📝 Here's an example of 'one' of the issues I have with Rivals recruiting rankings ...

[TerryP]

I grabbed these quotes from the Recruiting News thread and it started me thinking about Rivals and their "Team Rankings" of recruiting classes. As you guys are probably well aware, their rankings are done on a point system ... and of course a five star carries more points than a four star.

Very interested to see how high he climbs in the final rankings. Keep in mind only 32 players will receive five-stars. Will he make the top 32 when it's all said and done? Lot of other good players out there. Top 50 is still pretty dang good.

They will then decide the 32 best players in the country and give them five-stars. He is deserving of five-stars, but others are as well. So it's a tough assignment for the Rivals staff to put the list together.

I've heard Mike Farrell explain their rankings one more than one occasion. Recently, he began "devaluing" linebackers because "they can't tell how well they tackle in camps" as one explanation. Now, to me, that reads "they put too much emphasis on camps." But, I digress.

If a "recruitnik" is to value their rankings and then hear them say there's only 32 players who deserve that ranking...what value is found here? What we're being told by Rivals is Ben Davis is a top 10 player in the country in '16, but Dylan Moses isn't because there's only room for 32? And, BTW, Moses is considered a five star guy from 247's Composite ranking, 15th by their own, number sixth best player in the nation by Scout ... I won't even bother looking at ESPN but I'm willing to bet his ranking there is in the top 10.

But, there's only 32 five stars in the country according to Rivals "formula."

 

[BamaFan334]

I grabbed these quotes from the Recruiting News thread and it started me thinking about Rivals and their "Team Rankings" of recruiting classes. As you guys are probably well aware, their rankings are done on a point system ... and of course a five star carries more points than a four star.





I've heard Mike Farrell explain their rankings one more than one occasion. Recently, he began "devaluing" linebackers because "they can't tell how well they tackle in camps" as one explanation. Now, to me, that reads "they put too much emphasis on camps." But, I digress.

If a "recruitnik" is to value their rankings and then hear them say there's only 32 players who deserve that ranking...what value is found here? What we're being told by Rivals is Ben Davis is a top 10 player in the country in '16, but Dylan Moses isn't because there's only room for 32? And, BTW, Moses is considered a five star guy from 247's Composite ranking, 15th by their own, number sixth best player in the nation by Scout ... I won't even bother looking at ESPN but I'm willing to bet his ranking there is in the top 10.

But, there's only 32 five stars in the country according to Rivals "formula."

Glad you brought this up, because I was reading up on this the other day. You are absolutely correct that they put a ton into the camp circuit and all star games, rather than film and a bigger body of work. I'm starting to wonder if they are simply marketing this whole five star ranking to build their camps, advertising, and creating more traffic rather than simply rating these guys like they should. Farrell gives me something to read, but he also crosses me as a guy I'd like to punch with his arrogance and cockiness, since he holds most of the keys to these rankings and has built an industry that grades kids out and plays with them mentally. His formula is not right though in short, as it has evolved to create a rare combination to earn a fifth star, a la the buzz now over stars.

 

[UAgrad93]

The whole comment about only room for 32 5* kids really made me scratch my head. We have all heard how some years are heavier on talent than others when talkin instate talent. So some years, I would think nationally, there would be more 5* than others. There may be an additional 20-30 kids or more worthy of that extra star but did not go to these camps.

 

[sean]

the only recruiting expert and tool i need are pictured below:

 

[Tidestalker]

Great point Terry... And when I read that original statement about 32 5 Star's, I was really surprised. It's like a writer who's already written his conclusion before the story has played out. Every year is different!!

I'll always give those sites some slack because there's no perfect way to do this. Extremely subjective profession with subjects that are constantly changing. I do tend to think we notice a lot more when they get things wrong, but many times the rankings are justified.

On a personal note, when I watched Dylan Moses he did not look like the 5 star guys we've signed who have gone on to justify their rankings. Just seems like he's missing some instincts of Foster/McClain/Hightower/Evans. As noted on this site though, he's fairly new to LB. The measurable are unbeatable, he can run, physically he's ready. Would not shock me to see our coaches turn him into a beast, but as of now I could see why he's not an elite (5 star?) linebacker.

I'm super thankful for Alabama16's recruiting updates though... I've been really out of the loop. Love catching up! Good topic. RTR

 

[TerryP]

I do tend to think we notice a lot more when they get things wrong, but many times the rankings are justified.

That reminds me of an old conversation had here when we were looking at Texas for the BCSNC. The VAST majority of the media and a good number of fans talked of the recruiting bed of Texas. When we started looking at their classes and then delved into the state rankings there were a lot of highly ranked guys that never amounted to much on the field. Brown's recruiting really was exposed that month of December.

I do agree many of the player rankings are justified. The class rankings from Rivals with so many points hinging on 5 stars? That's where it gets real murky in my eyes. Not only is it very subjective, but it's built to where a class with a few fives stars will rank much higher than one with none but the later very well could have equal talent.

It's one of those parts of their formula that's ... well, just bad.

