(02-04-2013 10:46 PM)r2pirate Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 10:38 PM)whitey Wrote:  With the 7 ECU commits this weekend we have moved up fast.

ESPN has ECU rated #65.......highest school in CUSA (15: 3 stars). Does not include 3 star Demetri McGill who committed today so ECU should move up a place or two..........go ECU PIRATES!

We almost had McGill, it was between you and us...

bah humbug

Taken from the Sun Belt Board.

Based on 247sports.com rankings at the end of day, I combined the SBC and New CUSA and came up with this composite ranking:

1- Marshall
2- Louisiana
3-Tulsa
4-USM
5-La. Tech
6-FAU
7-WKU
8-UAB
9-Texas ST.
10-Rice
11-S. Alabama
12-Troy
13-MTSU
14-Arkansas ST.
15-Charlotte
16-UTSA
17-FIU
18-UTEP
19-ODU
20-UNT
21-Georgia ST.
22-ULM

(02-07-2013 10:38 AM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  Taken from the Sun Belt Board.

Based on 247sports.com rankings at the end of day, I combined the SBC and New CUSA and came up with this composite ranking:

1- Marshall
2- Louisiana
3-Tulsa
4-USM
5-La. Tech
6-FAU
7-WKU
8-UAB
9-Texas ST.
10-Rice
11-S. Alabama
12-Troy
13-MTSU
14-Arkansas ST.
15-Charlotte
16-UTSA
17-FIU
18-UTEP
19-ODU
20-UNT
21-Georgia ST.
22-ULM

Updated nC-USA 247:

1. 696-Marshall
2. 667-Tulsa
3. 662-USM
4. 660-LaTech
5. 659-FAU
6. 657-MT
7. 653-Rice
8. 653-UAB
9. 646-UTSA
10. 645-FIU
11. 645-Charlotte
12. 636-UNT
13. 636-ODU
14. 629-UTEP

MT is currently listed at 19 recruits; we signed 25.

(02-07-2013 10:38 AM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  Taken from the Sun Belt Board.

Based on 247sports.com rankings at the end of day, I combined the SBC and New CUSA and came up with this composite ranking:

1- Marshall
2- Louisiana-Lafayette
3-Tulsa
4-USM
5-La. Tech
6-FAU
7-WKU
8-UAB
9-Texas ST.
10-Rice
11-S. Alabama
12-Troy
13-MTSU
14-Arkansas ST.
15-Charlotte
16-UTSA
17-FIU
18-UTEP
19-ODU
20-UNT
21-Georgia ST.
22-ULM

Why do we care about Sun Belt recruiting?

(02-07-2013 11:50 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(02-07-2013 10:38 AM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  Taken from the Sun Belt Board.

Based on 247sports.com rankings at the end of day, I combined the SBC and New CUSA and came up with this composite ranking:

1- Marshall
2- Louisiana-Lafayette
3-Tulsa
4-USM
5-La. Tech
6-FAU
7-WKU
8-UAB
9-Texas ST.
10-Rice
11-S. Alabama
12-Troy
13-MTSU
14-Arkansas ST.
15-Charlotte
16-UTSA
17-FIU
18-UTEP
19-ODU
20-UNT
21-Georgia ST.
22-ULM

Why do we care about Sun Belt recruiting?

Because you have former Belt teams joining this year and they recruit and play in basically the same areas?

Good to see Charlotte isn't last. Can't believe we've signed 2 classes of recruits, time flies by.

(02-07-2013 11:50 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(02-07-2013 10:38 AM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  Taken from the Sun Belt Board.

Based on 247sports.com rankings at the end of day, I combined the SBC and New CUSA and came up with this composite ranking:

1- Marshall
2- Louisiana-Lafayette
3-Tulsa
4-USM
5-La. Tech
6-FAU
7-WKU
8-UAB
9-Texas ST.
10-Rice
11-S. Alabama
12-Troy
13-MTSU
14-Arkansas ST.
15-Charlotte
16-UTSA
17-FIU
18-UTEP
19-ODU
20-UNT
21-Georgia ST.
22-ULM

Why do we care about Sun Belt recruiting?

