CSNbbs

Texas State is doing well recruiting

http://rivals.yahoo.com/texasstate/footb...13/all/all

Tulame at 65 How is that possible?

WKU at the top of the Sun Belt. I'll take it.

(01-22-2013 11:13 PM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ]WKU at the top of the Sun Belt. I'll take it.

Texas State is second in the Sun Belt

Don't get too caught up in these rankings...there's a school who will tell you all about their top of the conference ranking in recruiting for many years running...no conference title yet though.

(01-23-2013 03:16 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]Don't get too caught up in these rankings...there's a school who will tell you all about their top of the conference ranking in recruiting for many years running...no conference title yet though.

not getting it done, that is a recurring theme down there isnt it...

(01-23-2013 04:09 AM)TOPPERSonTOP Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 03:16 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]Don't get too caught up in these rankings...there's a school who will tell you all about their top of the conference ranking in recruiting for many years running...no conference title yet though.

not getting it done, that is a recurring theme down there isnt it...

At first I thought you were just a little clueless, now I'm realizing you're just a troll, surely you realize I was talking about Western...

Let's see what these look like after National Signing Day. They are omitting 7 of USA's recruits and we also have a big recruiting weekend this weekend.

(01-23-2013 03:16 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]Don't get too caught up in these rankings...there's a school who will tell you all about their top of the conference ranking in recruiting for many years running...no conference title yet though.

Even the mod can't read a thread without feeling the need to talk smack abouth WKU. Sad.

That post by MTPi was clearly talking about MT as we had the top classes for years and have had no outright championships to show for it.

(01-23-2013 10:13 AM)BlueRaider0x0 Wrote: [ -> ]That post by MTPi was clearly talking about MT as we had the top classes for years and have had no outright championships to show for it.

Well lately that has been WKU's situation. I follow another team that I have been a fan of for years before moving to BG and the fanbase goes insane about whether someone is rated 5.7 or 5.8 on the Rivals board. Obviously there is some validity to the rankings but finding a player who fits your system, does the work and accepts coaching (if it is good coaching) is sometimes more important than what one evaluator at Rivals or Scout say. As you said in the case of MTSU or as I sais regarding WKU, having the best class does not guarantee the conference title, but it puts you in the running as WKU was for the past severla years and MTSU was this past season.

You do realize that this is all bull**** anyway?

Exactly. That's why I don't put weight in the stars or ranking of the classes. Boise St. was going undefeated and winning BCS bowl games with a roster full of "2 star" athletes. Now WKU has a very good coach and should utilize that talent well. I wouldn't be surprised to see you win the SBC title before Petrino leaves.

(01-23-2013 10:08 AM)Jacque Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 03:16 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]Don't get too caught up in these rankings...there's a school who will tell you all about their top of the conference ranking in recruiting for many years running...no conference title yet though.

Even the mod can't read a thread without feeling the need to talk smack abouth WKU. Sad.

I'm sorry, was what I said not true?

And just so we're on the same page, I'm no longer a mod for this board specifically. As a mod of the network, I still have some power here, but cannot move, lock, edit, or delete threads on this board.

(01-23-2013 10:38 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:08 AM)Jacque Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 03:16 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]Don't get too caught up in these rankings...there's a school who will tell you all about their top of the conference ranking in recruiting for many years running...no conference title yet though.

Even the mod can't read a thread without feeling the need to talk smack abouth WKU. Sad.

I'm sorry, was what I said not true?

And just so we're on the same page, I'm no longer a mod for this board specifically. As a mod of the network, I still have some power here, but cannot move, lock, edit, or delete threads on this board.

:lock::lock:

Locked smilies gloat at your inability to lock threads.

(01-23-2013 10:41 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:38 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:08 AM)Jacque Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 03:16 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]Don't get too caught up in these rankings...there's a school who will tell you all about their top of the conference ranking in recruiting for many years running...no conference title yet though.

Even the mod can't read a thread without feeling the need to talk smack abouth WKU. Sad.

I'm sorry, was what I said not true?

And just so we're on the same page, I'm no longer a mod for this board specifically. As a mod of the network, I still have some power here, but cannot move, lock, edit, or delete threads on this board.

:lock::lock:

Locked smilies gloat at your inability to lock threads.

(01-23-2013 10:43 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:41 AM)mathenis89 Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:38 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:08 AM)Jacque Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 03:16 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]Don't get too caught up in these rankings...there's a school who will tell you all about their top of the conference ranking in recruiting for many years running...no conference title yet though.

Even the mod can't read a thread without feeling the need to talk smack abouth WKU. Sad.

I'm sorry, was what I said not true?

And just so we're on the same page, I'm no longer a mod for this board specifically. As a mod of the network, I still have some power here, but cannot move, lock, edit, or delete threads on this board.

:lock::lock:

Locked smilies gloat at your inability to lock threads.

(01-23-2013 10:18 AM)Jacque Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:13 AM)BlueRaider0x0 Wrote: [ -> ]That post by MTPi was clearly talking about MT as we had the top classes for years and have had no outright championships to show for it.

Well lately that has been WKU's situation. I follow another team that I have been a fan of for years before moving to BG and the fanbase goes insane about whether someone is rated 5.7 or 5.8 on the Rivals board. Obviously there is some validity to the rankings but finding a player who fits your system, does the work and accepts coaching (if it is good coaching) is sometimes more important than what one evaluator at Rivals or Scout say. As you said in the case of MTSU or as I sais regarding WKU, having the best class does not guarantee the conference title, but it puts you in the running as WKU was for the past severla years and MTSU was this past season.

