Hogville Info
• 10,306,527 Posts
• 408,356 Topics
• 23,331 Hogvillians
THE RULES (Read 'em!)
Quick Links
Pick'Ems:Football      Basketball      Baseball
Sister Sites:Gridiron HistoryFearless Friday
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: These recruiting rankings are garbage.  (Read 4637 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Erockster20

These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« on: February 01, 2019, 07:29:38 am »

Obviously the recruiting rankings debate goes on every year. Some people say they are not accurate and others point to teams success year after year if having top classes and that that must have some merit. But this year for sure just doesnít make sense to me.

On rivals we are ranked #18. We have 26 commits with 14/4 star and 12/3 star

Teams ranked ahead of us:

Penn State 20-13/7
Notre Dame 21-11/10
Nebraska 26-10/16
Tennessee 21-11/10
USC 20-10/10

No 5 stars for any of them. (By the way, cases could be made we have a stronger class than Florida, Auburn, and Florida staye. But since they have at least a 5 star Iím keaving them out) So we have here 5 programs that have an established history of success. All have less 4 stars than us, and even in some cases less 3 stars as well. Now how in the world can someone say these arenít garbage rankings? 
Logged

Pork Twain

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2019, 07:35:36 am »

It is not bias or garbage, it is a mathematical calculation...

Sponsored Ad



Hogville encourages you to do business with the following...

Deep Shoat

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 1132
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5,165
  • The Artist formerly known as Hong Kong Sooey
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2019, 07:44:16 am »

It is not bias or garbage, it is a mathematical calculation...
That is manipulated to increase subscription sales...

Please don't imply that empirical data is used in the calculation. 

Porkys Revenge

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2019, 07:53:02 am »

One thing is for certain. No 2-10 team did a better job on the recruiting trail than Morris and Co. Itíll be interesting to see what he can do with hopefully 6 or 7 wins under his belt this yr.

Pork Twain

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2019, 07:56:15 am »

That is manipulated to increase subscription sales...

Please don't imply that empirical data is used in the calculation. 
Fake news.  I am not saying that individual recruits are not given a higher score based on where they land and who is recruiting them, I am saying that the way the numbers are calculated for the team rankings, is indeed mathematical.
Logged

East TN HAWG

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 401
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3,003
  • Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2019, 07:56:31 am »

If recruiting rankings is completely based on subscriptions, why are the majority of playoff teams the top recruiting teams?

I admit there may is some bias.  There are always some misses.  It is subjective which means there is no exact science behind it, but the general direction of the class rankings are somewhat of a indicator of on field performance.   Of course, there is other factors like coaching, player development, but it all starts with talent.   
Logged

BossHawg_Outlaw

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2019, 07:58:21 am »

Doesn't really matter where you rank in recruiting today it's where you rank at the end of the year in about 3 years that shows how good this class really is.

onebadrubi

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 1119
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 19,337
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2019, 08:03:28 am »

If recruiting rankings is completely based on subscriptions, why are the majority of playoff teams the top recruiting teams?

I admit there may is some bias.  There are always some misses.  It is subjective which means there is no exact science behind it, but the general direction of the class rankings are somewhat of a indicator of on field performance.   Of course, there is other factors like coaching, player development, but it all starts with talent.   

Texas the last 7 or so years has debunked your theory. 

Logged

RaisinHog

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 375
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3,340
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2019, 08:08:31 am »

The problem is not all 3 or 4 stars are equal it's pretty clear you must have top 10 classes to win it all .. maybe we will get there one day at the very least we are headed in the right direction
Logged

Seebs

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2019, 08:21:55 am »

All teams you listed are much better than us. Happy to be in the conversation.
Logged

PharmacistHog

  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 2041
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13,950
  • The Peopleís Mod
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2019, 08:23:18 am »

Fake news.  I am not saying that individual recruits are not given a higher score based on where they land and who is recruiting them, I am saying that the way the numbers are calculated for the team rankings, is indeed mathematical.

