http://cfn.scout.com/2/1045780.html

Interesting that Troy topped the list at #1 here, and were dead last at #9 on rivals. I can't see either site being reliable at this point.

(02-04-2011 10:54 AM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  http://cfn.scout.com/2/1045780.html

Interesting that Troy topped the list at #1 here, and were dead last at #9 on rivals. I can't see either site being reliable at this point.

This appears to be a ranking of 'best class' but not recruiting ranking. This Scout link was updated 15 minutes ago and shows WKU at #1. You can't really compare a judge of best class on Scout to recruiting rankings on Rivals. The recruiting rankings are based on a points system based on stars a player has and the position rank of that player. The link you reference is simply a rank of the Sun Belt classes (not using these aforementioned barometers for points).

(02-04-2011 11:15 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 10:54 AM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  http://cfn.scout.com/2/1045780.html

Interesting that Troy topped the list at #1 here, and were dead last at #9 on rivals. I can't see either site being reliable at this point.

This appears to be a ranking of 'best class' but not recruiting ranking. This Scout link was updated 15 minutes ago and shows WKU at #1. You can't really compare a judge of best class on Scout to recruiting rankings on Rivals. The recruiting rankings are based on a points system based on stars a player has and the position rank of that player. The link you reference is simply a rank of the Sun Belt classes (not using these aforementioned barometers for points).

With the wrong information. But Troy's average ranking per athlete is 2.23, which would put them at the top of the SBC.

Scout has become a joke.

(02-04-2011 11:23 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  Scout has become a joke.

Crump, that depends upon what side of the fence you are on. Because you have someone now covering ASU on Rivals, are they any less of a joke? Not in my book. Both are flawed and have questionable practices.

(02-04-2011 11:33 AM)CajunT Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 11:23 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  Scout has become a joke.

Crump, that depends upon what side of the fence you are on. Because you have someone now covering ASU on Rivals, are they any less of a joke? Not in my book. Both are flawed and have questionable practices.

It's not that. They just don't update things well at all. Information is public for weeks and months many times before they update anything. I don't care if their ratings are different but they just don't seem to work as hard as Rivals.

(02-04-2011 11:43 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 11:33 AM)CajunT Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 11:23 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  Scout has become a joke.

Crump, that depends upon what side of the fence you are on. Because you have someone now covering ASU on Rivals, are they any less of a joke? Not in my book. Both are flawed and have questionable practices.

It's not that. They just don't update things well at all. Information is public for weeks and months many times before they update anything. I don't care if their ratings are different but they just don't seem to work as hard as Rivals.

And that's because you have someone local with Rivals updating your commitments. We have the same with Scout.com, so it all comes down to having someone resonsible covering ASU. Neither network cares about non-bcs programs.

(02-04-2011 11:48 AM)CajunT Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 11:43 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 11:33 AM)CajunT Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 11:23 AM)Crump1 Wrote:  Scout has become a joke.

Crump, that depends upon what side of the fence you are on. Because you have someone now covering ASU on Rivals, are they any less of a joke? Not in my book. Both are flawed and have questionable practices.

It's not that. They just don't update things well at all. Information is public for weeks and months many times before they update anything. I don't care if their ratings are different but they just don't seem to work as hard as Rivals.

And that's because you have someone local with Rivals updating your commitments. We have the same with Scout.com, so it all comes down to having someone resonsible covering ASU. Neither network cares about non-bcs programs.

I've been using both for years now and it is better on Rivals now but Rivals was already better about updating.

They wrote that FIU signed Dylan Warner and Demetrius Allen in this class when, in reality they were taken off the commitment list a while back. At least Rivals takes the effort to see who we signed.

(02-04-2011 11:51 AM)panther viscosity Wrote:  They wrote that FIU signed Dylan Warner and Demetrius Allen in this class when, in reality they were taken off the commitment list a while back. At least Rivals takes the effort to see who we signed.

For years, I get an email about a "New Commitment for ASU!" from Scout only to click and see a guy that committed a month ago. They don't need dedicated writers, just a guy that knows how to use Google.

9 times out of 10, the beat writers have just as much, if not more, info as these sites. There are some talking points pertaining to the ratings, but the on-field performances and team chemistry are more important than the star rankings. If the coaches are optimistic, it makes me optimistic...

(02-04-2011 12:35 PM)trojanbrutha Wrote:  If the coaches are optimistic, it makes me optimistic...

If they aren't optimistic, it means they failed at their job....it won't happen.

Scouts write up about ASU is a joke. We didn't recruit a QB like they said. We didn't even recruit Brown as a RB like they said. They got the whole thing wrong. None of the guys who played QB in highschool are expected to play QB. Most of the RBs we recruited are going to play DBs. We recruited for the OL more than anything.

the problem with the sites generally comes from who you have working the site for your school. ULM doesn't have much of a presence on Rivals but has a guy who busts his butt on Scout. We get all our information from the Scout site and ours is up to date and on the money. The rivals guy does little work and generally gets his info from the Scout site.