Why do people buy term life insurance? They're planning for the worst-case scenario, no matter how unpleasant. There's no doubt we're on track to be part of an elite club known as "anybody."

(02-07-2013 12:48 PM)AndreWhere Wrote:  

(02-07-2013 11:50 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(02-07-2013 10:38 AM)geauxcajuns Wrote:  Taken from the Sun Belt Board.

Based on 247sports.com rankings at the end of day, I combined the SBC and New CUSA and came up with this composite ranking:

1- Marshall
2- Louisiana-Lafayette
3-Tulsa
4-USM
5-La. Tech
6-FAU
7-WKU
8-UAB
9-Texas ST.
10-Rice
11-S. Alabama
12-Troy
13-MTSU
14-Arkansas ST.
15-Charlotte
16-UTSA
17-FIU
18-UTEP
19-ODU
20-UNT
21-Georgia ST.
22-ULM

Why do we care about Sun Belt recruiting?

Why do people buy term life insurance? They're planning for the worst-case scenario, no matter how unpleasant. There's no doubt we're on track to be part of an elite club known as "anybody."

now I have read about the dumbest thing I have ever read at this board. First the poster is saying that recruiting rankings are a major determining factor in WLs down the road which is a bunch of garbage. The simple fact is you go by the star rankings you might have a great team and you might not, it is about how well the players do in your system and how well you are able to get the most out of them, not some stupid ranking service. Secondly the poster is comparing 2 conferences that have some teams that are moving forward and while some teams in the SBC can compete on a higher level others can not. It is like saying a team that can beat the lower level SEC teams can be considered on the level of LSU, or Alabama. It is fool's gold and any USM fan falling into it needs to stop and get their breath, then use their brain.

(02-05-2013 10:59 PM)Blue_Trombone Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 10:46 PM)r2pirate Wrote:  

(02-04-2013 10:38 PM)whitey Wrote:  With the 7 ECU commits this weekend we have moved up fast.

ESPN has ECU rated #65.......highest school in CUSA (15: 3 stars). Does not include 3 star Demetri McGill who committed today so ECU should move up a place or two..........go ECU PIRATES!

We almost had McGill, it was between you and us...

bah humbug

ODU and UNCC are what I liked most about the new Cusa. Hopefully we can continue to play both schools in the future regardless of what conference we are associated.

Doc Holliday Signing Day Press Conference....

I don't really think that you can determine the ability of an athelete mathmatically. These rankings seem to be based on stats too much. You don't know the kind of competition each athelete faces in their conference.

Since recruiting rankings are always questioned, this is an somewhat interesting article that seems to say that they are accurate enough to predict winners VS losers about 60%+/- of the time. That number was based on taking recruiting rankings over a period of years and comparing "recruiting totals"predictions VS actual wins/losses......if I read the summary correctly.

I suppose everyone can determine their own opinion regarding if that's "accurate" enough to argue over or not. I honestly don't have a clue if they are worth arguing over or not. In the end, I'd rather have players that were wanted by quality programs, which I suppose fits into the rankings/ratings somehow.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college...-accuracy/

(02-08-2013 03:04 PM)ODUMonarchs1 Wrote:  I don't really think that you can determine the ability of an athelete mathmatically. These rankings seem to be based on stats too much. You don't know the kind of competition each athelete faces in their conference.

I agree with you somewhat. Some of it has to do with how the players are coached. But I would feel more comfortable with a team full of all conference, all state, state champions who are rated higer in a class with a few sleepers. Than have class with 2nd team sleepers that have talent but not the level they are playing at.

Final 247 nC-USA recruiting rankings:

East:
1. 698-Marshall
3. 662-MT
6. 658-FAU
8. 653-UAB
10. 645-FIU
11. 645-Charlotte
13. 636-ODU
East Avg: 657

West:
2. 667-Tulsa
4. 662-USM
5. 660-LaTech
7. 653-Rice
9. 646-UTSA
12. 636-UNT
14. 630-UTEP
West Avg: 651