Class ranking recruit nonsense

[dbricker]

Have stated many times, recruiting news etc is a purely a money making biz. ESPN has psu ranked 13 (out of 40), Pitt is nowhere. According to Dokish, "Penn State has approached at least Rashad Wheeler, Maurice Ffrench, Therran Coleman, Bryce Hargrove, and Phil Campbell to see if they were interested. All turned them down. They were also trying to land Amir Watts and Camp. That didn't work either."

Love his sarcasm, and knowledge.

So, we have 5 4-star guys, psu has 6, and we have 2 2-star guys, so the class isn't even top 40? Does that make sense to anyone? Espn does not show points total (and all of this is nearly meaningless anyway!), so there must be a very tiny number of "points" that separate all those teams.

Is Rivals any better? It seems it is, somewhat: I checked the average score for 19 recruits, w/o the two 2 stars, and it is 3.26 (same as NCarolina). For Rivals psu is 24th, Pitt 29th (tied with mighty USC, although they only have 13 recruits currently), so if we get 2-3 more guys, it will be a "TOP 25 class" blah de blah. Still cool, but with all these kids, the truth of their talent is unkown.

 

[Dr. von Yinzer]

They can't even tell you what they're ranking. Are they ranking the players based on their current abilities or are they projecting how good these players will be at some undetermined date in the future? Also, we don't even know what systems or even what POSITIONS half the players will play?

Those are some pretty damn big factors, right?

Now consider the fact that we don't even do this with the guys who we actually see play.

For example, who is the best offensive guard in the country playing college football right now? Who is the 73rd best OG in CFB? Who is the 194th best guard in college football? If we can't determine with any degree of certainty who the best players are among the guys we actually see play how could anyone possibly do it with guys we haven't seen play or who we have only seen play sparingly?

It literally defies common sense. You might as well watch the Chronicles of Narnia because it has a greater relationship with reality than a lot of this recruiting hocus pocus.

However, that's not the problem. The problem is that people tend to take these lists far too seriously and way too literally.

You really should treat these things like you would whenever one of the local rock stations plays the Top 100 Rock Songs of All Time.

It's all meant in fun and a celebration of all the great rock songs recorded over the years. It doesn't make any sense to get hung up on whether or not Stairway to Heaven is ranked third and Hotel California is ranked fourth. The point is they are both great songs and worthy of celebrating. Recruiting rankings are every bit as inexact and taking them literally is every bit as ridiculous.

 

[OriginalEther]

Your rants are kind of funny, given how a not particularly liked poster here has recently said that he won't subscribe to this site any more until Pitt recruits better/is ranked higher.

Pitt will never be consistently ranked high on these sites just because they're not going to have the subscriber volume.

 

[CaptainSidneyReilly]

I outlined above a comparison of PITT, PSU, & WVU Rival Recruiting Rankings, and the Great Players that came out of Pitt since 2002 Rankings.

I like the Recruits & Players got right now and know Coach Pat & Staff should be delighted with all their Hard Work, in their First Full year of Recruiting? A Top 25 to 35 Class is not bad for the First Year? Pitt still has many vacancies in the Athletic Department! Barnes is fixing that too!