 

[BamaFan334]

That reminds me of an old conversation had here when we were looking at Texas for the BCSNC. The VAST majority of the media and a good number of fans talked of the recruiting bed of Texas. When we started looking at their classes and then delved into the state rankings there were a lot of highly ranked guys that never amounted to much on the field. Brown's recruiting really was exposed that month of December.

I do agree many of the player rankings are justified. The class rankings from Rivals with so many points hinging on 5 stars? That's where it gets real murky in my eyes. Not only is it very subjective, but it's built to where a class with a few fives stars will rank much higher than one with none but the later very well could have equal talent.

It's one of those parts of their formula that's ... well, just bad.

Personally I think that was due to the state of Texas tooting their own horn because they think they're the kings of high school football. I've said it since I was in high school that the state of Georgia puts out more players worth a crap than Texas, per capita. Everyone guves Florida, California, and Texas credit, but simply bypassed Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi for years. Now of course they're all over us acting like they knew the entire time when they wouldn't give us the time of day.

 

[planomateo]

Personally I think that was due to the state of Texas tooting their own horn because they think they're the kings of high school football. I've said it since I was in high school that the state of Georgia puts out more players worth a crap than Texas, per capita. Everyone guves Florida, California, and Texas credit, but simply bypassed Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi for years. Now of course they're all over us acting like they knew the entire time when they wouldn't give us the time of day.

Just a numbers game in Texas, lots of people, lots of high schools.

 

[JoshB]

I lost all faith in those recruiting services after one of them (cant remember if it was Scout or Rivals) refused to remove the points from Auburn and give them to Alabama the year Cyrus committed to Auburn but then switched to Bama right after on signing day. That was beyond ridiculous and they couldnt give a good explanation of why Alabama wouldnt get those points.

 

[Tidestalker]

That reminds me of an old conversation had here when we were looking at Texas for the BCSNC. The VAST majority of the media and a good number of fans talked of the recruiting bed of Texas. When we started looking at their classes and then delved into the state rankings there were a lot of highly ranked guys that never amounted to much on the field. Brown's recruiting really was exposed that month of December.

I do agree many of the player rankings are justified. The class rankings from Rivals with so many points hinging on 5 stars? That's where it gets real murky in my eyes. Not only is it very subjective, but it's built to where a class with a few fives stars will rank much higher than one with none but the later very well could have equal talent.

It's one of those parts of their formula that's ... well, just bad.

Got ya. I hadn't looked into that deep in terms of overall class ranks. Makes sense.

 

[TerryP]

Personally I think that was due to the state of Texas tooting their own horn because they think they're the kings of high school football.

I've heard Farrell talk about how their rankings are subjective. It's true in the most pure form of the word.

In the situation with Texas players I saw that a a subjective issue: a regional bias is probably a better way to describe the whole story. The "evaluators" felt the schools in Texas were that good therefore the stars of those schools were. Mis-evaluation or bad coaching?

 

[BamaFan334]

Just a numbers game in Texas, lots of people, lots of high schools.

I agree, and I'm not dogging the state of Texas and their high school football at all. They have some rabid fans and great systems at some big time programs. I just thought it was short sided for the analyst to buy into the Varsity Blues and Friday Night Lights narrative without necessarily breaking down football in other regions.

 

[planomateo]

I agree, and I'm not dogging the state of Texas and their high school football at all. They have some rabid fans and great systems at some big time programs. I just thought it was short sided for the analyst to buy into the Varsity Blues and Friday Night Lights narrative without necessarily breaking down football in other regions.

I didn't take it that way and by all means, I'm not defending the state.

When people ask me where I'm from, I always respond Alabama and I live in Texas.

 

[planomateo]

Speaking of Texas, look who's raiding the recruits.

 

[JoshB]

Speaking of Texas, look who's raiding the recruits.

View attachment 6401

Everyone other than Texas? :rolf:

 

[94 Grad]

The whole comment about only room for 32 5* kids really made me scratch my head. We have all heard how some years are heavier on talent than others when talkin instate talent. So some years, I would think nationally, there would be more 5* than others. There may be an additional 20-30 kids or more worthy of that extra star but did not go to these camps.

They are trying to say who will be a 1st round draft pick and labeling them as a 5*. That is why there is only 32 (only 32 picks in the NFL draft). Just because you have a deeper draft pool, you don't have more 1st round picks... maybe more 1st round talent that can be picked up in the 2nd round, much like some of those 4* and 3* kids that turn out to be much better than the "Star" ranking would indicate...

 

[TerryP]

They are trying to say who will be a 1st round draft pick and labeling them as a 5*.

Several years ago I did some pretty extensive research into this subject. Saying "heard Farrell" means "heard Farrell" and when he explained the Rivals way of thinking it wasn't about draft picks.
The easiest way I know to describe his ideas, along with those that Shannon Terry brought to the table with 247, was how quickly they'd be able to make an impact at the collegiate level.

The five star guys are seeing the field and contributing as freshman in their forecast/opinion. Your three star guy they are looking at 'shirting, the seeing time as a 'shirted sophomore and contributing as a junior.

Here's something related to read over:

Rivals.com - Rivals.com Five-Star Club: Revisiting the 2016 five-stars