Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
Pat Dye Field => Signing Day => Topic started by: jadennis on February 04, 2010, 12:31:11 PM
-
How has Rivals come to the conclusion that USC has the #1 class? I understand that they have some formula....but that's no excuse if the formula is flawed, which it appears to be.
# of players rated 6.1
USC - 5
UFL - 4
# of players rated 6.0
USC - 2
UFL - 3
# of players rated 5.9
USC - 7
UFL - 6
# of players rated 5.8
USC - 5
UFL - 9
# of players 5.7 or lower
USC - 1
UFL - 6
It makes zero sense to me that Florida is apparently penalized for having more overall recruits. USC has 20 total, and if you take Florida's top 20, they are nearly identical. The total number rated 5.8 or higher is 19 for USC, 22 for Florida. Apply a point value to each rating (6 for 6.1, 5 for 6.0, 4 for 5.9, 3 for 5.8) and USC has 83 total points and Florida has 90.
Florida just also happens to have some additional players beyond that. Why does that lower their point total? It doesn't hurt the team. In fact, it only adds a few more opportunities for someone to be a surprise and become a 3-star All-SEC player, which happens every year.
I know that there are other factors like national rank, position rank, etc. But when you're 6.1 and 6.0, you are at the top in every way (state rank, position rank, national rank, etc), so there can be very little difference between the classes based on that criteria. The only thing I can see is that Florida is penalized for having more players (the additional guys being 5.7 or lower players).
No logical explanation for reducing the value of a class based on the bottom 5-6 players when the top 20 are a nearly identical match to another program's 20 recruits.
-
One little related note....they say Seantrel Henderson's letter has still not been received at USC. He is their top recruit...wonder what's going on with him?
-
One little related note....they say Seantrel Henderson's letter has still not been received at USC. He is their top recruit...wonder what's going on with him?
I read an article earlier that said he was going to wait until after their preliminary hearing with the NCAA, which I believe is scheduled for the 19th. He wants to wait and see just how grim the outlook may be before he decides to ink his sig with them. Very smart move on his part, IMO.
-
Very smart move. I can't believe more parents didn't do the same with their kids. I guess everyone was worried about not getting a seat at the table when it was all said and done on NSD.
Henderson has no such worries....I think he's going to Ohio State if not USC. OSU only signed 18 kids.
-
How has Rivals come to the conclusion that USC has the #1 class? I understand that they have some formula....but that's no excuse if the formula is flawed, which it appears to be.
I have no clue what their formula is, but if you multiply 6.1 by the number of 6.1 rated players, 6.0 by the number of 6.0 rated players, etc., and then add them up and divide the result by the total number of players, USC has a higher number. This would give you an average rating of the entire class. Again, not sure if this is what they use, but that's the only way I can see them rating USC higher.
-
Probation. Probation. Probation. Reggie Bush. Probation.
-
I have no clue what their formula is, but if you multiply 6.1 by the number of 6.1 rated players, 6.0 by the number of 6.0 rated players, etc., and then add them up and divide the result by the total number of players, USC has a higher number. This would give you an average rating of the entire class. Again, not sure if this is what they use, but that's the only way I can see them rating USC higher.
That gives them the higher average rating per player. But if you take that theory, a program could sign one 6.1 rated guy, and no one else at all, and have the best class in America (because they would have the highest average).
One thing we do know by comparing the classes, is that typically, the more guys you sign, the more points you accumulate. Take 2007. Alabama finished #1 with an average player rating of 3.72. Notre Dame finished #2 with an average player rating of 3.96. That's a huge difference. But Alabama signed 32 kids, Notre Dame signed 23.
That's one reason Auburn is ranked #4. Our average rated player is 3.5, which is lower than Alabama's 3.62, Oklahoma's 3.55, and even #12 Penn State's 3.55. Thing is, Auburn signed 32 players to Penn State's 20. In doing so, we accumulated more points, even though our "average" recruit was rated lower (although the top of our class was better than the top of PSU's class, those extra 12 guys we signed drag down the overall average...but also add a lot of points).
