(01-30-2013 02:39 PM)jollyroger Wrote:  It's hard to really know much until they get signed AND qualified

That is very true. Until these guys sign, a lot can change between now and signing day.

(01-30-2013 11:08 PM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(01-30-2013 03:44 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  C-USA 2013

1. Marshall 82.28
2. Tulsa 80.58
3. ECU 80.38
4. UAB 80.05
5. La Tech 79.87
6. Tulane 79.82
7. Rice 79.69
8. USM 79.37
9. FAU 79.08
10. FIU 78.4
11. MTSU 78.23
12. UTSA 78
13. UTEP 77.64
14. North Texas 77.44

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-USA 2014

1. Marshall 82.28
2. Tulsa 80.58
3. UAB 80.05
4. La Tech 79.87
5. Rice 79.69
6. USM 79.37
7. FAU 79.08
8. FIU 78.4
9. MTSU 78.23
10. UTSA 78
11. UTEP 77.64
12. North Texas 77.44
13. Old Dominion 72.39


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Impressive by UAB as well. Looks like they are having an nice recruiting season.

Just don't go to our board. We had a handful of guys decommit, and now the sky is falling. I'm pretty sure we are just going to have 25 walk-ons new to the team next year.

In all seriousness, none of this means anything until signing day. I hope UAB signs all of the guys we have verbals from, and a few we won't know about until that day. I'm happy that UAB finally has some players committing that other schools want to poach.

And you never really know why guys "decommit"

We lost 2 yesterday that "decommited" from the program. At first we were asking what happened. Then we found out. Sounds like they changed thier mind right? Well one was not going to qualify acadmecially and is heading to JUCO, the other was told that his offer was off the table.

The knife cuts both ways, kids can abandon programs at the last minute, and programs can pull offers or not send NLI's at the last minute. This last week is cutthroat time.

Compare to Rivals recruiting rankings (doesn't have all the new teams):

http://rivals.yahoo.com/southernmiss/foo...3/CUSA/all

1. Houston - 1335
2. SMU - 1140
3. Marshall - 1065
4. Tulsa - 1005
5. Tulane - 990
6. UCF - 975
7. Rice - 855
7. Southern Miss - 855
9. La Tech - 825
10. Memphis - 810
11. ECU - 780
12. UAB - 735
13. FAU - 630
13. FIU - 630
15. North Texas - 495
16. UTEP - 375
17. Middle Tennessee - 360

(01-31-2013 11:00 AM)OwlFamily Wrote:  And you never really know why guys "decommit"

We lost 2 yesterday that "decommited" from the program. At first we were asking what happened. Then we found out. Sounds like they changed thier mind right? Well one was not going to qualify acadmecially and is heading to JUCO, the other was told that his offer was off the table.

The knife cuts both ways, kids can abandon programs at the last minute, and programs can pull offers or not send NLI's at the last minute. This last week is cutthroat time.

While it doesn't seem to be as common in football as basketball for some reason, a lot can change between the when they sign and when they actually qualify, enroll, attend class and show up for practice. Lots of outside influences at work with some situations.

And compare to Scout.com (includes a few that Rivals doesn't):

http://southernmississippi.scout.com/a.z...=2&yr=2013

1. Houston - 1421
2. SMU - 1375
3. Marshall - 1059
4. Tulsa - 1023
5. ECU - 952
6. UCF - 827
7. Southern Miss - 735
8. Tulane - 707
9. Rice - 673
10. Memphis - 574
11. North Texas - 482
12. UTSA - 454
13. UTEP - 432
14. Middle Tennessee - 378
15. FIU - 356
16. UAB - 343
17. FAU - 316
18. La Tech - 287
19. Old Dominion - 263

Comparing Scouts and Rivals shows just how much variation there can be. ECU 5th in Scout, yet 11th in Rivals. This will be an interesting week.

(01-31-2013 11:34 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Comparing Scouts and Rivals shows just how much variation there can be. ECU 5th in Scout, yet 11th in Rivals. This will be an interesting week.

Going off the sheer number of recruits is a dumb way to rank classes. I can't even begin to take that list seriously. Just because you have more recruits does not mean you have a better class.

(01-31-2013 11:37 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(01-31-2013 11:34 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Comparing Scouts and Rivals shows just how much variation there can be. ECU 5th in Scout, yet 11th in Rivals. This will be an interesting week.

