|
Post by aztec11 on Jun 4, 2013 13:20:42 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jun 4, 2013 13:27:28 GMT -8
Rice is up there as well?
|
|
|
Post by Old School on Jun 4, 2013 13:39:43 GMT -8
Gaining ground on USC, they usually get the Cream of the Crop 5 star kids, or have times changed?
Oldie Out
|
|
|
Post by GothamCityRogue on Jun 4, 2013 14:35:44 GMT -8
Gaining ground on USC, they usually get the Cream of the Crop 5 star kids, or have times changed? Oldie Out SC is still being prudent their schollies. They no longer bowl band, but they're still on scholly reduction from the sanctions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2013 8:32:50 GMT -8
Rice is up there as well? I would hope that, at some point, 247Sports will break free from the tendency of its predecessors, Rivals and Scout, to skew team rankings by overemphasizing quantity. Rice looks really good right now because they have 10 verbals. However, 247 rates Rice's average recruit as having a value of 79.3. In contrast, our eight have an average value of 82.3.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 5, 2013 12:04:34 GMT -8
Rice is up there as well? I would hope that, at some point, 247Sports will break free from the tendency of its predecessors, Rivals and Scout, to skew team rankings by overemphasizing quantity. Rice looks really good right now because they have 10 verbals. However, 247 rates Rice's average recruit as having a value of 79.3. In contrast, our eight have an average value of 82.3. What they should do is assume every team gets 25 recruits and give teams 8 points for unused ones. Examples: Rice 10 recruits 87.3 points. 15 unused * 8 points = 120 points = 207.3 Miss State 6 recruits 86.33 points. 19 unused * 8 points = 152 points = 238.33 points In the current method Rice is above Mississippi State but Rice would love to trade their 10 recruits for MSU's 6 recruits. The 7/24 rating doesn't accuratly reflect that reality. In the new rating SDSU is #59 and USC is #24. It is a better rating because Average gives no credit for count and Points gives too much credit for count. This rating adjusts for count in a real world way. Below is the top 100 in order of my proposed rating system. 7/24 Rating | New Rating | Team | Recruits | 7/24 Points | New Points | 1 | 1 | Texas A&M | 12 | 223.78 | 327.78 | 2 | 2 | Michigan | 12 | 212.7 | 316.7 | 5 | 3 | Notre Dame | 10 | 191.4 | 311.4 | 7 | 4 | Alabama | 9 | 179.18 | 307.18 | 9 | 5 | LSU | 9 | 175.95 | 303.95 | 6 | 6 | Clemson | 10 | 180.54 | 300.54 | 10 | 7 | Ohio State | 9 | 171.17 | 299.17 | 8 | 8 | Florida State | 10 | 178.62 | 298.62 | 4 | 9 | Texas | 14 | 207.15 | 295.15 | 12 | 10 | Auburn | 9 | 164.62 | 292.62 | 15 | 11 | Miami | 8 | 153.91 | 289.91 | 3 | 12 | Tennessee | 15 | 209.1 | 289.1 | 17 | 13 | Florida | 8 | 150.86 | 286.86 | 14 | 14 | Ole Miss | 11 | 162.65 | 274.65 | 18 | 15 | Penn State | 10 | 149.53 | 269.53 | 22 | 16 | Virginia Tech | 9 | 139.7 | 267.7 | 20 | 17 | Kentucky | 10 | 147.14 | 267.14 | 24 | 18 | Oklahoma | 8 | 130.75 | 266.75 | 31 | 19 | Georgia | 5 | 106.41 | 266.41 | 16 | 20 | Northwestern | 11 | 153.49 | 265.49 | 26 | 21 | Vanderbilt | 8 | 123.99 | 259.99 | 32 | 22 | Wisconsin | 6 | 105.79 | 257.79 | 27 | 23 | Michigan State | 8 | 121.66 | 257.66 | 34 | 24 | USC | 5 | 96.13 | 256.13 | 28 | 25 | North Carolina | 8 | 117.87 | 253.87 | 13 | 26 | Baylor | 14 | 163.59 | 251.59 | 33 | 27 | Virginia | 6 | 99.29 | 251.29 | 38 | 28 | Oklahoma State | 5 | 88.16 | 248.16 | 21 | 29 | Texas Tech | 12 | 142.61 | 246.61 | 11 | 30 | Louisville | 15 | 166.29 | 246.29 | 35 | 31 | TCU | 6 | 94.27 | 246.27 | 25 | 32 | Duke | 10 | 124.85 | 244.85 | 43 | 33 | Arizona | 5 | 84.66 | 244.66 | 23 | 34 | Rutgers | 11 | 132.59 | 244.59 | 19 | 35 | Boston College | 13 | 148.46 | 244.46 | 44 | 36 | South Carolina | 5 | 82.98 | 242.98 | 47 | 37 | Iowa | 4 | 73.2 | 241.2 | 49 | 38 | Arkansas | 4 | 70.82 | 238.82 | 46 | 39 | Utah | 5 | 78.72 | 238.72 | 40 | 40 | Mississippi State | 6 | 86.33 | 238.33 | 51 | 41 | Washington | 4 | 70.25 | 238.25 | 36 | 42 | Kansas State | 7 | 93.19 | 237.19 | 42 | 43 | Washington State | 6 | 84.66 | 236.66 | 54 | 44 | Arizona State | 4 | 66.75 | 234.75 | 59 | 45 | UCLA | 3 | 57.27 | 233.27 | 29 | 46 | Missouri | 10 | 112.82 | 232.82 | 62 | 47 | Stanford | 3 | 54.48 | 230.48 | 52 | 48 | South Florida | 5 | 69.25 | 229.25 | 41 | 49 | N.C. State | 7 | 85.08 | 229.08 | 64 | 50 | Oregon | 3 | 53.02 | 229.02 | 56 | 51 | California | 4 | 61.01 | 229.01 | 30 | 52 | Western Michigan | 10 | 107.68 | 227.68 | 53 | 53 | Temple | 5 | 67.65 | 227.65 | 57 | 54 | Boise State | 4 | 58.26 | 226.26 | 58 | 55 | Illinois | 4 | 57.31 | 225.31 | 45 | 56 | Cincinnati | 7 | 80.97 | 224.97 | 60 | 57 | Iowa State | 4 | 56.71 | 224.71 | 66 | 58 | Kansas | 3 | 48.66 | 224.66 | 37 | 59 | San Diego State | 8 | 88.23 | 224.23 | 67 | 60 | Minnesota | 3 | 48.21 | 224.21 | 55 | 61 | Brigham Young | 5 | 62.18 | 222.18 | 68 | 62 | Syracuse | 3 | 45.27 | 221.27 | 71 | 63 | West Virginia | 2 | 36.16 | 220.16 | 70 | 64 | Georgia Tech | 3 | 41.98 | 217.98 | 65 | 65 | Maryland | 4 | 49.59 | 217.59 | 48 | 66 | Houston | 7 | 72.09 | 216.09 | 50 | 67 | SMU | 7 | 70.54 | 214.54 | 74 | 68 | Colorado | 2 | 28.03 | 212.03 | 76 | 69 | Nebraska | 2 | 26.72 | 210.72 | 69 | 70 | Ohio | 4 | 42.55 | 210.55 | 77 | 71 | Texas State | 2 | 25.7 | 209.7 | 72 | 72 | Colorado State | 3 | 33.52 | 209.52 | 84 | 73 | Tulsa | 1 | 15.78 | 207.78 | 85 | 74 | Pittsburgh | 1 | 15.63 | 207.63 | 86 | 75 | Oregon State | 1 | 15.56 | 207.56 | 39 | 76 | Rice | 10 | 87.3 | 207.3 | 61 | 77 | Bowling Green | 6 | 54.99 | 206.99 | 87 | 78 | Indiana | 1 | 14.96 | 206.96 | 73 | 79 | Tulane | 3 | 29.77 | 205.77 | 88 | 80 | Toledo | 1 | 13.33 | 205.33 | 89 | 81 | Illinois State | 1 | 12 | 204 | 80 | 82 | San Jose State | 2 | 19.84 | 203.84 | 90 | 83 | UCF | 1 | 11.17 | 203.17 | 91 | 84 | Southern Miss | 1 | 11.11 | 203.11 | 92 | 85 | Air Force | 1 | 11.11 | 203.11 | 75 | 86 | Wake Forest | 3 | 27.01 | 203.01 | 81 | 87 | East Carolina | 2 | 18.62 | 202.62 | 93 | 88 | Florida Atlantic | 1 | 10.06 | 202.06 | 94 | 89 | Louisiana-Lafayette | 1 | 10 | 202 | 82 | 90 | Ball State | 2 | 17.02 | 201.02 | 96 | 91 | Marshall | 1 | 8.56 | 200.56 | 83 | 92 | Purdue | 2 | 16.52 | 200.52 | 79 | 93 | Old Dominion | 3 | 23.22 | 199.22 | 63 | 94 | Central Michigan | 7 | 53.74 | 197.74 | 97 | 95 | UTEP | 1 | 5 | 197 | 98 | 96 | New Mexico State | 1 | 2 | 194 | 78 | 97 | Hawaii | 4 | 24.67 | 192.67 | 99 | 98 | Western Kentucky | 1 | 0 | 192 | 99 | 99 | Massachusetts | 1 | 0 | 192 | 95 | 100 | Georgia State | 3 | 8.93 | 184.93 |
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2013 12:33:53 GMT -8
Great job, Bill! I'd be getting really pissed right about now if I was a Purdue grad. On the heels of a sucky season, they aren't recruiting worth a damn. Their new HC looks like the reincarnation of Chuck Long. Check that. They already have a new guy: www.purduesports.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/darrell_hazell_831637.htmlWho knew? (Purdue football is totally irrelevant.)
|
|
|
Post by breaztec on Jun 5, 2013 15:48:55 GMT -8
I would hope that, at some point, 247Sports will break free from the tendency of its predecessors, Rivals and Scout, to skew team rankings by overemphasizing quantity. Rice looks really good right now because they have 10 verbals. However, 247 rates Rice's average recruit as having a value of 79.3. In contrast, our eight have an average value of 82.3. What they should do is assume every team gets 25 recruits and give teams 8 points for unused ones. Examples: Rice 10 recruits 87.3 points. 15 unused * 8 points = 120 points = 207.3 Miss State 6 recruits 86.33 points. 19 unused * 8 points = 152 points = 238.33 points In the current method Rice is above Mississippi State but Rice would love to trade their 10 recruits for MSU's 6 recruits. The 7/24 rating doesn't accuratly reflect that reality. In the new rating SDSU is #59 and USC is #24. It is a better rating because Average gives no credit for count and Points gives too much credit for count. This rating adjusts for count in a real world way. Below is the top 100 in order of my proposed rating system. 7/24 Rating | New Rating | Team | Recruits | 7/24 Points | New Points | 1 | 1 | Texas A&M | 12 | 223.78 | 327.78 | 2 | 2 | Michigan | 12 | 212.7 | 316.7 | 5 | 3 | Notre Dame | 10 | 191.4 | 311.4 | 7 | 4 | Alabama | 9 | 179.18 | 307.18 | 9 | 5 | LSU | 9 | 175.95 | 303.95 | 6 | 6 | Clemson | 10 | 180.54 | 300.54 | 10 | 7 | Ohio State | 9 | 171.17 | 299.17 | 8 | 8 | Florida State | 10 | 178.62 | 298.62 | 4 | 9 | Texas | 14 | 207.15 | 295.15 | 12 | 10 | Auburn | 9 | 164.62 | 292.62 | 15 | 11 | Miami | 8 | 153.91 | 289.91 | 3 | 12 | Tennessee | 15 | 209.1 | 289.1 | 17 | 13 | Florida | 8 | 150.86 | 286.86 | 14 | 14 | Ole Miss | 11 | 162.65 | 274.65 | 18 | 15 | Penn State | 10 | 149.53 | 269.53 | 22 | 16 | Virginia Tech | 9 | 139.7 | 267.7 | 20 | 17 | Kentucky | 10 | 147.14 | 267.14 | 24 | 18 | Oklahoma | 8 | 130.75 | 266.75 | 31 | 19 | Georgia | 5 | 106.41 | 266.41 | 16 | 20 | Northwestern | 11 | 153.49 | 265.49 | 26 | 21 | Vanderbilt | 8 | 123.99 | 259.99 | 32 | 22 | Wisconsin | 6 | 105.79 | 257.79 | 27 | 23 | Michigan State | 8 | 121.66 | 257.66 | 34 | 24 | USC | 5 | 96.13 | 256.13 | 28 | 25 | North Carolina | 8 | 117.87 | 253.87 | 13 | 26 | Baylor | 14 | 163.59 | 251.59 | 33 | 27 | Virginia | 6 | 99.29 | 251.29 | 38 | 28 | Oklahoma State | 5 | 88.16 | 248.16 | 21 | 29 | Texas Tech | 12 | 142.61 | 246.61 | 11 | 30 | Louisville | 15 | 166.29 | 246.29 | 35 | 31 | TCU | 6 | 94.27 | 246.27 | 25 | 32 | Duke | 10 | 124.85 | 244.85 | 43 | 33 | Arizona | 5 | 84.66 | 244.66 | 23 | 34 | Rutgers | 11 | 132.59 | 244.59 | 19 | 35 | Boston College | 13 | 148.46 | 244.46 | 44 | 36 | South Carolina | 5 | 82.98 | 242.98 | 47 | 37 | Iowa | 4 | 73.2 | 241.2 | 49 | 38 | Arkansas | 4 | 70.82 | 238.82 | 46 | 39 | Utah | 5 | 78.72 | 238.72 | 40 | 40 | Mississippi State | 6 | 86.33 | 238.33 | 51 | 41 | Washington | 4 | 70.25 | 238.25 | 36 | 42 | Kansas State | 7 | 93.19 | 237.19 | 42 | 43 | Washington State | 6 | 84.66 | 236.66 | 54 | 44 | Arizona