Here's the thing about recruiting rankings, they get less and less accurate the further down you go in national rankings. The difference between the #1 class and the #25 class is much greater between the #75 class and the #100 class(the area in which most of our classes generally fall). There is typically much less info on the kids we're signing and we all usually end up signing a handful of kids for which there is almost no info at all. Also, usually some of our top end recruits have some sort of baggage, failed to qualify for a bigger program, kicked off a bigger program, JUCO(not saying all JUCOs have baggage)...whatever the case may be. So on top of the rankings being less accurate in the area in which we typically find ourselves ranked, all it takes is a couple of highly rated recruits being flops or dismissed or a couple of * or ** kids majorly overachieving to turn our already suspect rankings on their ear. If Bama has a 5* kid never make it to campus, or never realize their potential, it sucks, but it doesn't have nearly the same impact if a SBC 4* or even highly regarded 3* doesn't pan out.

I'm not saying I wouldn't rather be ranked 75th rather than 100th, hell I'm not saying I wouldn't rather be ranked 75th than 76th, I'm just saying recruiting rankings, especially in the bottom third of the rankings, aren't nearly the barometer that some make them out to be.

(01-23-2013 10:52 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:18 AM)Jacque Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:13 AM)BlueRaider0x0 Wrote: [ -> ]That post by MTPi was clearly talking about MT as we had the top classes for years and have had no outright championships to show for it.

Well lately that has been WKU's situation. I follow another team that I have been a fan of for years before moving to BG and the fanbase goes insane about whether someone is rated 5.7 or 5.8 on the Rivals board. Obviously there is some validity to the rankings but finding a player who fits your system, does the work and accepts coaching (if it is good coaching) is sometimes more important than what one evaluator at Rivals or Scout say. As you said in the case of MTSU or as I sais regarding WKU, having the best class does not guarantee the conference title, but it puts you in the running as WKU was for the past severla years and MTSU was this past season.

Here's the thing about recruiting rankings, they get less and less accurate the further down you go in national rankings. The difference between the #1 class and the #25 class is much greater between the #75 class and the #100 class(the area in which most of our classes generally fall). There is typically much less info on the kids we're signing and we all usually end up signing a handful of kids for which there is almost no info at all. Also, usually some of our top end recruits have some sort of baggage, failed to qualify for a bigger program, kicked off a bigger program, JUCO(not saying all JUCOs have baggage)...whatever the case may be. So on top of the rankings being less accurate in the area in which we typically find ourselves ranked, all it takes is a couple of highly rated recruits being flops or dismissed or a couple of * or ** kids majorly overachieving to turn our already suspect rankings on their ear. If Bama has a 5* kid never make it to campus, or never realize their potential, it sucks, but it doesn't have nearly the same impact if a SBC 4* or even highly regarded 3* doesn't pan out.

I'm not saying I wouldn't rather be ranked 75th rather than 100th, hell I'm not saying I wouldn't rather be ranked 75th than 76th, I'm just saying recruiting rankings, especially in the bottom third of the rankings, aren't nearly the barometer that some make them out to be.

It is a double-edged sword. We all want our recruiting class to be ranked better, but we also realize that many of our recruits are kids the services no little to nothing about. We just have to trust our coaches and recruiters and hope they bring in what each of us need to succeed. Also, this particular ranking is just one service, Rivals; and some of us don't really use them. Cajuns use Scout almost exclusively, so several of our guys won't show up on Rivals until much later. But hey, it's still fun to track.

(01-23-2013 11:03 AM)Shof Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:52 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:18 AM)Jacque Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-23-2013 10:13 AM)BlueRaider0x0 Wrote: [ -> ]That post by MTPi was clearly talking about MT as we had the top classes for years and have had no outright championships to show for it.

Well lately that has been WKU's situation. I follow another team that I have been a fan of for years before moving to BG and the fanbase goes insane about whether someone is rated 5.7 or 5.8 on the Rivals board. Obviously there is some validity to the rankings but finding a player who fits your system, does the work and accepts coaching (if it is good coaching) is sometimes more important than what one evaluator at Rivals or Scout say. As you said in the case of MTSU or as I sais regarding WKU, having the best class does not guarantee the conference title, but it puts you in the running as WKU was for the past severla years and MTSU was this past season.

Here's the thing about recruiting rankings, they get less and less accurate the further down you go in national rankings. The difference between the #1 class and the #25 class is much greater between the #75 class and the #100 class(the area in which most of our classes generally fall). There is typically much less info on the kids we're signing and we all usually end up signing a handful of kids for which there is almost no info at all. Also, usually some of our top end recruits have some sort of baggage, failed to qualify for a bigger program, kicked off a bigger program, JUCO(not saying all JUCOs have baggage)...whatever the case may be. So on top of the rankings being less accurate in the area in which we typically find ourselves ranked, all it takes is a couple of highly rated recruits being flops or dismissed or a couple of * or ** kids majorly overachieving to turn our already suspect rankings on their ear. If Bama has a 5* kid never make it to campus, or never realize their potential, it sucks, but it doesn't have nearly the same impact if a SBC 4* or even highly regarded 3* doesn't pan out.

I'm not saying I wouldn't rather be ranked 75th rather than 100th, hell I'm not saying I wouldn't rather be ranked 75th than 76th, I'm just saying recruiting rankings, especially in the bottom third of the rankings, aren't nearly the barometer that some make them out to be.

It is a double-edged sword. We all want our recruiting class to be ranked better, but we also realize that many of our recruits are kids the services no little to nothing about. We just have to trust our coaches and recruiters and hope they bring in what each of us need to succeed. Also, this particular ranking is just one service, Rivals; and some of us don't really use them. Cajuns use Scout almost exclusively, so several of our guys won't show up on Rivals until much later. But hey, it's still fun to track.

In Petrino we Trust. (For recruiting)