Latest Belt Committment Numbers From Rivals

MeanGreen61 · January 29, 2008

Troy leads with 25 committments, but NT is currently on top of Belt recruiting.

#72 North Texas

#73 Troy

#94 UL Monroe

#95 Florida International

T#96 Middle Tennessee

#100 Ul Lafayette

T#104 Arkansas State

#113 Florida Atlantic

Sun Belt

http://middletennessee.rivals.com/teamrank...2008&conf=0

Edited January 29, 2008 by MeanGreen61

UNTflyer · January 29, 2008

And today Troy has jumped out to a 74 point lead.

MeanGreenBuzz · January 29, 2008

And today Troy has jumped out to a 74 point lead.

Which doesn't make any sense. If you look at the RR scores top to bottom our class looks like a more solid class.

January 29, 2008

I just plain f'n hate the rivals rankings. That is all.

Dodge2007 · January 29, 2008

I just plain f'n hate the rivals rankings. That is all.

Rivals just doesn't mean crap. Rivals is a selling and marketing tool for the college football fan who just can't get enough.

It's easy to rank the four and five star players but after that, it's all a guessing game.

Jimmy Clausen, Rivals poster boy, will be a flop. Watch it happen. Notre Dame couldn't pass for any yards on Navy yet they have all the four and five star Rival's kids all over that offensive football team.

January 29, 2008

Rivals just doesn't mean crap. Rivals is a selling and marketing tool for the college football fan who just can't get enough.
It's easy to rank the four and five star players but after that, it's all a guessing game.
Jimmy Clausen, Rivals poster boy, will be a flop. Watch it happen. Notre Dame couldn't pass for any yards on Navy yet they have all the four and five star Rival's kids all over that offensive football team.

I know, I know. But it sure would be nice to be a little higher than 77 when our class is much better than those ranked above us!

DeepGreen · January 29, 2008

For those that care....

Troy - 67

UNT - 77

UNTflyer · January 29, 2008

For those that care....
Troy - 67
UNT - 77

I see Troy 169, UNT 95

UNT Mean Green · January 29, 2008

Isn't it interesting that the conference champion is last in "Rivals Rankings"???

Dodge2007 · January 29, 2008

Isn't it interesting that the conference champion is last in "Rivals Rankings"???

Again, it's bs. How does Troy end up with all those "no names" and kick everyone's ass?

UNTLifer · January 29, 2008

All they grade is potential. I like to place the real grade a couple of years down the road. Check our DCTF. Every year he revisits the recent graduating class, how they ranked as recruits and how they turned out.

January 29, 2008

I see Troy 169, UNT 95

You are looking at rivals points and he was reporting the actual rank.

Charlie NT 73 · January 29, 2008

I checked the Rivals.com total points back to the 2003 class, which scored 790 points.

2004 was 126 points, 2005 was 59, 2006 was 54, and last years 2007 class was 85, with

only a few weeks of recruiting time to put together a good class.

The 2008 class is scored at 95. With 7, 3 star rated players, and a Parade AA to boot,

and numerious all state, all metro area players, only scores 95? Geez!

Does the total Rivals.com points correlate to winning seasons?

Question for Rivals.com, " Are you guys nuts? " How the heck does both the

2007 and the 2008 classes score below 100?

I will never understand Rivals.com and their rating systems!

January 29, 2008

I checked the Rivals.com total points back to the 2003 class, which scored 790 points.
2004 was 126 points, 2005 was 59, 2006 was 54, and last years 2007 class was 85, with
only a few weeks of recruiting time to put together a good class.
The 2008 class is scored at 95. With 7, 3 star rated players, and a Parade AA to boot,
and numerious all state, all metro area players, only scores 95? Geez!
Does the total Rivals.com points correlate to winning seasons?
Question for Rivals.com, " Are you guys nuts? " How the heck does both the
2007 and the 2008 classes score below 100?
I will never understand Rivals.com and their rating systems!

I assume that they changed their points system after 2003??

H-towngreen · January 29, 2008

We don't score as many points as we should because of the state lists. If a player lands on a state top whatever then they get more points. It's alot easier to end up on the New Hampshire top 15 then the top 100 Texas. Thats why if you look at Temple who is 1 spot ahead of us in the rankings. Yet they only have 1 3*player and we have 7.

Charlie NT 73 · January 29, 2008

This afternoon, I took a look at all of Troy's commitments.

I found out, that 8 of the 25 Troy commitments are JUCO players.

I believe Rivals.com awards more points to JUCO players than

regular HS players. So, maybe the 8 JUCO comits accounted for the

higher total Rivals.com points.