State | 4 | 66.75 | 234.75 | 59 | 45 | UCLA | 3 | 57.27 | 233.27 | 29 | 46 | Missouri | 10 | 112.82 | 232.82 | 62 | 47 | Stanford | 3 | 54.48 | 230.48 | 52 | 48 | South Florida | 5 | 69.25 | 229.25 | 41 | 49 | N.C. State | 7 | 85.08 | 229.08 | 64 | 50 | Oregon | 3 | 53.02 | 229.02 | 56 | 51 | California | 4 | 61.01 | 229.01 | 30 | 52 | Western Michigan | 10 | 107.68 | 227.68 | 53 | 53 | Temple | 5 | 67.65 | 227.65 | 57 | 54 | Boise State | 4 | 58.26 | 226.26 | 58 | 55 | Illinois | 4 | 57.31 | 225.31 | 45 | 56 | Cincinnati | 7 | 80.97 | 224.97 | 60 | 57 | Iowa State | 4 | 56.71 | 224.71 | 66 | 58 | Kansas | 3 | 48.66 | 224.66 | 37 | 59 | San Diego State | 8 | 88.23 | 224.23 | 67 | 60 | Minnesota | 3 | 48.21 | 224.21 | 55 | 61 | Brigham Young | 5 | 62.18 | 222.18 | 68 | 62 | Syracuse | 3 | 45.27 | 221.27 | 71 | 63 | West Virginia | 2 | 36.16 | 220.16 | 70 | 64 | Georgia Tech | 3 | 41.98 | 217.98 | 65 | 65 | Maryland | 4 | 49.59 | 217.59 | 48 | 66 | Houston | 7 | 72.09 | 216.09 | 50 | 67 | SMU | 7 | 70.54 | 214.54 | 74 | 68 | Colorado | 2 | 28.03 | 212.03 | 76 | 69 | Nebraska | 2 | 26.72 | 210.72 | 69 | 70 | Ohio | 4 | 42.55 | 210.55 | 77 | 71 | Texas State | 2 | 25.7 | 209.7 | 72 | 72 | Colorado State | 3 | 33.52 | 209.52 | 84 | 73 | Tulsa | 1 | 15.78 | 207.78 | 85 | 74 | Pittsburgh | 1 | 15.63 | 207.63 | 86 | 75 | Oregon State | 1 | 15.56 | 207.56 | 39 | 76 | Rice | 10 | 87.3 | 207.3 | 61 | 77 | Bowling Green | 6 | 54.99 | 206.99 | 87 | 78 | Indiana | 1 | 14.96 | 206.96 | 73 | 79 | Tulane | 3 | 29.77 | 205.77 | 88 | 80 | Toledo | 1 | 13.33 | 205.33 | 89 | 81 | Illinois State | 1 | 12 | 204 | 80 | 82 | San Jose State | 2 | 19.84 | 203.84 | 90 | 83 | UCF | 1 | 11.17 | 203.17 | 91 | 84 | Southern Miss | 1 | 11.11 | 203.11 | 92 | 85 | Air Force | 1 | 11.11 | 203.11 | 75 | 86 | Wake Forest | 3 | 27.01 | 203.01 | 81 | 87 | East Carolina | 2 | 18.62 | 202.62 | 93 | 88 | Florida Atlantic | 1 | 10.06 | 202.06 | 94 | 89 | Louisiana-Lafayette | 1 | 10 | 202 | 82 | 90 | Ball State | 2 | 17.02 | 201.02 | 96 | 91 | Marshall | 1 | 8.56 | 200.56 | 83 | 92 | Purdue | 2 | 16.52 | 200.52 | 79 | 93 | Old Dominion | 3 | 23.22 | 199.22 | 63 | 94 | Central Michigan | 7 | 53.74 | 197.74 | 97 | 95 | UTEP | 1 | 5 | 197 | 98 | 96 | New Mexico State | 1 | 2 | 194 | 78 | 97 | Hawaii | 4 | 24.67 | 192.67 | 99 | 98 | Western Kentucky | 1 | 0 | 192 | 99 | 99 | Massachusetts | 1 | 0 | 192 | 95 | 100 | Georgia State | 3 | 8.93 | 184.93 |
Not sure where you find we are 59th I see on the same link above we dropped to 38 and USC is 34. 247sports.com/Season/2014-Football/CompositeTeamRankings
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jun 9, 2013 6:17:59 GMT -8