In the case of ULM this year, we got little to no information from the coaching staff. Even finding out who was visiting was an issue. Berry appears to take the release of information seriously because technically, the school should not be releasing any information about a player (commits, decommits, visits, etc) so you must have a guy who can do his homework, investigate, and get in touch with players and high school coaches themselves to find out if a player commits. As I said, our Scout site was dead on. We knew 20 of the 21 commits, the 2 decommits on the last Sunday, and we knew that we probably wouldn't get McJunkins, even though he was a soft verbal.

Don't blame the sites, blame the guy who runs your page.

(02-04-2011 12:47 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  Scouts write up about ASU is a joke. We didn't recruit a QB like they said. We didn't even recruit Brown as a RB like they said. They got the whole thing wrong. None of the guys who played QB in highschool are expected to play QB. Most of the RBs we recruited are going to play DBs. We recruited for the OL more than anything.

True.

Yes, but then "average" fans look up the rankings and see there team at the bottom. They get discouraged, think that the school cant compete with these players and tunes out. They dont realize that no one is manning the ship for the most part or even looking at the recruits who have signed..

Hell, Scout STILL hasnt got the number of FAU recruits right yet. They are closer now, up from 10 yesterday, to 22 today. The actual number is 24, and that was released by FAU on Wed night.

As I said I dont care about stars at all as long as my team competes well and wins. FAU has gone backwards since 07 so I am frustrated with the staff. We are in a CRITICAL period right now, with the new stadium going up, the MBB team doing well. We have a lot of positive things going. It is almost impeative that FAU competes next year in football for the confrence championship and a bowl.

But having no set QB, and switching defensive schemes does not bode well for that.

(02-04-2011 01:41 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Yes, but then "average" fans look up the rankings and see there team at the bottom. They get discouraged, think that the school cant compete with these players and tunes out. They dont realize that no one is manning the ship for the most part or even looking at the recruits who have signed..

Hell, Scout STILL hasnt got the number of FAU recruits right yet. They are closer now, up from 10 yesterday, to 22 today. The actual number is 24, and that was released by FAU on Wed night.

As I said I dont care about stars at all as long as my team competes well and wins. FAU has gone backwards since 07 so I am frustrated with the staff. We are in a CRITICAL period right now, with the new stadium going up, the MBB team doing well. We have a lot of positive things going. It is almost impeative that FAU competes next year in football for the confrence championship and a bowl.

But having no set QB, and switching defensive schemes does not bode well for that.

It's late in the game, but you can send them a link to the correct information. Sometimes they get it right. Same with rivals, but they removed TROY's mid-year guys...head-scratcher to be sure, but we know who was signed...

(02-04-2011 01:41 PM)OwlFamily Wrote:  Yes, but then "average" fans look up the rankings and see there team at the bottom. They get discouraged, think that the school cant compete with these players and tunes out. They dont realize that no one is manning the ship for the most part or even looking at the recruits who have signed..

Hell, Scout STILL hasnt got the number of FAU recruits right yet. They are closer now, up from 10 yesterday, to 22 today. The actual number is 24, and that was released by FAU on Wed night.

As I said I dont care about stars at all as long as my team competes well and wins. FAU has gone backwards since 07 so I am frustrated with the staff. We are in a CRITICAL period right now, with the new stadium going up, the MBB team doing well. We have a lot of positive things going. It is almost impeative that FAU competes next year in football for the confrence championship and a bowl.

But having no set QB, and switching defensive schemes does not bode well for that.

I would say get in touch with the guy who runs your scout site. He can get that updated if he wants to do so.

(02-04-2011 12:47 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  Scouts write up about ASU is a joke. We didn't recruit a QB like they said. We didn't even recruit Brown as a RB like they said. They got the whole thing wrong. None of the guys who played QB in highschool are expected to play QB. Most of the RBs we recruited are going to play DBs. We recruited for the OL more than anything.

And not mentioning Kyle Coleman, who I think is the best in the class along with Artez Brown, shows they don't have a clue.

Now we have 2 kids whose dads played in the NFL 15 years.

(02-04-2011 08:10 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  

(02-04-2011 12:47 PM)statefanatic Wrote:  Scouts write up about ASU is a joke. We didn't recruit a QB like they said. We didn't even recruit Brown as a RB like they said. They got the whole thing wrong. None of the guys who played QB in highschool are expected to play QB. Most of the RBs we recruited are going to play DBs. We recruited for the OL more than anything.

And not mentioning Kyle Coleman, who I think is the best in the class along with Artez Brown, shows they don't have a clue.

Now we have 2 kids whose dads played in the NFL 15 years.

Again, you have Matheson? that covers ASU on Rivals. Otherwise, you would be complaining today about them. As InjunJohn stated, all the sites that have a supporter or local person covering a programs recruiting are up-to-date. Rivals is no different in that manner, then Scout.