Intersting fact about the 8 JUCO's is 6 are defensive players,

2 SDE's, 3-CB's, 1-Safety, while the offense commitments

are 1 WR and 1 RB.

Edited January 29, 2008 by charlie nt73

PlummMeanGreen · January 29, 2008

We don't score as many points as we should because of the state lists. If a player lands on a state top whatever then they get more points. It's alot easier to end up on the New Hampshire top 15 then the top 100 Texas. Thats why if you look at Temple who is 1 spot ahead of us in the rankings. Yet they only have 1 3*player and we have 7.

Seems like an unusually flawed system if they don't go by numbers of 3* or 4* recruits and how they all add up. Of cousre, some schools can only recruit 15 (+/-) kids this year while others can recruit the full allottment, so who knows.

I think a good barometer for UNT would (obviously) be how we do as compared to all the other Texas D1-A schools (since that is how most of us measure our recruiting haul anyway, right)?

GMG!

Edited January 29, 2008 by PlummMeanGreen

UNTLifer · January 29, 2008

The best barometer will be how they develop in 2 or 3 years.

GrandGreen · January 29, 2008

It is not rational to try make sense out of an irrational rating system. To rate the individual players on a number basis, but than to evaluate the team's class with some other voodoo factors is not logical. Troy being above NT is one thing, but La Tech, Tulsa, Temple and Tulane! La Tech is even above Troy.

It would be interesting to see Rival ratings' correlation with the amount of revenue generated by teams' fans and websites to Rival. Naturally, if Rival choses to give some great mysterious rating upgrade, like they bestowed on Troy, to NT; most will overlook the foolishness of all this.

AnotherEagleFan · January 29, 2008

The best barometer will be how they develop in 2 or 3 years.

So true... If only you could measure that today.

Nt4Life! · January 30, 2008

College Football News Recruiting Ranking

undefined

North Texas Ranked 70th

ULM Ranked 93rd

Troy Ranked 94th

FAU Ranked 97th

ULM Ranked 103rd

FIU Ranked 111th

MT Ranked 112th

Ark. State Ranked 15th

H-towngreen · January 30, 2008

The H-Towngreen ranking system has us currently ranked at 64!!! And also has NT as one of the best NON-BCS schools recruiting classes.

PlummMeanGreen · January 30, 2008

SOMETHING FOR ALL MEAN GREENERS TO PONDER

Hey fellow Mean Green recruiting junkies, here are some interesting numbers of Boise State's 4 previous years national recruiting rankings leading to their BCS Championshiop Series Bowl win over the Oklahoma Sooners in January of 2007. These national recruiting rankings for OU & Boise State are from the College Football News.

OU (ties #7 & with LSU........... 2006................... BSU #78

OU #5................................. 2005................... BSU #73

OU #7 .................................2004................... BSU #72

OU #3 .................................2003................... BSU #73

Boise State athletic officials have said for years how most of their annual recruiting classes were most always unheralded even among other WAC members (and for certain not ranked so high nationally as compared to the Big Boys...........

.............BUT, I think the thing that most of us would all agree is how Boise State was recruiting "lights out" speed with all their not so highly ranked recruiting classes & IMHO was one of the prime reasons they were able to hang with the Sooners and eventually beat the vaunted University of Oklahoma Sooners in that most exciting bowl game.

Edited January 30, 2008 by PlummMeanGreen

eulessismore · January 30, 2008

.............BUT, I think the thing that most of us would all agree is how Boise State was recruiting speed with all their low ranked recruiting classes and it did make a difference when they beat the vaunted Sooners of the University of Oklahoma.

Well, that's the theory I've heard for getting the fastest improvement in a college football team...recruit speed!

FirefightnRick · January 30, 2008

SOMETHING FOR ALL MEAN GREENERS TO PONDER
Hey fellow Mean Green recruiting junkies, here are some interesting numbers of Boise State's 4 previous years national recruiting rankings leading to their BCS Championshiop Series Bowl win over the Oklahoma Sooners in January of 2007. These national recruiting rankings for OU & Boise State are from the College Football News.
OU (ties #7 & with LSU...........2006...................BSU #78
OU #5................................. 2005...................BSU #73
OU #7 .................................2004...................BSU #72
OU #3 .................................2003...................BSU #73
Boise State athletic officials have said for years how most of their annual recruiting classes were most always unheralded even among other WAC members (and for certain not ranked so high nationally as well compated to the Big Boys...........
.............BUT, I think the thing that most of us would all agree is how Boise State was recruiting "lights out" speed with all their low ranked recruiting classes and it did make a difference & IMHO was one of the prime reasons they were able to hang in there with the Sooners and eventually beat University of Oklahoma Sooners in that most exciting bowl game.