USA Today Recruiting Class Ranking

Submitted by wolverine1987 on
This is a snippet of a much larger article in today's sports section of USA Today. It's interesting because given the inexact nature of recruiting, and the lack of clear evidence for one service or another being better predictors, this is an average of 4, but not including Scout. Kind of like when in politics they look at an poll average or consensus of polls. Not definitive by any means, but interesting: A consensus of recruiting services ranks these schools with the best signing classes: 1. LSU 2. Alabama 3. Southern California 4. Ohio State 5. Texas 6. Georgia 7. North Carolina 8. Florida 9. Florida State 10. Michigan Other interesting tidbit from the article: apparently MSU is ranked 10th by ESPN

DamnYankee

February 5th, 2009 at 9:03 AM ^

Various services have us as high as 7 and as low as 13, with ESPN ranking us right in the middle @ 10. After last year and yesterday's late additions - I'll take it!

chally

February 5th, 2009 at 9:04 AM ^

Often forgotten in all of the hype surrounding the recruiting season is that, under Lloyd Carr, we've often failed to fully develop the talent we've recruited. Over the last several years, our team rankings have been pretty comparable to those of Oklahoma and Ohio State. Yet, save for the 2006 season, we've not seen nearly the on-field success. I'm really hoping that the new S&C staff manages to get the most out of these kids' potential, and that Rich Rod and Greg Robinson can turn that potential into Ws. I'm excited about this group and looking forward to the new year of football!

Ernis

February 5th, 2009 at 10:19 AM ^

Often forgotten in the assertions that Carr's highly ranked recruiting classes not winning national titles = not developing the awesome talent, is the imperfect nature of talent evaluation and measurement. That goes both for Carr's staff and the media. Because a player is highly ranked does not mean he will be a stud necessarily, and vice-versa. But I am with you for the most part. Most of the observed disparity between our recruiting class rank and subsequent season rank would be due to lack of proper development/motivation. Not that I have any evidence to base it on... just a philosophical assumption.

Yinka Double Dare

February 5th, 2009 at 9:29 AM ^

USA Today thus confused us with State, because ESPN has Michigan at #10, and State not in the top 25. Then again, what do you expect from a paper that can't say anything unless it's in pretty chart form.

goody

February 5th, 2009 at 9:34 AM ^

review previous recruiting classes after they graduate so that they can announce a true #1 class after proving it on the field. i.e.: Grady turned out at a 2* ..... Pat White = 5*