Explains, in part, why ESPN has Pitt's class lower rated than the others.
Irrespective of any of the ratings, I prefer to look at each Pitt class more broadly and longer term (as the Pitt coaches do) based on all newcomers (i.e., HS recruits, JUCOs, Grad Transfers and recruited preferred walk-ons) and how they fill needs both for immediate help in areas of need and for the longer term (i.e., athletic development players not expected to contribute for 1-3 years until after they are physically developed) and players who may provide extra longer-term depth (i.e., preferred walk-ons).
Many fans are, IMHO, too focused on which incoming freshmen will be immediate impact players when the reality is that most freshman (typically except for 4-5 star skill position players) need a minimum of a redshirt year before they will be ready to contribute beyond the scout team. IMO, the more quality depth at certain positions the less need their is to recruit immediate impact players at those positions. It is often also harder to sell a potential immediate impact player to come to your school if he plays a position which already has quality depth (unless you are a team like an Alabama or an Ohio State that can convince 4-5 star recruits to come in and wait their turn).
So, with the current Pitt recruiting cycle (including transfers), IMHO, we should focus on how we seem to have met (or not met) immediate and longer term needs for each position. It appears to me that the only position we may have fallen short at meeting the coaching staff's perceived needs (based on Narduzzi's presser remarks) is DE where we seemingly didn't land any immediate impact players only getting guys with athleticism and not yet filled out frames who wont provide immediate help (although they have potential to be very good by their redshirt sophmore or redshirt junior years when they have become physically men and are no longer physically HS kids).