking last year, but didn't have quantity. Two years down the road they are screwed if they get injured. They have absolutely zero depth, but hey...I mean they had a high star ranking. Where as UT might not have the highest * rating. But if we sign 31 players this year it will be a program changing class...to the good. A class like USC's could be program changing for the bad. Lack of depth is crippling, Tennessee fans should know.

So I agree with you...not counting past 20 IMO makes zero sense and is a flaw in their precious little system.
 
#36
#36
If we win the recruiting series battle we get the commits and then the touchdowns and wins that's all how it adds up

Go vols
 
#37
#37
I was wrong...USC had 12 commits, I said 17.

Point being, USC had 12 commits. 5 5*s, 7 4*s for a total of 2193 points and a 4.42* average, giving them the 13th ranked class.

Ranked 12 was UGA with 2226 points, a 3.48* average, 16 4*s and 17 3*s. 33 total players

Ranked 11 was A&M with 2332 points, a 3.45 average, 15 4*s and 15 3*s. 31 total players

Now I know USC signed 5 5*s and all. But 12 players overall? They got credit for there's why UGA and A&M got cut off at 20 (if I understand this correctly). While I like 5*s and all, I'd take UGA or A&M's class 10 times over before I would touch USC's. But the rankings show they are basically all three on an even playing field.
 
Last edited:
#38
#38
RichRollin said:
I was wrong...USC had 12 commits, I said 17.

Point being, USC had 12 commits. 5 5*s, 7 4*s for a total of 2193 points and a 4.42* average, giving them the 13th ranked class.

Ranked 12 was UGA with 2226 points, a 3.48* average, 16 4*s and 17 3*s. 33 total players

Ranked 11 was A&M with 2332 points, a 3.45 average, 15 4*s and 15 3*s. 31 total players

Now I know USC signed 5 5*s and all. But 12 players overall? They got credit for there's why UGA and A&M got cut off at 20 (if I understand this correctly). While I like 5*s and all, I'd take UGA or A&M's class 10 times over before I would touch USC's. But the rankings show they are basically all three on an even playing field.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Tee lost both of his crowned jewels in Jason Hatcher and Jalen Ramsey.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#42
#42
RichRollin said:
Your last statement kinda goes with what my last post meant. Again, USC. They had a high star ranking last year, but didn't have quantity. Two years down the road they are screwed if they get injured. They have absolutely zero depth, but hey...I mean they had a high star ranking. Where as UT might not have the highest * rating. But if we sign 31 players this year it will be a program changing class...to the good. A class like USC's could be program changing for the bad. Lack of depth is crippling, Tennessee fans should know.

So I agree with you...not counting past 20 IMO makes zero sense and is a flaw in their precious little system.
Click to expand...

yes it does - 12 can really cripple a program as recruiting is just not an exact science - I know they were under limitations but Kiffin failed to understand how important signing a deep class was when he was here as well

between not signing the full amount and then running several players off he ended up getting us into a situation where we were much farther below 85 than we needed to be
 
#43
#43
SCvol333 said:
yes it does - 12 can really cripple a program as recruiting is just not an exact science - I know they were under limitations but Kiffin failed to understand how important signing a deep class was when he was here as well

between not signing the full amount and then running several players off he ended up getting us into a situation where we were much farther below 85 than we needed to be
Click to expand...

Spot on.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top