So Henry getting hurt before a freaking all-star game (minor injury that only kept him from playing in an all-star game) mathematically drops his ranking?

a0ashle

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 225
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,279
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2019, 08:52:43 am »

If recruiting rankings is completely based on subscriptions, why are the majority of playoff teams the top recruiting teams?

I admit there may is some bias.  There are always some misses.  It is subjective which means there is no exact science behind it, but the general direction of the class rankings are somewhat of a indicator of on field performance.   Of course, there is other factors like coaching, player development, but it all starts with talent.   

Correlation, not necessarily causation.

Wildhog

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2019, 08:58:08 am »

I don't think there's necessarily a bias against the non-blue-bloods.  I think that more than anything, these recruiting analysts just want to be right.  So we see the players committed to better programs (where they're more likely to have high profile success) get a little better treatment in the rankings.

Grizzlyfan

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 263
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,912
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #13 on: February 01, 2019, 09:05:04 am »

Texas the last 7 or so years has debunked your theory.
No it proves Texas has been the outlier. It also proves that a great recruiting class without a top QB is hard to overcome.  Are you saying the top recruiting teams haven't made up the playoff sports?

nwahogfan1

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #14 on: February 01, 2019, 09:07:50 am »

Doesn't really matter where you rank in recruiting today it's where you rank at the end of the year in about 3 years that shows how good this class really is.

I agree.  I think for us since we are so low of great talent we need to get hard working recruits who have 3 star talent with 5 star hearts and develop them.  Some guys come in with size and speed to play immediately while others need time. We must get those recruits who in 2 years are better than Bama's rookies.  We must Develop.
Logged

PharmacistHog

  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 2041
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13,950
  • The Peopleís Mod
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2019, 09:08:16 am »

I don't think there's necessarily a bias against the non-blue-bloods.  I think that more than anything, these recruiting analysts just want to be right.  So we see the players committed to better programs (where they're more likely to have high profile success) get a little better treatment in the rankings.

I think so as well. I would imagine offer lists from the bluebloods is probably a big starting point for the ratings guys.
Logged

PharmacistHog

  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 2041
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13,950
  • The Peopleís Mod
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2019, 09:09:13 am »

I agree.  I think for us since we are so low of great talent we need to get hard working recruits who have 3 star talent with 5 star hearts and develop them.  Some guys come in with size and speed to play immediately while others need time. We must get those recruits who in 2 years are better than Bama's rookies.  We must Develop.

Wonít work but makes for a good story.
Logged

Steef

  • Idylically living in the Valley of the Cats
  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 347
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 36,788
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2019, 09:17:12 am »

I don't think there's necessarily a bias against the non-blue-bloods.



I think that more than anything, these recruiting analysts just want to be right.

Not really TRYING to be argumentative, but this is the very definition of bias.


o we see the players committed to better programs (where they're more likely to have high profile success) get a little better treatment in the rankings.

And so is this.

If the recruits have been evaluated correctly BEFORE they commit to a program, then (in theory), their worth/value is established apart from the program they choose.

A case could be made that the program increases their value after they get there, because of good coaching. But that has nothing to do with their value on paper BEFORE they get there.

I agree with the OP. The placement of those teams ahead of us this year, is pure bias and contradicts the math.

That said.....meh. I don't really care. Where our recruiting class 'ranks' compared to others, has ZERO bearing on how we play next year or the years after. Comparing the rankings is fun, but it has no importance in real life.

Jahog2020

  • Bench Warmer
  • ***
  • Total likes: 33
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 118
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #18 on: February 01, 2019, 09:21:32 am »

Fake news.  I am not saying that individual recruits are not given a higher score based on where they land and who is recruiting them, I am saying that the way the numbers are calculated for the team rankings, is indeed mathematical.

No way do I believe that if Henry or Burks signed with Bama or Texas that their ranking would be the same.