I would hope that, at some point, 247Sports will break free from the tendency of its predecessors, Rivals and Scout, to skew team rankings by overemphasizing quantity. Rice looks really good right now because they have 10 verbals. However, 247 rates Rice's average recruit as having a value of 79.3. In contrast, our eight have an average value of 82.3. What they should do is assume every team gets 25 recruits and give teams 8 points for unused ones. Examples: Rice 10 recruits 87.3 points. 15 unused * 8 points = 120 points = 207.3 Miss State 6 recruits 86.33 points. 19 unused * 8 points = 152 points = 238.33 points In the current method Rice is above Mississippi State but Rice would love to trade their 10 recruits for MSU's 6 recruits. The 7/24 rating doesn't accuratly reflect that reality. In the new rating SDSU is #59 and USC is #24. It is a better rating because Average gives no credit for count and Points gives too much credit for count. This rating adjusts for count in a real world way. Below is the top 100 in order of my proposed rating system. 7/24 Rating | New Rating | Team | Recruits | 7/24 Points | New Points | 1 | 1 | Texas A&M | 12 | 223.78 | 327.78 | 2 | 2 | Michigan | 12 | 212.7 | 316.7 | 5 | 3 | Notre Dame | 10 | 191.4 | 311.4 | 7 | 4 | Alabama | 9 | 179.18 | 307.18 | 9 | 5 | LSU | 9 | 175.95 | 303.95 | 6 | 6 | Clemson | 10 | 180.54 | 300.54 | 10 | 7 | Ohio State | 9 | 171.17 | 299.17 | 8 | 8 | Florida State | 10 | 178.62 | 298.62 | 4 | 9 | Texas | 14 | 207.15 | 295.15 | 12 | 10 | Auburn | 9 | 164.62 | 292.62 | 15 | 11 | Miami | 8 | 153.91 | 289.91 | 3 | 12 | Tennessee | 15 | 209.1 | 289.1 | 17 | 13 | Florida | 8 | 150.86 | 286.86 | 14 | 14 | Ole Miss | 11 | 162.65 | 274.65 | 18 | 15 | Penn State | 10 | 149.53 | 269.53 | 22 | 16 | Virginia Tech | 9 | 139.7 | 267.7 | 20 | 17 | Kentucky | 10 | 147.14 | 267.14 | 24 | 18 | Oklahoma | 8 | 130.75 | 266.75 | 31 | 19 | Georgia | 5 | 106.41 | 266.41 | 16 | 20 | Northwestern | 11 | 153.49 | 265.49 | 26 | 21 | Vanderbilt | 8 | 123.99 | 259.99 | 32 | 22 | Wisconsin | 6 | 105.79 | 257.79 | 27 | 23 | Michigan State | 8 | 121.66 | 257.66 | 34 | 24 | USC | 5 | 96.13 | 256.13 | 28 | 25 | North Carolina | 8 | 117.87 | 253.87 | 13 | 26 | Baylor | 14 | 163.59 | 251.59 | 33 | 27 | Virginia | 6 | 99.29 | 251.29 | 38 | 28 | Oklahoma State | 5 | 88.16 | 248.16 | 21 | 29 | Texas Tech | 12 | 142.61 | 246.61 | 11 | 30 | Louisville | 15 | 166.29 | 246.29 | 35 | 31 | TCU | 6 | 94.27 | 246.27 | 25 | 32 | Duke | 10 | 124.85 | 244.85 | 43 | 33 | Arizona | 5 | 84.66 | 244.66 | 23 | 34 | Rutgers | 11 | 132.59 | 244.59 | 19 | 35 | Boston College | 13 | 148.46 | 244.46 | 44 | 36 | South Carolina | 5 | 82.98 | 242.98 | 47 | 37 | Iowa | 4 | 73.2 | 241.2 | 49 | 38 | Arkansas | 4 | 70.82 | 238.82 | 46 | 39 | Utah | 5 | 78.72 | 238.72 | 40 | 40 | Mississippi State | 6 | 86.33 | 238.33 | 51 | 41 | Washington | 4 | 70.25 | 238.25 | 36 | 42 | Kansas State | 7 | 93.19 | 237.19 | 42 | 43 | Washington State | 6 | 84.66 | 236.66 | 54 | 44 | Arizona State | 4 | 66.75 | 234.75 | 59 | 45 | UCLA | 3 | 57.27 | 233.27 | 29 | 46 | Missouri | 10 | 112.82 | 232.82 | 62 | 47 | Stanford | 3 | 54.48 | 230.48 | 52 | 48 | South Florida | 5 | 69.25 | 229.25 | 41 | 49 | N.C. State | 7 | 85.08 | 229.08 | 64 | 50 | Oregon | 3 | 53.02 | 229.02 | 56 | 51 | California | 4 | 61.01 | 229.01 | 30 | 52 | Western Michigan | 10 | 107.68 | 227.68 | 53 | 53 | Temple | 5 | 67.65 | 227.65 | 57 | 54 | Boise