April 20th, 2012 at 12:11 PM ^
247's are already out. However, they're not rankings make by the gurus, but rather just an algorithm based on #of recruits multiplied by the ranking of the recruits, so it's not a great measure of classes this early in the game. Needless to say we are number 1.
LINK?
April 20th, 2012 at 12:16 PM ^
Isn't that how all the sites do it though?
April 20th, 2012 at 12:18 PM ^
I'm honestly not sure, but I dont think that they do—mostly because I remember people mentioning how bad 247's system team ranking system is early in the game.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:22 PM ^
Well, it could very well be that 247's methodology is bunk compared to the othere sites, but I don't think Rivals or Scout have anything subjective in their rankings.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:36 PM ^
Well, considering 247 uses a Gaussian distribution formula [click the info button at the top next to "Football Team Rankings"] to rank classes, it certainly could be the case that small sample size was the big issue. I also think that's why Rivals and Scout don't release rankings early in the game, since not all players are ranked and not enough schools have enough numbers in their class. Here's the Scout/Rivals formula.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:40 PM ^
If you have a larger class you are always going to be ranked higher with these sites. That is why some Sparty fans were crying las year. They kept bringing up average stars, which we were still much higher.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:47 PM ^
They use Photoshop?
April 20th, 2012 at 12:38 PM ^
But those rankings are based on numerical values given by the gurus. 247 is just on a different scale. 1-100 vs 5.0-6.0 for Rivals.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:16 PM ^
1. MIchigan
2. Others
April 20th, 2012 at 12:42 PM ^
Spoiler alert.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:27 PM ^
2 points to you sir as I laugh out loud.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:38 PM ^
As a2 suggested, these are terribly done. They're basically just a ranking of class size. One example is Central Michigan (one two-star recruit and one three-star recruit) being well ahead of Oregon (one five-star recruit).
It's nice that they have Michigan at #1, but the algorithm is so lame that this just shows that we have a lot of commitments.
In my view, subjective rankings like Ace's are much better right now.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:43 PM ^
This is the reason why it is hard to determine who has the best class right now. If you go by average stars then Oregon would have the #1 class in the nation, but they only have 1 commit.
I'll go with ESPN because that will give us the most national spotlight.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:36 PM ^
Released their first 2012 team rankings on 6/23/11.
April 20th, 2012 at 12:48 PM ^
The re-rank of Ohio helped us on 247. Smith and Conley both getting 4 stars and bumped into the top 247 gave us a bigger lead point wise.
ESPN showed their list on a recruiting nation show earlier this week .. We were #1
Just found the link
http://search.espn.go.com/s/overlay/videoOverlay?searchString=top%20cla…
A poster at Rivals tried to approximate their rankings...and Michigan was #1 and in the lead by quite a bit.
Yes, 247's rankings are a little hinky until most schools approach the average class size but they're out much sooner than the other sites. Texas, Bama and Michigan have the best classes right now.
Our class is so superior that they had to put us on the list twice. #1 and #10.