Not saying we are outrecruiting them by any means.  When you sign so many 4 and 5 stars, if one or two don't pan out then the others make up for it.

nwahogfan1

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #19 on: February 01, 2019, 09:26:36 am »

Also rating all these guys talent, skills and especially heart accurately is near impossible.  I think there are over 1000 kids who get rated.  So if you were a rater and had to make any judgement call on a recruit then you would probable want to error up or down on who is recruiting the kid. So we see Clemson or Bama's signee's moving up while our signees are going down.
Logged

Wildhog

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #20 on: February 01, 2019, 09:27:02 am »



Not really TRYING to be argumentative, but this is the very definition of bias.


And so is this.

If the recruits have been evaluated correctly BEFORE they commit to a program, then (in theory), their worth/value is established apart from the program they choose.

A case could be made that the program increases their value after they get there, because of good coaching. But that has nothing to do with their value on paper BEFORE they get there.

I agree with the OP. The placement of those teams ahead of us this year, is pure bias and contradicts the math.

That said.....meh. I don't really care. Where our recruiting class 'ranks' compared to others, has ZERO bearing on how we play next year or the years after. Comparing the rankings is fun, but it has no importance in real life.

I should have worded my post better.  I don't think these guys sit around saying, "Oh that guy committed to Arkansas, drop him in the rankings."  I do think they see someone commit to a blue-blood and say, "Oh that guy committed to Bama.  Let's move him up."  Naturally, when someone moves up, someone else has to move down.

So yes, there is a bias, but I don't think the motivation is to stick it to the Arkansas's of the world.  I think it's just to make the analysts look better.



I agree with you on the rankings.  This is the best class that I can ever remember us signing.  I couldn't care less what it's ranked.

Pork Twain

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #21 on: February 01, 2019, 09:27:03 am »

So Henry getting hurt before a freaking all-star game (minor injury that only kept him from playing in an all-star game) mathematically drops his ranking?
Selective reading is a growing issue in America...  Again, as I stated, the individual rankings might be flawed, but the way classes are ranked, is mathematical.  You could say there is a root-flaw, but I am sure every school has players they think should be ranked higher.  I have a lengthy post on how flawed I think individual player rankings can be.  Each flawed player evaluation, unfortunately, is part of the bigger class ranking calculation.

https://247sports.com/college/arkansas/Season/2019-Football/Commits/Preview/

vs

https://247sports.com/college/nebraska/Season/2019-Football/Commits/Preview/

We have an amazing class, maybe the best ever, while coming off a 2-10 year.  Why can't we focus on that, instead of crying about how people are out to get us?
« Last Edit: February 01, 2019, 09:41:10 am by Pork Twain »
Logged

Wildhog

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #22 on: February 01, 2019, 09:27:50 am »

No way do I believe that if Henry or Burks signed with Bama or Texas that their ranking would be the same.

I definitely agree with this.
Logged

Hugo Bezdek

  • Senior
  • *****
  • Total likes: 155
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,474
  • We Played Like A Wild Band of Razorbacks!
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2019, 09:32:17 am »

Obviously the recruiting rankings debate goes on every year. Some people say they are not accurate and others point to teams success year after year if having top classes and that that must have some merit. But this year for sure just doesnít make sense to me.

On rivals we are ranked #18. We have 26 commits with 14/4 star and 12/3 star

Teams ranked ahead of us:

Penn State 20-13/7
Notre Dame 21-11/10
Nebraska 26-10/16
Tennessee 21-11/10
USC 20-10/10

No 5 stars for any of them. (By the way, cases could be made we have a stronger class than Florida, Auburn, and Florida staye. But since they have at least a 5 star Iím keaving them out) So we have here 5 programs that have an established history of success. All have less 4 stars than us, and even in some cases less 3 stars as well. Now how in the world can someone say these arenít garbage rankings?

I view recruiting rankings like a betting line. Who's most likely to make an impact and at what level? Nothing is a given until they play, but some guys are a better bet than others to be difference makers or at least contributors.
Logged

tusked

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 970
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12,870
  • Clapton is god....but SRV was the big bang!
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #24 on: February 01, 2019, 09:35:50 am »


Here's what I know.

1 - 4* QB
4 - 4* WRs
1 - 4* TE

4 - 4* DEs
1 - 4* LB
4 - 4* DBs


If the hogs can do this every season while CM is the coach and spread the 4* around I'll take that righ now.