State | 4 | 58.26 | 226.26 | 58 | 55 | Illinois | 4 | 57.31 | 225.31 | 45 | 56 | Cincinnati | 7 | 80.97 | 224.97 | 60 | 57 | Iowa State | 4 | 56.71 | 224.71 | 66 | 58 | Kansas | 3 | 48.66 | 224.66 | 37 | 59 | San Diego State | 8 | 88.23 | 224.23 | 67 | 60 | Minnesota | 3 | 48.21 | 224.21 | 55 | 61 | Brigham Young | 5 | 62.18 | 222.18 | 68 | 62 | Syracuse | 3 | 45.27 | 221.27 | 71 | 63 | West Virginia | 2 | 36.16 | 220.16 | 70 | 64 | Georgia Tech | 3 | 41.98 | 217.98 | 65 | 65 | Maryland | 4 | 49.59 | 217.59 | 48 | 66 | Houston | 7 | 72.09 | 216.09 | 50 | 67 | SMU | 7 | 70.54 | 214.54 | 74 | 68 | Colorado | 2 | 28.03 | 212.03 | 76 | 69 | Nebraska | 2 | 26.72 | 210.72 | 69 | 70 | Ohio | 4 | 42.55 | 210.55 | 77 | 71 | Texas State | 2 | 25.7 | 209.7 | 72 | 72 | Colorado State | 3 | 33.52 | 209.52 | 84 | 73 | Tulsa | 1 | 15.78 | 207.78 | 85 | 74 | Pittsburgh | 1 | 15.63 | 207.63 | 86 | 75 | Oregon State | 1 | 15.56 | 207.56 | 39 | 76 | Rice | 10 | 87.3 | 207.3 | 61 | 77 | Bowling Green | 6 | 54.99 | 206.99 | 87 | 78 | Indiana | 1 | 14.96 | 206.96 | 73 | 79 | Tulane | 3 | 29.77 | 205.77 | 88 | 80 | Toledo | 1 | 13.33 | 205.33 | 89 | 81 | Illinois State | 1 | 12 | 204 | 80 | 82 | San Jose State | 2 | 19.84 | 203.84 | 90 | 83 | UCF | 1 | 11.17 | 203.17 | 91 | 84 | Southern Miss | 1 | 11.11 | 203.11 | 92 | 85 | Air Force | 1 | 11.11 | 203.11 | 75 | 86 | Wake Forest | 3 | 27.01 | 203.01 | 81 | 87 | East Carolina | 2 | 18.62 | 202.62 | 93 | 88 | Florida Atlantic | 1 | 10.06 | 202.06 | 94 | 89 | Louisiana-Lafayette | 1 | 10 | 202 | 82 | 90 | Ball State | 2 | 17.02 | 201.02 | 96 | 91 | Marshall | 1 | 8.56 | 200.56 | 83 | 92 | Purdue | 2 | 16.52 | 200.52 | 79 | 93 | Old Dominion | 3 | 23.22 | 199.22 | 63 | 94 | Central Michigan | 7 | 53.74 | 197.74 | 97 | 95 | UTEP | 1 | 5 | 197 | 98 | 96 | New Mexico State | 1 | 2 | 194 | 78 | 97 | Hawaii | 4 | 24.67 | 192.67 | 99 | 98 | Western Kentucky | 1 | 0 | 192 | 99 | 99 | Massachusetts | 1 | 0 | 192 | 95 | 100 | Georgia State | 3 | 8.93 | 184.93 |
AztecBill, you may be onto something. Scout and Rivals both have us now in the high 50's. Sadly, we will likely end up---as usual---in the high 60s or low seventies when the recruiting season is done. We do not have coaches who are capable of bringing top recruits to SDSU. That's going to take someone special and unless some that "special" group of coaches stumbles across our path, we do not have an administration capable of finding them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2013 7:39:42 GMT -8
Give me a break in the 247 rankings only four non BCS school are ranked higher than us Rice, Cincinnati, Houston, and Western Michigan. Rice got commits form two very fast very short brothers from Texas. A very special coach would have to do a very special thing get us into the BCS. right no we are on a par with Boise state in the last two years, which means we have the talent to compete with them year after year foir the Championship. Fresno is looking good but its head coach loading up on JC guys so he can make a splash and move on asap.
