ESPN recruiting rankings seem biased
I havent seen this mentioned here yet...
It looks like ESPN has team recruiting rankings up.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/recruiting/classrankings?classyear=2010&c…
Surprise Surprise they squeezed seven SEC teams into the top 15.
They put South Carolina in the top 15 even though Scout and rivals dont have SC in their top 25.
Has there ever been such a blatant conflict of interest for a supposed news agency?
They didnt have much credibility in the CFB recruiting rankings in the first place.
This isnt a huge discrepancy but enough for me to ignore them from now on as they seem to be clearly biased.
September 30th, 2009 at 5:14 PM ^
This concerns me! Run for the hills!
Not saying you're wrong, and this is an honest question, but why would they be so SEC biased?
September 30th, 2009 at 5:20 PM ^
They have a fifteen year contract with the SEC.
September 30th, 2009 at 6:24 PM ^
ESPN has a 10-year $1B contract with the Big Ten too. Plus contracts with the Big 12, Pac-10, ACC, and Big East. The SEC one just draws the most buzz because its the newest and biggest. And a big part of the reason it was worth so much was because ESPN overpaid so that the SEC wouldn't try and start up their own network a la the Big Ten Network.
If you want to link the bias to anything, link it to the fact that people in the south like/watch/consume football more, and are therefore more likely to watch and click web articles featuring their schools. While ESPN does news, they are still driven by ratings. The SEC draws people, and people = money.
September 30th, 2009 at 7:33 PM ^
mmmmmm football sandwich.
Couldn't resist (good points in your post though).
September 30th, 2009 at 5:19 PM ^
ESPN, Scout, Rivals, and the rest of them are all in business to make money. They create controversy to increase traffic whether it be good or bad, its traffic, and that makes money. They all do it, ESPN is just a little less skilled at masking it. Making the SEC out to be gods makes SEC traffic because they all get the feeling of 'I told ya so'. The rest of us will look to just to piss and moan at how stupid they are and they must be doing this to sell add slots. Mission accomplished.
September 30th, 2009 at 5:20 PM ^
broadcasting rights. I think it's for football and possibly hoops, but CBS broadcasts one SEC game every Saturday so I'm not sure of all the details.
ESPN has developed a habit of over-covering and over-hyping the sports/teams/conferences they cover the most.
These rankings surprise me...not at all.
September 30th, 2009 at 5:25 PM ^
Yeah im not really surprised either i just thought it was noteworthy and could be used as evidence of the bias in the future.
September 30th, 2009 at 8:14 PM ^
What are you gonna do, sue them?
September 30th, 2009 at 5:41 PM ^
Not just 7 of the top 15, but 5 of the top 6 (!!??!?) are SEC teams
September 30th, 2009 at 5:48 PM ^
ESPN still pays almost the same or maybe even more money to the BIG TEN. Everyone allready assumes the esss eeee ceeee pwns noobs. So it seems like they would want pepole to think the Big Ten is at least OK, since they still have TONS of big ten games.
Also I don't think they are tyring to get "hits" from the south. The Big Ten has tons of fans in more major cities.
Of course ESPN over covers games on thier networks. But I doubt they would rank South Carolina's class that much better so they could get all 10,000 of their fans to click on espn.com, and try to piss off Illinois/Wisconsin fans all over the country.
September 30th, 2009 at 6:01 PM ^
I'm not sure I see the connection between ESPN inflating recruiting "RANKINGS" and their own ratings. It's not like more people tune in to watch teams who have guys who ESPN said were good in high school. People tune in to watch good teams. Just because ESPN claims guys are better than they are in high school does not translate to good play on the college football field.
September 30th, 2009 at 6:12 PM ^
What?!?! you mean they might base their rankings off of a story they could write?
I wonder how many articles they had ready last year for how USC was able to pull in the top defensive and offensive players last year. hhahhahahahhahhhahaha
September 30th, 2009 at 6:25 PM ^
Has there ever been such a blatant conflict of interest for a supposed news agency?didn't fox news and mayor giuliani have some kind of affiliation when he was nyc's mayor, yet they covered the 2008 election?
September 30th, 2009 at 7:32 PM ^
Actually I think the conflict is with Scout and Rivals. One of the Scout guys (forgive me for forgetting who) said that the rankings were inflated for people in the north to get more subscribers. The thinking was that if all the 5 stars were in Florida and Texas it would deaden the interest of the midwest and northeast. This was said to allay some concerns about the 3* types we were getting from the south.
So may it be possible that ESPN is ignoring geography when figuring out their rankings?
September 30th, 2009 at 8:02 PM ^
good point. The ratings are all equally divided regionally on scout and rivals which is why penn state has such a strong class?
more top players from the northeast than comparable players from the south.