East TN HAWG

  • All-American Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 401
  • Online Online
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 3,003
  • Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #25 on: February 01, 2019, 09:38:27 am »

Texas the last 7 or so years has debunked your theory. 
Since 2003, only three teams have won a NC with and average 247 recruiting (four years prior) ranked over 10 (LSU, Aubbie, Clemson.  No team in the last 15 years has won a NC with recruiting rankings higher than 16, period.   

You all can dispute the rankings all you want, but it is only your opinion because the facts simply do not support your position.  Again, there are other factors (coaching, injuries, Etc,) which is why the #1, #2 or #3 don't win it every year.  In general, teams with high recruiting rankings win the NC.  As I stated before, there is some subjectivity in the rankings, but from a high level they are historically a solid predictor of success.     

The 247 recruiting average the 4 years prior to a NC:

2003- LSU 12,  2004- USC 8, 2005 Texas 8, 2006 FL 5, 2007 LSU 8, 2008 FL 5, 2009- Bama , 2010 - Aubbie 16, 2011 Bama 2, 2012 Bama 3, 2013 FL St 6, OH ST 4, 2015 Bama 1, 2016-Clemson 13 
Logged

PharmacistHog

  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 2041
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13,950
  • The Peopleís Mod
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #26 on: February 01, 2019, 09:53:10 am »

Selective reading is a growing issue in America...  Again, as I stated, the individual rankings might be flawed, but the way classes are ranked, is mathematical.  You could say there is a root-flaw, but I am sure every school has players they think should be ranked higher.  I have a lengthy post on how flawed I think individual player rankings can be.  Each flawed player evaluation, unfortunately, is part of the bigger class ranking calculation.

https://247sports.com/college/arkansas/Season/2019-Football/Commits/Preview/

vs

https://247sports.com/college/nebraska/Season/2019-Football/Commits/Preview/

We have an amazing class, maybe the best ever, while coming off a 2-10 year.  Why can't we focus on that, instead of crying about how people are out to get us?

Obviously the individual rankings are used in a mathematical formula to get the team rankings,  but when the individual rankings are biased and/or garbage, you can plug them into whatever formula you want but you still get garbage. Iím not focusing on anything other than how great a class we have. I was simply responding to you saying the class rankings arenít trash. I couldNíT care less about our rankings. This class is unbelievable.

greenie

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #27 on: February 01, 2019, 10:37:45 am »

On 247 at least, players are not ranked by their star rating; they are given a numerical score, which (I suppose) for historical reasons and for comparison with other ranking services, they also convert to a star rating.  The accumulation of star ratings in a team's class has nothing to do with the ranking of that team by 247.  It uses the numerical scores assigned to each player.  For 247, I believe the breakdown is something like (approximately):

5*: 0.97 - 1.0
4*: 0.89 - 0.97
3*: 0.80 - 0.89

So my point is that telling me the star-distribution of a team's class gives me only a general sense of the "perceived" quality of that class.  247 has a mathematical formula that they use to calculate a team's recruiting score, and they use that formula in a mathematically correct way.  You can argue all day long that the formula is wrong, or more likely, that the player rankings are wrong (or biased); however, as stated earlier, the calculation is pure math and the rankings are based off running the numbers. 

So for me,

The calculation - repeatable, reliable (everybody who submits the same numbers, gets the same results)

The individual player ratings - not repeatable, not reliable (different people, in different situations, looking at the same player will likely produce a different rating).  This is the primary error source in the entire process.


I agree.  The recruiting rankings are garbage...but they do give you a general sense of class quality.  Our trajectory is definitely up with this class.
Logged

hawgfan4life

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #28 on: February 01, 2019, 10:40:56 am »

Not rocket science:

1.  Rankings are badly flawed, but the flaws don't mean they aren't mostly accurate.  A very hot girl can have a few things wrong that would make an ugly girl uglier, but the rest of her is so fine, she is still hot!  A few skewed players doesn't impact AL's class ranking too much because the rest of the class is so good.  Recruiting rankings are similar to the final four Championship slots.  It is pretty obvious which 4 to 6 teams are in the conversation although two or three are debatable for the final slot.  Then there are another 5 or 6 teams that were one loss away from being in the discussion.  Then you have about 25 teams that were a few circumstances, bad losses, or whatever away from being in the discussion, but they clearly aren't.  Most of them you can shake in a bag and there isn't a lot of difference overall. 