Our goal is get players who fit our system and can win championships we just did that and we should again. WE are not going to get star struck Pac Ten kids who have four stars or so.. The best we can do is get the local kid who really wants to stay home, and find kids in areas with good football and lousy weather. When the dusts clears on the final rankings we will be in the top five of non BCS programs.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 10, 2013 7:20:06 GMT -8
Reread my post. The list is my adjusted ratings using the information provided at that site. I use a different methodology for the reasons stated in my prior post.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 8:56:10 GMT -8
AztecBill, you may be onto something. Scout and Rivals both have us now in the high 50's. Sadly, we will likely end up---as usual---in the high 60s or low seventies when the recruiting season is done. Maybe, maybe not. One of these years we just could get a snowball effect in which one big name kid decides we have a shot at being a contender for a big boy bowl in another couple years and so commits to us and then several other kids who were undecided between us and a couple lower level Pac schools like WSU, Utah, Arizona or whomever decide to follow that kid to SDSU. HOWEVER, for that to happen, we need to win the MWC West half the time and win the conference championship game most of the time when we get there. And for THAT to happen, we absolutely can't keep choking away a MWC victory in the fourth quarter to teams with less talent than we have.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jun 10, 2013 9:39:23 GMT -8
AztecBill, you may be onto something. Scout and Rivals both have us now in the high 50's. Sadly, we will likely end up---as usual---in the high 60s or low seventies when the recruiting season is done. Maybe, maybe not. One of these years we just could get a snowball effect in which one big name kid decides we have a shot at being a contender for a big boy bowl in another couple years and so commits to us and then several other kids who were undecided between us and a couple lower level Pac schools like WSU, Utah, Arizona or whomever decide to follow that kid to SDSU. HOWEVER, for that to happen, we need to win the MWC West half the time and win the conference championship game most of the time when we get there. And for THAT to happen, we absolutely can't keep choking away a MWC victory in the fourth quarter to teams with less talent than we have. Hard to disagree with your "plan" SGF. However, SDSU has been waiting for that "snowball" to get rolling for countless years. Was crazy enough to think that Marshall Faulk would start it, but alas and alack...back on the treadmill. I've now come to the conclusion that we are stuck in a barren, dry rut, with snow all around, and we won't get back onto the slope until there are major, refreshing and energizing changes at the top.
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jun 10, 2013 10:34:04 GMT -8
Maybe, maybe not. One of these years we just could get a snowball effect in which one big name kid decides we have a shot at being a contender for a big boy bowl in another couple years and so commits to us and then several other kids who were undecided between us and a couple lower level Pac schools like WSU, Utah, Arizona or whomever decide to follow that kid to SDSU. HOWEVER, for that to happen, we need to win the MWC West half the time and win the conference championship game most of the time when we get there. And for THAT to happen, we absolutely can't keep choking away a MWC victory in the fourth quarter to teams with less talent than we have. Hard to disagree with your "plan" SGF. However, SDSU has been waiting for that "snowball" to get rolling for countless years. Was crazy enough to think that Marshall Faulk would start it, but alas and alack...back on the treadmill. I've now come to the conclusion that we are stuck in a barren, dry rut, with snow all around, and we won't get back onto the slope until there are major, refreshing and energizing changes at the top. We are at the beginning of that snowball. It is a positive feedback loop. We win and get better recruits and win more and get better recruiting results and win more and get even better recruits. It would be nice if there was a short-cut as described above but I think we will just continue to improve with flucuations within that improvement. Remember, those we recruited from winning the Poinsettia Bowl over Navy were only red-shirt freshmen last year. We need these new better class of recruits to work through the system so we have 4 classes of better recruits playing. Then the 2015 class will be better than the 2011 class etc., therefore we will continue to improve.
|
|
|
Post by deadlypepsi on Jun 10, 2013 12:45:28 GMT -8
its just like ncaa video game you start out as a two star (out of five) sdsu program takes about 6-7 years to get to a four star program, if you don't play any games. things take time lol
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 14:15:19 GMT -8
If four years ago someone would tell us we would be coming of a MWC Championship tie had beaten Boise State at their home, and played in three straight bowls we would be ecstatic. There is little doubt we will again win at least eight games and go bowling that has become the norm. Instead of bottom of the heap we are at the top with BSU. What success has UA, ASU, Wazzu, and Oregon State now Utah had in the Pac 12,Two Rose Bowl games in twenty years or so. We are a commuter school in an old funky stadium with a scoreboard not much bigger than then ones is sports bar, seating equivalent to a bus depots ,food that costs a ton and is awful A tiny endowment most liberal arts school have more money. If we could do a little better than last year win the bowl and dont blow the San Jose game, then I would be happy. A MW championship a top 25. if we can do that year after year we will be the equivalent of what BYU was in the eighties and make some BCS bowls. If we could add a degree in coaching in PE and Polynesian studies major we would rule the world.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 10, 2013 15:09:33 GMT -8
I'm not elated but am satisfied with where the program is. The bowl game performance was once again unacceptable but winning at Boise was huge and recruiting continues to be immensely better than when the other Long was around. So I'm cautiously optimistic about the future.
