I find this to be very interesting and quite impressive (assuming the math works, which I'm not checking).  Predicting preseason team rankings given a single variable vs. experts ranking teams using all information at hand and the single variable providing a better result almost half the time - I find that impressive.  He's not claiming that recruiting rankings are the only variable that should be used or that recruiting rankings are even the best variable for ranking teams, just that this one variable is almost as good as the experts.  Sure, recruiting has a lot of factors baked into the ranking, but so does most any variable (ranking coaches takes into a school's financial resources and commitment to football, the number of returning starters includes coaching, etc.)

I'm not suggesting, and I don't believe thepowerrank is either, that this one variable is the only lense through which to view teams in 2013.  It's another way to view teams headed into next year.  (The offseason sucks!)

For the nitpickers, there's probably ways to improve the analysis: study this over multiple years, weight the recruiting classes so the freshman class has less impact, rate the players on the roster, rate only the two-deeep or starters, exclude players that have left the team and incoming transfers, etc.

The bottom line, that few would argue, is that recruiting better players is likely to result in a better team.

I'm just wondering if the standard we hold kids to includes basic math: 4 years eligibility - 1 year of playing time = 3 years eligibility.  To his credit, there is the possibility Braxton redshirts this year.

I'm guessing he just got lost in the moment intimidating high school kids half his size.  Let's hope that Hoke instills a little humility.