2.  Recruiting rankings are skewed to rate recruits of major programs higher.  Say you have two identical athletes in skill, size, athleticism, and any other variables, one is being recruited by AL, Clemson, and OU.  The other is being recruited by AR, MO, and Kansas St.  The one being recruited by AL might be a 5 star and the other one a high 3.  They both may have started out as identical rated 4s, but the one recruited by the big names will move up simply by who is offering and recruiting and the other will lose ground for the same reasons. 

3.  Recruiting services will tend to favor athletes in their state, region, and those being recruited by the programs that are paying their bills much more than the athletes on the other side of the nation.  Why wouldn't they be for crying out loud.  In many cases the gurus are putting a rank or rating on kids they have spent little to no time reviewing.  They look at where others have rated them and who the player is getting offers from.  If they are getting offers from big names, they instantly jump into a different pool of players such as the top 200.  If they are being recruited by schools traditionally out of the top 25, they are automatically thrown into the pool of players in the above top 200 players.  This greatly impacts kids like Burks who doesn't do a lot of the big camps, big school visits, is from a medium sized school in Arkansas, and doesn't carry a long list.  The fact is that most don't offer because they knew he was a lock and they don't want to be turned down.  Some guru in California knows little about Burks.  When he starts ranking players, he is going to rate similar sized athletes with more big offers higher than Burks.  Burks then becomes a high 3 or lower 4 when he may be a 5 the whole time.

4.  Coaches find gems all the time and they try to keep them quiet as long as possible.  Sometimes the secret gets out and then you see a kids rating or ranking shoot up.  When some shoot up, others get pushed down.  This happens all the time and in many cases does because of other reasons stated.  The moral is that ratings and rankings do matter overall.  No doubt about it.  However, ratings on any given class or on any given athlete can be way off and isn't something to be too concerned about if you have faith in the staffs ability to evaluate and develop players.

5.  Considering AR's national prestige in recent years, our ranking may be similar to where it has traditionally been, but I would say we had to recruit better than we traditionally have just o land in that spot.  This is a great class.  Had AR been in bowl games and winning 8 or 9 games most years recently, we would be a higher rated class due to the variables I stated above. 

Pork Twain

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #29 on: February 01, 2019, 10:46:51 am »

Obviously the individual rankings are used in a mathematical formula to get the team rankings,  but when the individual rankings are biased and/or garbage, you can plug them into whatever formula you want but you still get garbage. Iím not focusing on anything other than how great a class we have. I was simply responding to you saying the class rankings arenít trash. I couldNíT care less about our rankings. This class is unbelievable.
Sorry, I just do not believe that there is some grand conspiracy out there to lower individual player rankings by 10th of decimal points, so that Arkansas will finish below Nebraska or ND.  Rankings are flawed for everyone, not just poor little Arkansas
« Last Edit: February 01, 2019, 11:58:23 am by Pork Twain »
Logged

justmakeit2thebcs

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #30 on: February 01, 2019, 10:57:12 am »

Obviously the recruiting rankings debate goes on every year. Some people say they are not accurate and others point to teams success year after year if having top classes and that that must have some merit. But this year for sure just doesnít make sense to me.