Our men's basketball program is now superior to at least half the Pac-12 and I think we're fully capable of having a football team that good too. We'll never catch UCLA or Arizona in hoops or USC and Oregon in football but we can be just as strong as anybody else in that conference.
|
|
|
Post by fowl on Jun 10, 2013 18:04:40 GMT -8
If four years ago someone would tell us we would be coming of a MWC Championship tie had beaten Boise State at their home, and played in three straight bowls we would be ecstatic. There is little doubt we will again win at least eight games and go bowling that has become the norm. Instead of bottom of the heap we are at the top with BSU. What success has UA, ASU, Wazzu, and Oregon State now Utah had in the Pac 12,Two Rose Bowl games in twenty years or so. We are a commuter school in an old funky stadium with a scoreboard not much bigger than then ones is sports bar, seating equivalent to a bus depots ,food that costs a ton and is awful A tiny endowment most liberal arts school have more money. If we could do a little better than last year win the bowl and dont blow the San Jose game, then I would be happy. A MW championship a top 25. if we can do that year after year we will be the equivalent of what BYU was in the eighties and make some BCS bowls. If we could add a degree in coaching in PE and Polynesian studies major we would rule the world. VERY well said. What we have accomplished in four years is actually amazing considering the immediate past. We are on our way. We just need to keep having winning seasons and going to bowls. If we do that we will have down years where things don't go our way but we still win 7-8 games and go to a bowl. We will also have good years where we win the conference and lose just a game or two. The important part is sustained winning - building a tradition of winning. We are now starting to see high caliber local recruits looking our way based on our success. In fact I read a comment by a local kid who got an offer talking about our winning tradition. Once we get to 8-9 years of consistent bowl seasons every local 16-17 year old recruit by then will only know us as a traditionally winning program. That will do wonders for recruiting. We just need to stay consistent and go to bowl games. That will continue to build the legacy of the program. It is very akin to a snowball that starts out small but gradually gets rolling and gets bigger and bigger. It takes time, but we are on our way.
|
|
|
Post by missiontrails on Jun 10, 2013 21:29:37 GMT -8
If four years ago someone would tell us we would be coming of a MWC Championship tie had beaten Boise State at their home, and played in three straight bowls we would be ecstatic. There is little doubt we will again win at least eight games and go bowling that has become the norm. Instead of bottom of the heap we are at the top with BSU. What success has UA, ASU, Wazzu, and Oregon State now Utah had in the Pac 12,Two Rose Bowl games in twenty years or so. We are a commuter school in an old funky stadium with a scoreboard not much bigger than then ones is sports bar, seating equivalent to a bus depots ,food that costs a ton and is awful A tiny endowment most liberal arts school have more money. If we could do a little better than last year win the bowl and dont blow the San Jose game, then I would be happy. A MW championship a top 25. if we can do that year after year we will be the equivalent of what BYU was in the eighties and make some BCS bowls. If we could add a degree in coaching in PE and Polynesian studies major we would rule the world. VERY well said. What we have accomplished in four years is actually amazing considering the immediate past. We are on our way. We just need to keep having winning seasons and going to bowls. If we do that we will have down years where things don't go our way but we still win 7-8 games and go to a bowl. We will also have good years where we win the conference and lose just a game or two. The important part is sustained winning - building a tradition of winning. We are now starting to see high caliber local recruits looking our way based on our success. In fact I read a comment by a local kid who got an offer talking about our winning tradition. Once we get to 8-9 years of consistent bowl seasons every local 16-17 year old recruit by then will only know us as a traditionally winning program. That will do wonders for recruiting. We just need to stay consistent and go to bowl games. That will continue to build the legacy of the program. It is very akin to a snowball that starts out small but gradually gets rolling and gets bigger and bigger. It takes time, but we are on our way. OK, but don't tell myownwords, he'll be heartbroken.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2013 9:27:49 GMT -8
JFTHOI, I checked 247 and Scout going back to when 247 began and here are their final rankings for our classes.
Year 247 Scout
2010 68 77 2011 78 93 2012 75 72 2013 73 67
Right now with the admittedly skewed system the two use, we're at 42 with 247 and 54 with Scout. So we should be realistic that if in February we are better than 68th and 67th in those rankings, we will have had what the professionals think is our best job of recruiting since Tom Craft's two illusory classes a decade ago.
|
|