Going off the sheer number of recruits is a dumb way to rank classes. I can't even begin to take that list seriously. Just because you have more recruits does not mean you have a better class.

I totally agree with that. And that is where Rivals fail IMO.

(01-31-2013 11:37 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(01-31-2013 11:34 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Comparing Scouts and Rivals shows just how much variation there can be. ECU 5th in Scout, yet 11th in Rivals. This will be an interesting week.

Going off the sheer number of recruits is a dumb way to rank classes. I can't even begin to take that list seriously. Just because you have more recruits does not mean you have a better class.

I was trying to make that same point earlier. The rating average per player is as good or perhaps better gauge in my opinion. Obviously, you have to sign enough players to have sufficient depth, but 22 "good - better than average" players is better than 25 "average" guys.

I didn't even bother to look at how the rating were established. Would have thought it would have been by a better measure than sheer number of recruits.

It is killing UNT that both TT and TCU are working hard to land the top players/targets out of their class now because of attrition..

Happens every year, but it if frustrating. Only bonus is that UNT can grab a few academic qualifiers that some of the other Texas schools can't.

DOC and Seider have both been in South Florida making "home visits". Seider tweeted: Some suprises are coming, Big Suprises", "Go Herd".

(01-31-2013 03:41 PM)HerdZoned Wrote:  DOC and Seider have both been in South Florida making "home visits". Seider tweeted: Some suprises are coming, Big Suprises", "Go Herd".

Nice! Looking forward to wrapping it up!

(01-31-2013 10:46 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(01-30-2013 02:39 PM)jollyroger Wrote:  It's hard to really know much until they get signed AND qualified

That is very true. Until these guys sign, a lot can change between now and signing day.

Well shoot, a lot can happen after signing day too. Until a kid signs, qualifies, enrolls and shows up on the field in a game these list are just speculation by people who may not know anything about the player the are giving a rating for. I'll trust the coaches more than these lists that come out every year.

(01-31-2013 04:33 PM)CrownRoyal Wrote:  

(01-31-2013 10:46 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(01-30-2013 02:39 PM)jollyroger Wrote:  It's hard to really know much until they get signed AND qualified

That is very true. Until these guys sign, a lot can change between now and signing day.

Well shoot, a lot can happen after signing day too. Until a kid signs, qualifies, enrolls and shows up on the field in a game these list are just speculation by people who may not know anything about the player the are giving a rating for. I'll trust the coaches more than these lists that come out every year.

Very true. Its still fun to look at though.

(01-31-2013 11:41 AM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  

(01-31-2013 11:37 AM)blazers9911 Wrote:  

(01-31-2013 11:34 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Comparing Scouts and Rivals shows just how much variation there can be. ECU 5th in Scout, yet 11th in Rivals. This will be an interesting week.

Going off the sheer number of recruits is a dumb way to rank classes. I can't even begin to take that list seriously. Just because you have more recruits does not mean you have a better class.

I totally agree with that. And that is where Rivals fail IMO.

Not to mention that they're based on fan subscriptions, more subs = more effort/assets put into it. If UAB had a massive # of subscribers to either, you'd see our players get higher ratings instead since they commit to a D1 school they get 2stars just for that & since we don't have many subs to either they don't spend too much time evaluating them & they don't assign anyone to cover us specifically instead probably some newbie lackey that covers multiple low level teams/conferences.

rankings suck....that is why you find 4 stars in the sunbelt after their freshman year.

Rivals only counts the top 20 in a class. They count your 20 best of course.

(01-30-2013 02:37 PM)mturn017 Wrote:  

(01-30-2013 02:15 PM)MUHERD76 Wrote:  The shocker to me is seeing ODU ranked below Charlotte. Did not expect to see that. Especially considering that ODU will be eligible for the conference championship a year earlier than expected.

A little surprised to see FAU higher than some as well. Looks like FAU has done a good job.

247 seems to be missing a few and some aren't ranked that rivals or espn have as 2*'s. I'm not that worried about it, they seem to be concentrating on the areas in need the most (defense). I've got more faith in our coaches to recognize talent than recruiting websites.

This was Taylor Heinicke's Rivals page as a senior:


http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncpreps/football...cke-116595

Relax, it will change next week when loi are signed. ECU may have best strength coach in nation in Coach Connor and I assure you he will make men out of boys. Games are played on field as it will take about two years to see if player truly work out. A good example was Tenn. Chris Johnson who was a 2 star out of high school.