PonyFans.com

I do not have any 'Platinum' service on RIVALS. I do not know the password or secret handshake to get the 'insider' info on recruits & the schools who chase them. But since there's been complaints of losing some recruits to Tulsa, I did look thru the site & came up with a comparison. Here again, I do not have RIVALS backroom BS that gives Tulsa a considerably higher ranking than us. When you see the stats (below), you may question if there is a subjective bias.

If you discount our 4 extra commits, you find the "STAR" ranking almost equal (slight edge SMU). As you compare the number rankings of the recruits, it is close to equal (again, slight edge SMU). Add them, subtract them, etc., and there is not much difference. Yet, they're ranked 58 with 231 points while we are # 71 with only 90 points???

So, Tulsa's 2-Star 5.4 ranked player is better than our 2-Star 5.4 ranked player? Based on the numbers, RIVALS must grade each Tulsa recruit 2.5 times better prospect than the same ranked SMU player... Huh?

COMMIT
COMPARISON SMU v. TULSA

TOT COMMITS # 23 v. 19
RANK- 5 STAR # 00 v. 00
RANK- 4 STAR # 00 v. 00
RANK- 3 STAR # 06 v. 06
RANK- 2 STAR # 17 v. 12
RANK- 0 STAR # 00 v. 01
AVG STAR RANK - 2.26 v. 2.21
IND. FB POSITION-
RANK PLAYERS # 01 v. 02
Rival’s Player Ranking (RR), numerical:
RR 5.0-5.4 # 15 v. 10 *
RR 5.5-5.7 # 02 v. 02 *
RR 5.8 + + # 00 v. 00
NON-RANKED # 04 v. 05

* JUCO players have no “RR” (Rival’s Rank), only Stars.

I'm not sure exactly how they calculate the points but Tulsa got extra points because of Terrell Nemons was rated a 5.7 while our highest recruit is rated 5.5. Also, I think they get extra points for recruits who are nationally ranked at their position. Tulsa has 2 SMU has none. JUCOs only get a star rating and not a number ranking like 5.4. Rivals does not take into account the 4+ Division 1A BCS transfers Tulsa has signed.

And there may not much difference between say 45 - 75, or 55-85, or between 75 - 105...its anyones guess.

Just that if you are in the Top40 you are probably better than the Next group of 40. If you are in 20-40 you are better than 60-80, if you are 50, then don't go jumping for joy for being ranked 10 places higher (the #60)...

TCU is ranked higher, because they have ONE 4-star..and if he pans out, he is likely to be a 'playmaker' - a difference maker.

But, if he fails out or doesn't pan out (like their 4-star QB from Denton Ryan 2 years ago)...then their class rank falls considerably.

All things equal, you would rather have MORE higher ranked players, because you aren't reaching, or having to develop as many players.

Having said that, VaTech's Michael Vick-led #2 team had no class ranked higher than I think 28th?

And Boise State's 3 in a row Top15 ranked teams haven't had a class in the Top80 until this year.

And the NYYankees don't win the World Series every year (but it sure helps them to be close by having the highest payroll, year in and year out).

Again-the best barometer is offers and visits. Plus I've also raised an eyebrow on the recruiting services treatment of JUCOs. The kid won't be mentioned and then BAM! he's a 3 star. I don't really have much of a problem if the recruit gets 2-3 nice offers but that's not always the case. I find it extremely humurous that Ponyboy and Stampede(I guess GoRedGoBlue has taken the year off) are the ones this year who are pinning our hopes on the star and rating system of the Rivals "evil empire"-which seems to give us 3 stars for some pretty marginally recruited players. I'll take a highly recruited player over a highly rated player every day.

I like Turtles.

To give full credit, Justin Willis is nationally ranked as a QB...

True indeed, Eddie P...

But, I'll take a glass of Maker's Mark.

Stallion wrote:I find it extremely humurous that Ponyboy and Stampede(I guess GoRedGoBlue has taken the year off) are the ones this year who are pinning our hopes on the star and rating system of the Rivals "evil empire"-which seems to give us 3 stars for some pretty marginally recruited players.

Keep building those straw men, Stal. I have stated numerous times in the last several days that I trust completely your judgement of this class. I simply made the irrefutable statement that you'd have to be pretty damned naive to have expected more after the last two seasons. I have been nothing if not consistent on this point. We should all be pleased with the quality of the recruits we're getting right now. Bennett's doing a helluva job.

GoRedGoBlue wrote:
TCU is ranked higher, because they have ONE 4-star..and if he pans out, he is likely to be a 'playmaker' - a difference maker.

But, if he fails out or doesn't pan out (like their 4-star QB from Denton Ryan 2 years ago)...then their class rank falls considerably.

Wow, how has Battle failed? Because he couldn't beat out Gunn & Hassell his RS freshman year? Battle is expected to contribute this year and will probably end up as #2 behind Gunn and will be a starter his Jr year, sooner if Gunn goes down as he has in the past.

From what I have heard, if Battle is starting his Junior yr it is because someone at TCU is doing some serious "grade engineering".

gostangs wrote:From what I have heard, if Battle is starting his Junior yr it is because someone at TCU is doing some serious "grade engineering".

Maybe he can get an acoholism redshirt.*


*Disclaimer: I am not intimating that he has an alcohol problem -- only that he could easily "develop" one and, under NCAA rules, be eligible for a redshirt.

From what I hear from TCU inside people is that Battle has essentially been a bust.