Troy, Middle Pulling Away In Rivals Rankings

Harry · February 5, 2008

http://meangreen.beloblog.com/

Troy, Middle pulling away in Rivals rankings

Just remember you heard it here on the Mean Green Blog before it happened – Troy and Middle Tennessee are pulling away in the race for the unofficial Sun Belt Conference recruiting crown. The latest rundown from recruiting authority Rivals.com has Troy out front with 178 points, Middle Tennessee second at 166 and North Texas third at 100.

UNT and Troy appear to be close to being done with their classes that stand at 26 and 25 recruits, respectively. MTSU has 21 players, which leaves the Blue Raiders room to add a couple of players late. Troy usually over-signs its class and UNT is already over the 25-man mark, so it might still be in the market for a player or two. If you are going to over-sign a class there is no sense in stopping at 26 players.

I have received a few e-mails asking how MTSU and Troy pulled so far ahead even though UNT has eight three-star players, while Troy has six and MTSU five. The answer lies in the bonus points Rivals awards for landing nationally ranked players. Both Troy and MTSU landed a big-time player that boosted their ranking.

MTSU landed the highest rated player among Sun Belt schools – Miami quarterback Sancho McDonald, who is rated No. 15 among dual-threat quarterbacks in the country. Troy's gem is Mobile, Ala., inside linebacker Jacoby Thomas, who is ranked No. 25 at his position. UNT got a boost from landing Riley Dodge and DaWaylon Cook, who are ranked No. 48 and No. 80 among athletes, respectively.

UNT's duo just wasn't enough to push the Mean Green over the top.

It is kind of funny to think back over the course of recruiting season and all the e-mail I have received. A few months ago, all I heard about was how highly UNT's recruits were ranked by Rivals and Scout. All I hear about these days is what a load of baloney the rankings are now that UNT has fallen a little in the ratings.

Just remember, UNT is doing a lot better than it has in the past and no one thought that Patrick Cobbs guy was worth a Division I scholarship, let alone a national ranking, when he came out of high school. That one turned out pretty well for the Mean Green.

Be sure to post your thoughts on UNT's recruiting class on the blog.

runt96 · February 5, 2008

We're landing some great recruits. Eight three-stars, this is amazing.

PlummMeanGreen · February 5, 2008

We're landing some great recruits. Eight three-stars, this is amazing.

And yes, I know, I'm land-locked on this same ol' theme (but after all, I am of the age where I can repeat myself, repeat myself, repeat myself, .................., but Boise State rarely finished in the WAC's Top 3 or 4 recruiting classes in the years preceeding their $17,000,000.00 bowl revenue win over OU in 2007.

AND.............perhaps I may be one of the most humble 6'th generation Texans you'll ever meet, :blushing: (blushing emoticon).................but FWIW............I'll still take a Texas High School Football-produced 3* recruit over most 3* recruits from other parts of the country. I'll also take a Texas HS Football 2'nd or 3'rd team All State player over what some other state's call some of their high school products actual blue-chip future stars.

AND..........do we really ever want to take over the role of "sexy" over another Sun Belt Conference school with all this mythical SBC Recruiting Champion talk? :rolleyes:

AND..........don't most of us like our upcoming recruiting class, that is, since it's filling some much-needed holes and........... might that kind of recruiting be what creates true championship teams moreso than getting a nationally ranked super-star recruit or 2 that might create other internal team problems from time to time? Let's see how many of those national recruits actually get signed, too, right?

AND........has anyone else noticed that since Troy U finished their (basically) new football stadium that their recruiting seems to have hit a higher plateau with Trojan teams that have competed quite admirably against upper echelon "known" OOC foes? Hmmm? :whistling1:

Pardon me now while I go eat a slice of humble pie & have my first cup of AM coffee.

Edited February 5, 2008 by PlummMeanGreen

UNTflyer · February 5, 2008

I only give cursory respect to Rivals rankings. They are a tool, nothing more. What really counts is how these guys perform on the field.

SilverEagle · February 5, 2008

All this star rating is just off season BS for bored alumni. What really counts is how well our staff develops the players that we recruit......and how much character our new recruits have.

Spring training can't get here soon enough so that I can see (with my binoculars of course :rolleyes: ) how well the transfers from last year, and the current crop of walk-ons are developing.

PlummMeanGreen · February 5, 2008

All this star rating is just off season BS for bored alumni. What really counts is how well our staff develops the players that we recruit......and how much character our new recruits have.
Spring training can't get here soon enough so that I can see (with my binoculars of course ) how well the transfers from last year, and the current crop of walk-ons are developing.

Good post, Bill...(and I, too, can relate with the binoculars part, especially at our venerable Fouts Field).

PLUS.........I've always preferred c.s. lewis over sinclaire, but different strokes for different folks, eh?

GMG!

Edited February 5, 2008 by PlummMeanGreen

greenminer · February 5, 2008

MTSU has had sexy quarterbacks before, and that led them nowhere.

Don't let one star recruit scare you; we have much more quality depth than ever before and will be making that Miami kid mess his pants in fear on the way down to the ground.

SUMG · February 5, 2008

All I will say is: How many Rivals stars was Casey Fitzgerald when he came out of high school?