On rivals we are ranked #18. We have 26 commits with 14/4 star and 12/3 star

Teams ranked ahead of us:

Penn State 20-13/7
Notre Dame 21-11/10
Nebraska 26-10/16
Tennessee 21-11/10
USC 20-10/10

No 5 stars for any of them. (By the way, cases could be made we have a stronger class than Florida, Auburn, and Florida staye. But since they have at least a 5 star Iím keaving them out) So we have here 5 programs that have an established history of success. All have less 4 stars than us, and even in some cases less 3 stars as well. Now how in the world can someone say these arenít garbage rankings? 
You realize not all 4 stars are the same?  some are just barely a 4 and some almost a 5.  Most of our 4s are borderline.  There is no conspiracy here.

hawginbigd1

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 480
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 6,657
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #31 on: February 01, 2019, 12:22:31 pm »

On 247 at least, players are not ranked by their star rating; they are given a numerical score, which (I suppose) for historical reasons and for comparison with other ranking services, they also convert to a star rating.  The accumulation of star ratings in a team's class has nothing to do with the ranking of that team by 247.  It uses the numerical scores assigned to each player.  For 247, I believe the breakdown is something like (approximately):

5*: 0.97 - 1.0
4*: 0.89 - 0.97
3*: 0.80 - 0.89

So my point is that telling me the star-distribution of a team's class gives me only a general sense of the "perceived" quality of that class.  247 has a mathematical formula that they use to calculate a team's recruiting score, and they use that formula in a mathematically correct way.  You can argue all day long that the formula is wrong, or more likely, that the player rankings are wrong (or biased); however, as stated earlier, the calculation is pure math and the rankings are based off running the numbers. 

So for me,

The calculation - repeatable, reliable (everybody who submits the same numbers, gets the same results)

The individual player ratings - not repeatable, not reliable (different people, in different situations, looking at the same player will likely produce a different rating).  This is the primary error source in the entire process.


I agree.  The recruiting rankings are garbage...but they do give you a general sense of class quality.  Our trajectory is definitely up with this class.
Great post all but the last part, they are not garbage, but there are flaws. Stars are really insignificant the numerical rating and whether or not a recruit is top 100- 300 or not matter in the rankings. These are the reasons a ND is rated ahead of us with fewer 4 stars, their fewer 4 stars outrank our 4 stars.

PharmacistHog

  • Global Moderator
  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 2041
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 13,950
  • The Peopleís Mod
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #32 on: February 01, 2019, 12:26:38 pm »

Sorry, I just do not believe that there is some grand conspiracy out there to lower individual player rankings by 10th of decimal points, so that Arkansas will finish below Nebraska or ND.  Rankings are flawed for everyone, not just poor little Arkansas

I dont either. But I think as Alabama and Ohio state and those start filling their classes the rankings adjust accordingly. I dont think it has anything to do with arkansas.
Logged

1highhog

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 2163
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 11,205
  • Fortis Fortuna Adiuvat.
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #33 on: February 01, 2019, 12:29:09 pm »

Obviously the recruiting rankings debate goes on every year. Some people say they are not accurate and others point to teams success year after year if having top classes and that that must have some merit. But this year for sure just doesnít make sense to me.

On rivals we are ranked #18. We have 26 commits with 14/4 star and 12/3 star

Teams ranked ahead of us:

Penn State 20-13/7
Notre Dame 21-11/10
Nebraska 26-10/16
Tennessee 21-11/10
USC 20-10/10

No 5 stars for any of them. (By the way, cases could be made we have a stronger class than Florida, Auburn, and Florida staye. But since they have at least a 5 star Iím keaving them out) So we have here 5 programs that have an established history of success. All have less 4 stars than us, and even in some cases less 3 stars as well. Now how in the world can someone say these arenít garbage rankings? 

We have two 5* players.  They just didn't bother to go to every single big event to hype themselves, they know who they are.  The #1 TE in the country by far and Burks is the #1 everything, and I'm not saying that as a homer, that boy could go to the NFL on offense or defense.

SooieGeneris

  • Hogvillian
  • ******
  • Total likes: 731
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 1,871
  • You don't ever want to be chasin' speed..
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #34 on: February 01, 2019, 01:00:59 pm »

No it proves Texas has been the outlier. It also proves that a great recruiting class without a top QB is hard to overcome.  Are you saying the top recruiting teams haven't made up the playoff sports?

Clemson and FSU are in the same conference. Clemson has owned FSU.

Clemson's last 5 classes in 2014-18 had the composite rankings of: 16,9,11,16,7.
FSU's last 5 classes had composite rankings of: 4,3,3,6,11.

