Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Well I hope these rankings don't pan out:

http://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruit ... /MIDAM/all

1. Temple - 228
2. Toledo - 214
3. Ohio - 197
4. Miami - 178
5. Northern Illinois - 100
6. Eastern Michigan - 85
7. Kent State - 85
8. Western Michigan - 80
9. Bowling Green - 73
10. Ball State - 65
11. Central Michigan - 65
12. Akron - 60
13. Buffalo - 50

They also refer to our conference as "Mid America".

I am pretty sure they look for the amount of players and the major markets... every year pretty much the same.. I think the fact that we have 2.3 stars on avg which in the top 5 in the conference is a better indication.... but it all means nothing just go ask guys like victor cruz jerry rice ... guys that had no "stars"

They're greatly influenced by number of recruits signed..the TU's both signed a gazillion players...we signed 20.

I wouldn't put much into this .. It has alot to do with the size of the class and we only signed 16 compared to 31 by Toledo ... I'm guessing that we just don't have as many scholarships left as we are heavy frosh and soph

I also LOVE what we added with our transfers in Stokes and Givens that aren't included in these rankings. Those two alone have me very excited.

Where is U Mass ranked?

It would also appear that schools that sign a larger # of "skilled" position players (incl. "athletes") make for a more glamorous class. Also, since schools are only allowed to sign 25 scholarship players in any one year, it'll be interesting to see how Temple and team "up North" handle these extra bodies.

BTW, freak and I attended the nite presentation of BG's class...we had a great time talking with the coaches, one of whom estimated that we'd be around 4th or 5th when the rankings came out. It would seem that a lot of OL and DL folks don't get the attention that WR's and RB's do.

Here is a completely UNBIASED rating of the MAC recruiting classes!

http://toledo.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1326659




This tool must have spent hours coming up with a formula that would rank their class #1. He said on another post that he submitted more film on some players to get them ranked higher on Rivals. That tells you all you need to know about class ratings etc and how worthless they are, especially when you have people that have probably never even picked up a football, trying to influence ratings!
Seems there is not much credibiltiy to him or the whole system.

Here are my ratings:

1. BGSU
2. (makes no difference)
3. "
4. "
5. "
6. "
7. "
8. "
9. "
10. "
11. "
12. "
13. "
14. Toledo

factman wrote:Here is a completely UNBIASED rating of the MAC recruiting classes!

http://toledo.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1326659




This tool must have spent hours coming up with a formula that would rank their class #1. He said on another post that he submitted more film on some players to get them ranked higher on Rivals. That tells you all you need to know about class ratings etc and how worthless they are, especially when you have people that have probably never even picked up a football, trying to influence ratings!
Seems there is not much credibiltiy to him or the whole system.

Here are my ratings:

1. BGSU
2. (makes no difference)
3. "
4. "
5. "
6. "
7. "
8. "
9. "
10. "
11. "
12. "
13. "
14. Toledo

It was acatually pretty complimentary of BG's class in the write up. Obviously there are some serious flaws in those rankings. Why not give some or all weight to the average score?

sportydude1818 wrote:I wouldn't put much into this .. It has alot to do with the size of the class and we only signed 16 compared to 31 by Toledo ... I'm guessing that we just don't have as many scholarships left as we are heavy frosh and soph

I believe Toledo had four preferred walk-ons and two greyshirts on their list to get to 31.

BGSU33 wrote:I also LOVE what we added with our transfers in Stokes and Givens that aren't included in these rankings. Those two alone have me very excited.

No kidding! The video footage of Givens was incredible. IF he can shake off the rust of not playing for a couple years, holy crap. Samuel, Givens, Hopgood and Martin in our stable of backs?!?!?!? Freakin eh.

sportydude1818 wrote:I wouldn't put much into this .. It has alot to do with the size of the class and we only signed 16 compared to 31 by Toledo ... I'm guessing that we just don't have as many scholarships left as we are heavy frosh and soph

Not sure where you got your numbers... the last thing I saw was 27 for Toledo and TWENTY for us. As I 've already posted, I think the "rankings" get skewed by the total # of kids PLUS the glamour positions/skill positions tend to create more buzz than the 8 or so linemen that BG signed.