247 composite rankings

[Uncle Ruckus]

I don't get it. Scout and 247 are becoming one in the same. Rivals is awful and doesn't provide a numerical rating from what I can tell. The new commit from Forest is a 90 on 247, unranked on Scout, a 4* #247 overall on Rivals (#247 on 247 is a 90 for reference), but his composite is 93. Where the 17 does that come from?

 

[msudawg12]

I'm not sure what they will do for sure but if I was them, I would drop the composite after the completion of the Scout acquisition.

 

[Strike.sixpack]

They also factor in ESPN rankings as well

 

[Uncle Ruckus]

Damnit. I knew I forgot something

 

[Msubulldogfan1]

When do they update their rankings?

 

[TheStateUofMS]

Rivals does rankings.

Hover over "Recruiting" at the top then click "FB Team Rankings."
We're #16
https://n.rivals.com/team_rankings/2018/all-teams/football

 

[TheStateUofMS]

You're also talking about kids who are currently Juniors in HS. They don't have priority to be ranked by every service just yet. ESPN doesn't even really update their JC recruits until the end of the year.

 

[engie]

Anyone that's a 4* in all of the first 3 services that rank him is probably a 4*. A lot of times someone will be a 4* in the first service that ranks them early in the process and it will be a misnomer. Jonnas Spivey comes to mind on that from back when I was really following closely.

That said, the MS rankings while having improved are still a crapshoot. I like the 247 individual ranking more than the composite for that reason, because they actually invest time and eyeballs here. Although it seems to have gotten worse from a distance in the recent years.

Several of the services work like this:
- Get a power 5 offer, you are a 3*.
- Get multiple power 5 offers, you are a high 3*.
- Get invited to an All-American game, you are a 4*.
- Light up the MS/AL game and subsequent all-star games, you are a 4*. Although they won't admit it, this is when many of these players actually get evaluated by the national guys for the first time unless they get invited to/go to one of the huge camps as a JR. Their ratings up until that point based on above criteria. And often guys will light up the MS/AL game and still be 3*s because they effectively "came out of nowhere" since they committed early and kept a low recruiting profile.
- Actually have elite programs competing for you down to the wire, you are a high 4*. Meet that plus the all-star criteria, you might be a 5*.

None of that requires one minute of actual player evaluation. Just looking at compiled data. Which is why Paul/Robbie/Steve have a better handle on what these players are than anyone else does, because they are actually going to the games and getting to know more about them.

 

[mount lefroy]

Anyone that's a 4* in all of the first 3 services that rank him is probably a 4*. A lot of times someone will be a 4* in the first service that ranks them early in the process and it will be a misnomer. Jonnas Spivey comes to mind on that from back when I was really following closely.

That said, the MS rankings while having improved are still a crapshoot. I like the 247 individual ranking more than the composite for that reason, because they actually invest time and eyeballs here. Although it seems to have gotten worse from a distance in the recent years.

Several of the services work like this:
- Get a power 5 offer, you are a 3*.
- Get multiple power 5 offers, you are a high 3*.
- Get invited to an All-American game, you are a 4*.
- Light up the MS/AL game and subsequent all-star games, you are a 4*. Although they won't admit it, this is when many of these players actually get evaluated by the national guys for the first time unless they get invited to/go to one of the huge camps as a JR. Their ratings up until that point based on above criteria. And often guys will light up the MS/AL game and still be 3*s because they effectively "came out of nowhere" since they committed early and kept a low recruiting profile.
- Actually have elite programs competing for you down to the wire, you are a high 4*. Meet that plus the all-star criteria, you might be a 5*.

None of that requires one minute of actual player evaluation. Just looking at compiled data. Which is why Paul/Robbie/Steve have a better handle on what these players are than anyone else does, because they are actually going to the games and getting to know more about them.

'None of that requires one minute of actual player evaluation.'

AND there you have it. It's why they get some right by relying on Saban and some others to tell them who the best is. The majority RARELY evaluate accurately those who Saban , Meyer, et al don't offer.

Recruiting rankings are only valid AFTER the fact and with the temperance that a great coach can make a world of difference from 3 star to 5 star.

 

[TheStateUofMS]

I'm a member on Gene's Page for the sole reason Steve gets out and sees the recruits and he also says guys "can play" or whatever, but I've never heard him go out on a limb lately and say someone should be a 5 star when they are a 3 star. Most of the time he says our guys are right where they should be as high 3s or a low 4 star. He does take issue with OL being 2 stars sometimes.

 

[Uncle Ruckus]

Slightly disagree. I only hear him on the boneyard, but he makes everyone out to be a superstar. I don't know what else I expect, he's not going to come out and say he belongs at JSU even if he believes it.

 

[woozman]

Do. Not. Care.

 

[TheStateUofMS]

I don't get that from him. He's optimistic but I wouldn't call him a homer.