Is that not an "outlier?" Are Clemson's coaches that much better than FSU's? Don't throw the Willie Taggart card either as Jimbo Fisher and staff were owned by Clemson the 4 years previous..

FSU's worst class in that period was #11. Clemson had 3 classes out of 5 ranked 11 or worse. No Rivals bashing either, these are the 24/7 composites..

Is FSU more "talented" than Clemson? If so, Houston, they have a problem..

FSU W-L record 2014-18: 45-20
Clemson W-L record 2014-18: 65-7

Anyone can parse the rankings any way they want but there is also this:

Alabama recruiting rankings last 5: #1,1,1,1,5
Clemson recruiting rankings last 5: #16,9,11,16,7

So the recruiting rankings are the be all end all? Scoreboard said Clemson 44-Alabama 16 and it hasn't changed since the game.. Clemson 2 NCs last 3 years, Alabama 1.

I don't know if they are biased against anyone, but these ranking are NOT INFALLIBLE whether they are biased or not. They are very fallible!
« Last Edit: February 01, 2019, 01:19:38 pm by SooieGeneris »
Logged

Redhogs

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #35 on: February 01, 2019, 01:31:35 pm »

I don't think there's necessarily a bias against the non-blue-bloods.  I think that more than anything, these recruiting analysts just want to be right.  So we see the players committed to better programs (where they're more likely to have high profile success) get a little better treatment in the rankings.
Best explanation I've heard yet.
Logged

Redhogs

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #36 on: February 01, 2019, 01:34:50 pm »

All teams you listed are much better than us. Happy to be in the conversation.
Until Arkansas starts winning, we are not going to get the benefit of the doubt with anything...including recruiting rankings.
Logged

redeye

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #37 on: February 01, 2019, 02:00:55 pm »

As many have noted, not all 4 stars are the same and that's likely the reason for our perceived discrepancies in the rankings.  Some say that Henry and Burks are 5 star players, even if the services don't think so.  Honestly, I have no idea, but this gave me one.

Using 247''s class calculator, I removed Henry and Burks.  I then added the 2 lowest ranked 5 stars in the 247 composite (Jordan Whittington [TX] and Bo Nix [AU]).  That gave us a rating of 244.48, which is over 7 points higher than our current rating of 237.24.  It also would put us in 19th place, right in front of Nebraska and behind USC.

So, this is probably the least we should expect, if Henry and Burks were bumped back up to 5 stars.  I say "bumped back up", because both had 5 stars about 1 year ago.  Then we could complain about USC being in front of us, despite having no 5 star recruits and fewer 4 stars...  ;)

Fairview76

  • Band Nerd
  • **
  • Total likes: 0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 28
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #38 on: February 01, 2019, 02:23:50 pm »

Has anyone spent the time researching and ranking the recruiting services?  Look at classes two or three years down the road and see how the players turned out verses where the recruiting services had them ranked?
Logged

redeye

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #39 on: February 01, 2019, 02:31:23 pm »

Has anyone spent the time researching and ranking the recruiting services?  Look at classes two or three years down the road and see how the players turned out verses where the recruiting services had them ranked?

I think one of the services reranks past classes yearly.  I always miss it, so I'm not sure which service.  I remember Arkansas ended up with a top-5 class in the Petrino years, though.

Pig in the Pokey

  • Gold Hogvillian
  • *********
  • Total likes: 1837
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 26,173
  • Roastin da bomb in Fayettenam.
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #40 on: February 01, 2019, 04:50:14 pm »

I think one of the services reranks past classes yearly.  I always miss it, so I'm not sure which service.  I remember Arkansas ended up with a top-5 class in the Petrino years, though.
yep. And we've had THREE top 10 classes. It's just more evidence that lack of subscriptions hurt our ranking with these dudes. That and they undervalue instate kids, even ones with Bama offers. And , finally, if we STILL end up 'too high' we get hit with a last score adjustment that plummets our best players (just happened and we went from 12th to 18th).
Logged

carolinahogger

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #41 on: February 01, 2019, 06:01:35 pm »

For as long as these ranking services have existed Razorback fans have been crying about our recruits not getting the high rankings that they deserve.  In general, they have been wrong.