UNTLifer · February 5, 2008

All I will say is: How many Rivals stars was Casey Fitzgerald when he came out of high school?

Thank you.

Did we ever win the "recruiting race" when we were winning the conference titles? Seems to me the MUTS always got the sexy recruits yet they have yet to win a conference championship.

Rate the classes a couple of years down the road for a clearer picture of who won the recruiting battle.

Personally, I could care less what everyone else is doing. I couldn't be more happy with the quality and character that Dodge has recruited this year.

MeanGreen61 · February 5, 2008

Actually If you knock off the bonus points, Troy, MTSU & UNT are about neck & neck in average stars per recruit. Also the Muts "nationall ranked" duel threat quarterback is a 5.6 Rivals rating and Riley is a 5.7 but he is classified as an athelete.

Troy 2.24

UNT 2.23

Muts 2.23

ASU 2.0

ULM 1.95

FAU 1.93

FIU 1.88

February 5, 2008

I've heard it time and again about all of the exceptions but I never hear the numerous times that the recruiting services are right. If they're so wrong then why do their ratings seem to mirror the results on the field?

It's only a test of potential, partially based on size, speed and past accomplishments. In the university every once in a while a person with an average SAT graduates magna cum laude. Even our grade point averages in college don't guarantee success in our chosen profession. But they are good barometers.

Evaluating recruits is an inexact science at best but Rivals, sespecially does a pretty decent job of evaluating. Still, they are not infallible and their point system is ridiculous.

I tried to explain once, what little I knew about how they rank recruiting classes. All that I could really tell for sure was that they award three points for two-star and eight points for three-star recruits. They mass everyone that they rate from 4.9 to 5.4 and award three points. If they are going to do that, why do they have individual ratings? Ditto for the 5.5 through 5.7 athletes that they give three stars. But the worst of all is that they award bonus points for not only nationial commits but also STATE. That's pathetic. Are they telling me that the #1 athlete in Hawaii should receive the same number of points as the #1 athlete in Texas? Click on Page 2 of the Rivals list and you will find their state rank. We have only one ranked recruit, Riley Dodge at #52. I didn't check Troy or Middle's state rankings closely but at one time Troy had 0 and I don't think that they have but one now.

Not only that, they have miscalculated our score. We should have 51 points for our two-star athletes (17 X 3) plus 64 points for our three-stars (8 X 8) and add whatever value is assigned for Riley's ranking. That should be a minimum of 115 points without the bonus.

Then when a rating is determined for Hollivay, it should add to our score.

The simplest way is to just total the RRs for each team and let that be their score. They are already getting a bonus for national recruits because all of them are four or five stars, which is 5.8 to 6.1, If you want to average it out so that the one that takes 26 is compared to the one that takes 20, I could live with that but get off of the silly bonus points for bogus state rankings.

When all of this is said and done, I will calculate every team's recruiting class based on their ratings and post it in this forum. Only then will I feel more comfortable about who really outdid whom.

And, yes, even then it will be possible for some of the lower rated athletes to outperform their more celebrated brethren.

Edited February 5, 2008 by GrayEagleOne

GreenAlums · February 5, 2008

http://meangreen.beloblog.com/
It is kind of funny to think back over the course of recruiting season and all the e-mail I have received. A few months ago, all I heard about was how highly UNT's recruits were ranked by Rivals and Scout. All I hear about these days is what a load of baloney the rankings are now that UNT has fallen a little in the ratings.

I think this is a rather normal action and reaction. Its like any poll; we agree with them when they agree with us and we disagree with them when they tell us something we don't want to hear!! We have good recruits and now one of the best coaching staffs assembled that can coach the recruits to greatness. After these recruits are singed it's up to the coaching staff.

I'm totally OK with staying a little lower on the radar and then win big at the right time!

Edited February 5, 2008 by GreenExes

GrandGreen · February 5, 2008

I've heard it time and again about all of the exceptions but I never hear the numerous times that the recruiting services are right. If they're so wrong then why do their ratings seem to mirror the results on the field?
Because their ratings IMO are primarily based on who recruits a player. Therefore, the correlation is always going to be there, almost by definition, with the most successful teams. I do agree with your thesis in general. Those that advocate the only true way to rate a class is four to five years later are obviously correct but then why even be concerned with recruiting. Few go back four or five years and rate a class. The fun and the whole recruiting rating industry is based on the analysis of the current class. Most fans overrate their team's class; generally based on nearly meaningless stats such as all district, highly suspect 40 times, etc. and glowing reports from the staff. The most meaningful factor in evaluating a recruit is who else is recruiting the player, which is also the primary basis of the recruiting services. Yes, you can find hundreds of players that were scantly recruited that end up being great players, but as stated the odds definitely go up with the individual's original recruiting rating.
One of the major flaws in Rival's approach is there is no attempt to adjust for questionable academic backgrounds. A lot of those late big commits to Belt teams, including NT, are to players that the "Bigs" have passed on due to academic issues. Not necessarily a bad strategy but getting a 4 star athlete with eligibility issues is not exactly the same as getting the same athlete with no academic problems. I have seen several references to the MUTS winning the recruiting battles, but losing to NT on the field. The problem for the MUTS was that a great number of their prized recruits never saw the field.