We can see this fact all up and down the board. There are teams with lower average ratings, but more signees that are ranked higher. There are teams with high average recruits that finished lower because they didn't have many guys (Cal averaged 3.58, but only signed 19 kids...they are #11).
USC seems to be the exception. The top of their class is nearly identical to Florida's, and Florida has more recruits. In every other example, if everything else is the same, "more recruits" equals more points. How is this not true when it comes to USC and Florida?
-
(http://www.appletreeblog.com/wp-content/2008/04/ronald-blow-job.jpg)
Ronald = USC
Girl = Rivals
-
I don't know Rivals formula, but again, taking the average in some fashion is the only way I can figure they differ. Afterall, if they went with the traditional formula of simply adding up each player's rating and coming up with a total, then yes, Florida would have more recruits and would have a higher raw number. They obviously don't follow this formula, as Florida is not #1. It may be that they somehow weigh the higher rated players (5.9 and above) more than the others. In that instance, USC would be ranked higher because they had 14 players that were 5.9 and above, and Florida only had 13. It could also be a scaled thing, where 6.1 rated players are worth X points, 6.0 players are worth Y points, etc., and the point values and differences in the number of higher rated players were enough to give USC the edge.
-
I don't know Rivals formula, but again, taking the average in some fashion is the only way I can figure they differ. Afterall, if they went with the traditional formula of simply adding up each player's rating and coming up with a total, then yes, Florida would have more recruits and would have a higher raw number. They obviously don't follow this formula, as Florida is not #1. It may be that they somehow weigh the higher rated players (5.9 and above) more than the others. In that instance, USC would be ranked higher because they had 14 players that were 5.9 and above, and Florida only had 13. It could also be a scaled thing, where 6.1 rated players are worth X points, 6.0 players are worth Y points, etc., and the point values and differences in the number of higher rated players were enough to give USC the edge.
Rivals takes the average of the top 20 recruits,
-
Rivals takes the average of the top 20 recruits,
Dammit Jumbo, I'm a Mathlete not an athlete.
-
Rivals takes the average of the top 20 recruits,
If that's true, then we're back to the "flawed" system of stupidity then.
USC's top 20 average 5.925....Florida's averages 5.920.
Beyond that, USC has zero recruits. Beyond that, Florida has two more 4-star guys and a total of 5 that are a 5.7 or higher. 5.7 is the highest 3-star you can be. How do they figure that those players are worth ZERO points.
Stupid.
What's funny is I completely have no care whatsoever if USC or Florida is #1. I only have a care if STUPID is allowed to run free. It's driving me crazy that no logical explanation seems to exist (or at least isn't available to verify).
-
Not that I doubted you Jumbo (so keep your fist away from my dog)...but I think you're right. I did the point totals for the top 20 of each class...and sure enough, that's the order they're in. I did through the top 10 at least, and they all line up according to the top 20 of each class.
So my final conclusion? As mentioned before...stupid. No other word fits better. Stupid. It's why ESPN has Florida #1 and USC #7. They actually care that Florida has more players that are worth something beyond the top 20. Even Scout has Florida #1 and USC #5. Overall, I tend to like Rivals way of doing things, but knowing how they do the final rankings is nonsensical.
-
You also have to figure in the added "Bonus" points for having the Top Overall Rated prospect, the Top Overall Rated prospect at their position, the Top Five Overall Rated prospect, the Top Five Overall Rated prospect at their position....and I'm sure there are extra points for being in the Top 50, Top 100, Top 250, Top Prospect in the State. Basically, it's the BCS of the recruiting world. Remember Barrett Jones? HS Guard was moved to Center, eventhough he'd never played Center in HS. But, was moved there because he would be rated as the #1 Center Prospect (Extra Bonus points, bitches).
-
Probation. Probation. Probation. Reggie Bush. Probation.
We shall see. I hope they get something but I do not feel it will be much.