Recruit "ratings"???

[Class of 61]

After reading through a couple of threads re: football recruits, I decided to look to see if either Rivals or Scout had "updated" BG's commits...of course they hadn't...
But one thing kind of jumped out at me all of a sudden... Scout's "ratings" of our hopefully incoming linemen (all listed as OG's by the way) are as follows:

Walker - #66
Stevens- # 82
German- # 92
Robinson- #98

ALLEGEDLY, these ratings are their positions IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY! And yet, all are listed as 2 stars.... 4 kids in the top 100 at their position in the U.S. and only rated as "Average"? If you don't doubt the ratings and these sytems my now, you never will.
Either that, or there are very few GOOD OG's in the U.S. this year?

[hammb]

After reading through a couple of threads re: football recruits, I decided to look to see if either Rivals or Scout had "updated" BG's commits...of course they hadn't...
But one thing kind of jumped out at me all of a sudden... Scout's "ratings" of our hopefully incoming linemen (all listed as OG's by the way) are as follows:

Walker - #66
Stevens- # 82
German- # 92
Robinson- #98

ALLEGEDLY, these ratings are their positions IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY! And yet, all are listed as 2 stars.... 4 kids in the top 100 at their position in the U.S. and only rated as "Average"? If you don't doubt the ratings and these sytems my now, you never will.
Either that, or there are very few GOOD OG's in the U.S. this year?

Star ratings are determined by a recruits overall rank, not his position rank.

Scout will rank all the kids in the class, then the top 50 will be 5*, the next 150 will be 4*, etc. Guard is one of those positions where very few kids will fall into the upper tier of the overall rankings (only 2 5*, and 13 4*).


Recruiting rankings aren't that important really. At the MAC level, especially. Scout.com and the other websites are not spending that much time actually scouting the talent of the kids that we're recruiting. Our players' value is going to be more based upon who they have offers from. If we're pulling a kid who has an offer from a Big 10 school he's going to rank higher in their minds than a kid whose only offers are from other MAC schools. Is it fair? Probably not, but that's the way it goes.

I'm sure the kids we're recruiting will be fine players at BG, and the fact that they're labeled as only 2* recruits has little to no bearing on that.

[Class of 61]

After reading through a couple of threads re: football recruits, I decided to look to see if either Rivals or Scout had "updated" BG's commits...of course they hadn't...
But one thing kind of jumped out at me all of a sudden... Scout's "ratings" of our hopefully incoming linemen (all listed as OG's by the way) are as follows:

Walker - #66
Stevens- # 82
German- # 92
Robinson- #98

ALLEGEDLY, these ratings are their positions IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY! And yet, all are listed as 2 stars.... 4 kids in the top 100 at their position in the U.S. and only rated as "Average"? If you don't doubt the ratings and these sytems my now, you never will.
Either that, or there are very few GOOD OG's in the U.S. this year?

Star ratings are determined by a recruits overall rank, not his position rank.

Scout will rank all the kids in the class, then the top 50 will be 5*, the next 150 will be 4*, etc. Guard is one of those positions where very few kids will fall into the upper tier of the overall rankings (only 2 5*, and 13 4*).


Recruiting rankings aren't that important really. At the MAC level, especially. Scout.com and the other websites are not spending that much time actually scouting the talent of the kids that we're recruiting. Our players' value is going to be more based upon who they have offers from. If we're pulling a kid who has an offer from a Big 10 school he's going to rank higher in their minds than a kid whose only offers are from other MAC schools. Is it fair? Probably not, but that's the way it goes.

I'm sure the kids we're recruiting will be fine players at BG, and the fact that they're labeled as only 2* recruits has little to no bearing on that.

Hambb,
Thanks for the clarification...and I know that most MAC recruits tend to be put into the 2 star category...You're right, all we can do is recruit the best kids possible and hope they'll work out for us...as well as for them. Only thing that surprised me a bit was that the Middletown kids in particular supposedly DID get offered by the B-11...(Illinois, I think). But give me kids like Mark Stevens who seems to be the most excited kid I've seen or known to be coming to BG...these kind of kids are what we should all want.

[hammb]

After reading through a couple of threads re: football recruits, I decided to look to see if either Rivals or Scout had "updated" BG's commits...of course they hadn't...
But one thing kind of jumped out at me all of a sudden... Scout's "ratings" of our hopefully incoming linemen (all listed as OG's by the way) are as follows:

Walker - #66
Stevens- # 82
German- # 92
Robinson- #98

ALLEGEDLY, these ratings are their positions IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY! And yet, all are listed as 2 stars.... 4 kids in the top 100 at their position in the U.S. and only rated as "Average"? If you don't doubt the ratings and these sytems my now, you never will.
Either that, or there are very few GOOD OG's in the U.S. this year?

Star ratings are determined by a recruits overall rank, not his position rank.

Scout will rank all the kids in the class, then the top 50 will be 5*, the next 150 will be 4*, etc. Guard is one of those positions where very few kids will fall into the upper tier of the overall rankings (only 2 5*, and 13 4*).


Recruiting rankings aren't that important really. At the MAC level, especially. Scout.com and the other websites are not spending that much time actually scouting the talent of the kids that we're recruiting. Our players' value is going to be more based upon who they have offers from. If we're pulling a kid who has an offer from a Big 10 school he's going to rank higher in their minds than a kid whose only offers are from other MAC schools. Is it fair? Probably not, but that's the way it goes.

I'm sure the kids we're recruiting will be fine players at BG, and the fact that they're labeled as only 2* recruits has little to no bearing on that.

Hambb,
Thanks for the clarification...and I know that most MAC recruits tend to be put into the 2 star category...You're right, all we can do is recruit the best kids possible and hope they'll work out for us...as well as for them. Only thing that surprised me a bit was that the Middletown kids in particular supposedly DID get offered by the B-11...(Illinois, I think). But give me kids like Mark Stevens who seems to be the most excited kid I've seen or known to be coming to BG...these kind of kids are what we should all want.

Yeah, I know the Middletown kids both did have Illinois offers, and they qualify as great "gets" for us. My guess is that had they chosen Illinois they would've been bumped higher in the rankings and ended up as 3 star guys. Since they chose BG they get left where they are, and possibly even surpassed by other prospects who sign at BCS schools.

I gave up on the recruiting "rankings" awhile ago. They're all based on hearsay, and few of the rankers are actually watching film and evaluating it based on that. There have been times in the past where I've seen a kid commit to BG or another MAC school and he'll lose a star that next week, presumably because he chose a MAC school. I just know that those guys aren't spending much time watching our recruits play.

Agreed on Marc...he definitely seemed excited to be heading to BG, and that's the best thing we can hope for

[freefalcon]

Agreed on Marc...he definitely seemed excited to be heading to BG, and that's the best thing we can hope for

Make that DAMN excited!!!