What was the average ranking of Bert's last 4 recruiting classes?  In the 20s or 30s?  Were the 2017 Razorbacks in the top 50 teams in the country?  Nope.  So the case is easily made that those classes were overrated.

Same for last year. 
Logged

greenie

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #42 on: February 01, 2019, 08:48:24 pm »

Great post all but the last part, they are not garbage, but there are flaws. Stars are really insignificant the numerical rating and whether or not a recruit is top 100- 300 or not matter in the rankings. These are the reasons a ND is rated ahead of us with fewer 4 stars, their fewer 4 stars outrank our 4 stars.

Youíre right. ďGarbage ď is too strong a criticism.  They at least tell you who is going to have a sustainable level of excellence. For example, teams ranked regularly in the top ten are far more likely to be perennially  competitive. Teams not getting these top classes may flash occasionally, but wonít sustain. Not an absolute, but certainly typical.
Logged

Deep Shoat

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 1132
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5,165
  • The Artist formerly known as Hong Kong Sooey
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #43 on: February 02, 2019, 05:15:14 am »

Fake news.  I am not saying that individual recruits are not given a higher score based on where they land and who is recruiting them, I am saying that the way the numbers are calculated for the team rankings, is indeed mathematical.
If the individual rating is manipulated, then the whole number is crap.

Garbage in, garbage out.
Logged

Pigcrazy

  • Varsity
  • ****
  • Total likes: 99
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 350
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #44 on: February 02, 2019, 07:45:19 am »

The rankings are pure speculation. Letís wait and see on field performance to judge the quality of our class vs others. I couldnít care less a recruiting rankings compared to wins and losses.
Logged

plumbhog

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #45 on: February 02, 2019, 08:20:54 am »

The team you sign with should impact your rating. Take an average 3 star player and place him on a team of average 3 star players and you'll probably get 3 star results. Take that same player and place him on a team that surrounds him with 5 star players and he will probably perform much better.

As good as McFadden was, don't you think his numbers would have been much better if he had been running behind Bama's or Auburn's line?
Logged

PigPusher

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 107
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 8,480
  • Just another day as a Hog!!!
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #46 on: February 04, 2019, 12:05:53 am »

Totally agree that there is for sure something that smells about the way the recruiting rankings are conducted. If this is so all the schools are are be marginalized with reduced player strengths could have a few surprises to mete out to the "Power Schools." It was said earlier that it does not matter what anyone says about recruiting strength because it all boils down to what happens on the field. Now the referee bias or instructions could play a part here but the truth finally wins out as a rule.  We may have three or four that can puss a 5 star rankings if all were called equally. You put these players on the field in behalf of the Hogs and the truth will be heard.
Logged

Deerhunter

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #47 on: February 04, 2019, 01:48:19 am »

If rankings meant nothing then the odds of about 100 other schools who recruit outside the top 25 every year of winning a championship would be extremely high.  Thing is they havenít...
Logged

Hawgphat

  • Hall of Fame Hogvillian
  • *******
  • Total likes: 463
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 5,550
  • Surfing the web at Hogville.net
Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #48 on: February 04, 2019, 02:15:49 am »

The only rankings which carry any definitive, permanent weight are the weekly AP rankings, - - and the final AP ranking at the conclusion of each succeeding season.  The rest of the contributory PR is just window dressing, - - and does not factor into the national record archives.  It does no harm that I can perceive; - - but it really holds no practical merit other than that of indicating the relative strengths of the various teams in the PR-hyped preseason rankings - - - (according to the "experts").
Logged

Pork Twain

Re: These recruiting rankings are garbage.
« Reply #49 on: February 04, 2019, 06:31:14 am »

If the individual rating is manipulated, then the whole number is crap.

Garbage in, garbage out.

They are not without their flaws, but I would say they are not garbage.  People that don't finish as high as they think they should, usually find fault in the system
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
 

KARK
KWNA
Fox 16 Arkansas