In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 423
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
I'm looking at the Rivals 2014 top100 and honestly these rankings look pretty bad to me. Ever since I've followed recruiting, I've used Rivals whenever I look at rankings, but so far I think 247 is doing the best job with them. IMO this is the year 247sports becomes the best recruiting service.
Steve, Clint, Mark, and Thomas all do fantasic jobs of bringing us info and writing articles.
This post was edited by TAMUWolverine 14 months ago
Then halfway through the year 247 has 100 guys that came out of nowhere and they move them up
Exactly. 247's rankings change too much. They should put out an initial set of rankings after junior year and then update them once each for summer camps, senior season and maybe the all-star games. Also, the fact that 247 openly factors in where a prospect commits is bizarre. A prospect should not get a higher ranking because he commits to one school over another. Offers I understand, because if the top schools want a prospect that's a very good confirmation he's probably good, but where he commits should be irrelevant. I look at all four services, but think Rivals still does it best.
This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by MrWoodson 14 months ago
Let's not forget the bumps for uncommitted prospects too, just to keep things interesting down the line.
Personally, I still go by Rivals too.
I usually go with whoever ranks Michigan guys higher.
Is this a bad thing? Not every prospect is going to be discovered immediately. For example, nobody knew who Eddie Jackson (going to Bama) was until about 3 or 4 weeks until NSD. If somebody gets discovered late, no reason they shouldn't update the rankings to include prospects who come on the scene late.
I agree that 247 shouldn't rank players on where they commit. Overall I'm liking their 2014 rankings the best though.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by TAMUWolverine 14 months ago
Ducksworth's rankings, imho.
I didn't know 247 ranked based on final destinations. Seems like one of the least logical things they could possibly do when it comes to rankings. They need to change that as soon as possible.
Thanks for the support. It's fans like you that make this site great.
Exactly. TBH I think 247 moves the rankings around so much intentionally to build website traffic. Every time they move a guy up or down someone starts a thread to complain about it. I can't say I really blame them, because this is a business. But worrying about every update they put out 12 months ahead of NSD is a waste of time. If you are going to use 247's rankings, there's no point even looking at them until at least November.
Well, those are usually the ones that have Michigan guys highest.
But they're totally unbiased.
I like that.
If they get more videos or see another prospect in person and he has improved, and he deserves to move up, why should they have to wait for some arbitrary date to change? That is just stupid IMO.
Rankings should be fluid, and I like that the 247's rankings are.
Go Blue and Go Titans!
JC said they factored that in because some staffs (i.e. Alabama) have a better track record of developing talent than others. It created quite the discussion on tBB several weeks ago. These are their rankings so in the end they are entitled to factor in whatever they want. But a lot of posters were surprised to find out.
I was thinking this exact same thing when all the Ohio guys moved up. It's just a way to make the site look like they are evaluating the recruits better.
I'm not trying to bash 247. The message board set up is the best around and I love the writers and content we get here. I was just responding to the OP's comment that somehow Rivals' rankings are flawed. I simply disagree with that. I think they do the rankings the best. FWIW I also think 247's scoring system is too complicated. Does anyone really believe they can accurately distinguish between thousands of HS players to the point they can distinguish a 91 from a 92 or a 92 from a 93? It's hard enough just to figure out the four stars from the three stars.
This post was edited by MrWoodson 14 months ago
Oh i wasn't saying you were bashing 247. If anything i was bashing them more than you.
I do disagree with you on the scoring system though. I love 247s scoring system. To me there is a difference between a high 4 star(94-96) and say a 90 or 91. I just don't get all riled up over who is better when you start talking about a kid ranked 1 or 2 numbers a part.
Well, IMO, that's really stupid.
What happens when a recruit commits to USC, or another school that has an entire coaching staff on the hot seat. Who knows who will be there to replace the coaches, or if their current coaches just aren't good at developing talent, or if there's no tangible way to measure it in the first place.
All in all, there's far too much going on with coaching staffs to factor that in to a recruits' ranking, and I think it's ridiculous they even entertained the idea. Let alone implement it.
Rivals basically has three caregories of four stars ... 5.7, 5.8 and 5.9. In my mind, that kind of corresponds to low, middle and high. Do you really need more than that? Can 247 really tell the difference between a 94 and a 95? At some point, it becomes random noise.
I like it.
That's a good question. Or even if you consider how often assistant coaches move around. I don't know how they rationalize that.
One more thing to consider is the affiliation the major recruiting sites have with their All Star games. It has become very bias if you ask me.
Absolutely. And ESPN has always seemed to be the worst when it comes to that sort of thing.
Can I ask why?
I just feel like up to this point, 247 has more accurate rankings. Of course I don't know about each and every prospect, but of the ones I do know I like where 247 has them.
I do not think Elijah Hood is a 5*. There is no way he should be ranked above Bo Scarbrough and Dalvin Cook.
I find it hard to believe Juju Smith isn't even a top 100 prospect.
Also think Jamarco Jones is a bit underrated on rivals.
A few more players I think are overrated/underrated. I'm pretty much nitpicking, and I'm not trashing Rivals. I still think their initial 2014 rankings are pretty good, I'm just saying so far I like 247's better.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports