Rivals missed on Odiari's...

[westexSMU]

2nd rating. In 2005 Rivals rated LB recruit Alex Odiari 6'2" 225, a 3 Star with a 5.5 personal rating. Of course, the highly recruited Odiari originally signed with Oklahoma State, and started several games for the cowboys as a freshman and sophmore.....As I understand, since leaving OSU and signing with SMU, Odiari has put on another 25lbs. without loosing any speed (which is 4.4/ 4.5).....So obviously, who ever did the Rivals rating on Odiari recently, did not recognize who he is as Rivals now has Odiari at just 2 Star with a lowest 4.9 rating....Odiari should really now be a 4 Star JUCO recruit because he is a proven quality player.

[KnuckleStang]

Difficult to argue with much of this statement, since, if he is really a 4.9, according to Rivals, "no Rivals.com expert knew much, if anything, about this player; a prospect that only a college coach really knew about."

[SMU 86]

This might be because of the year layoff from football.

[RushStPony]

Doesn't rivals also ding you for things like getting kicked out of school or really, really poor academic marks?

[Alaric]

Doesn't rivals also ding you for things like getting kicked out of school or really, really poor academic marks?

Odiari was Academic All Big XII - I recognize that your comment doesn't say Odiari had "really, really poor academic marks"

[PerunaPunch]

No, it's because Rivals.com is very subjective. The people doing the evaluations are not professionals, and SMU's Rivals affiliate is weak.

I like this service as much as anyone. In many ways they do a great job, and considering that there's no money in that business to compensate professionals, they cover a lot of ground. But take it for what it is... A loose affiliation of independently owned websites, whose writers aren't that much more knowledgeable than those who post on this board. Being a bunch of independent sites, rather than a cohesive organization, there is great inconsistency in evaluations from school to school, site to site, and player to player.

Case in point, SMU Rival is owned by Ted Gangi and Scott Farrell. You'd be hard pressed to find more loyal Mustangs, BUT I doubt either of those guys has played a down of football outside PeeWee league. That's not to say they don't know Mustang Football, Ted sits in the broadcast booth and has been producing the SMU Football radio show for a decade, and Scott is (or was) the Sports Editor for the Park Cities News, but neither are players or coaches, and neither of them have journalistic credentials beyond writing for the local rag that covers Highland Park High more than SMU.

In short, Rivals is a neat service. The local affiliates do a lot on zero budget. But if you're expecting Jimmy Johnson to be out visiting every pipsqueak high school, well, it's just not going to happen.

Rivals is great for getting stats on recruits you're interested in. And beyond that, for learning what those recruits are up to. It just gets into a gray area IMHO when they start assigning stars to kids. Because quite frankly in the main, they're probably your worst source for accurate talent evaluations (Stallion can argue this all he wants, but I'll maintain **correctly** that of the talent evaluation resources out there -- high school coaches, college coaches and Rivals -- Rivals the most subjective and least accurate).

[Big Easy Pony]

Difficult to argue with much of this statement, since, if he is really a 4.9, according to Rivals, "no Rivals.com expert knew much, if anything, about this player; a prospect that only a college coach really knew about."

The guy had a bunch of offers coming out of high school and started some Big 12 games in each of his two years in Stillwater. There's no way rivals can not know anything about this guy.

[PerunaPunch]

Difficult to argue with much of this statement, since, if he is really a 4.9, according to Rivals, "no Rivals.com expert knew much, if anything, about this player; a prospect that only a college coach really knew about."

The guy had a bunch of offers coming out of high school and started some Big 12 games in each of his two years in Stillwater. There's no way rivals can not know anything about this guy.

The Rivals network knows him as a name on a spreadsheet -- nothing more. There are probably less than a half dozen Rivals content providers nationwide who have seen him in person or seen him on tape. The Rivals affiliate at Okie State could've simply lowered his rating when he left Stillwater (pure speculation on my part, but that's how easy it is to account for the inconsistency).

[George S. Patton]

No, it's because Rivals.com is very subjective. The people doing the evaluations are not professionals, and SMU's Rivals affiliate is weak.

I like this service as much as anyone. In many ways they do a great job, and considering that there's no money in that business to compensate professionals, they cover a lot of ground. But take it for what it is... A loose affiliation of independently owned websites, whose writers aren't that much more knowledgeable than those who post on this board. Being a bunch of independent sites, rather than a cohesive organization, there is great inconsistency in evaluations from school to school, site to site, and player to player.

Case in point, SMU Rival is owned by Ted Gangi and Scott Farrell. You'd be hard pressed to find more loyal Mustangs, BUT I doubt either of those guys has played a down of football outside PeeWee league. That's not to say they don't know Mustang Football, Ted sits in the broadcast booth and has been producing the SMU Football radio show for a decade, and Scott is (or was) the Sports Editor for the Park Cities News, but neither are players or coaches, and neither of them have journalistic credentials beyond writing for the local rag that covers Highland Park High more than SMU.

In short, Rivals is a neat service. The local affiliates do a lot on zero budget. But if you're expecting Jimmy Johnson to be out visiting every pipsqueak high school, well, it's just not going to happen.

Rivals is great for getting stats on recruits you're interested in. And beyond that, for learning what those recruits are up to. It just gets into a gray area IMHO when they start assigning stars to kids. Because quite frankly in the main, they're probably your worst source for accurate talent evaluations (Stallion can argue this all he wants, but I'll maintain **correctly** that of the talent evaluation resources out there -- high school coaches, college coaches and Rivals -- Rivals the most subjective and least accurate).

This is exactly what I have maintained. The politics and subjectiveness are always involved in this.

[westexSMU]

Well, fact is, he should still be upgraded by Rivals now in fairness to Alex Odiari....Hey Ted and Scott, say something.

[Stallion]

I'd be willing to bet its because the MM.com people put him on their list when they are not supposed to count those guys on the Rivals system. And he can't be a 4 star JUCO because he never played JUCO football-he went to a JUCO w/o a football team to get eligible at SMU. Robieskie is from the Class of 2007. Therefore, they got a 4.9 which means they in fact aren't rated by any scout at Rivals.

[westexSMU]

[quote="Stallion"]I'd be willing to bet its because the MM.com people put him on their list when they are not supposed to count those guys on the Rivals system. And he can't be a 4 star JUCO because he never played JUCO football-he went to a JUCO w/o a football team to get eligible at SMU. Robieskie is from the Class of 2007. Therefore, they got a 4.9 which means they in fact aren't rated by any scout at Rivals.[/quote]..........................I can understand your point about not rating him as a JUCO. However, since Rivals did in fact rate him recently, they should have at least rated him where he was in high school because he is a proven Div. 1 player.

[Stallion]

No 4.9 is in fact not a rating-its is a statement that he is not rated by any scout in their system. Therefore, he is on the system as a 4.9. They've stated for years they don't rate DIA transfers.

Tulsa got a 4 star WR transfer from Alabama and a high 3 star transfer from Arkansas and they aren't rated. Texas Tech just got the former Miami 4 star DT and he is not even on their commitment list. Ryan Mallett was the No. 1 QB in the country last year and I don't see him on Arkansas' list. There are several other transfers to local schools that I have recently posted and they aren't rated.

The MM.com boys just put them on our list and probably shouldn't have. I wished for years they would have ranked DiA transfers-it would have shown how far down SMU's recruiting actually has been when you start adding in about 8 3, 4 and 5 star Transfers(3 Parade All-Americans) for UTEP, the 10+ DIA transfers in recent years to UH etc. TCU has had less transfers in recent years but I guarantee you they've had at least 6 All-Conference players who were D1A transfers on their best teams.

The failure to include these transfers only serves to make their ratings suspect when schools using these transfers play to a higher level than expectations. I don't think SMU's cheerleaders would really like to see the adjusted ratings of their classes if D1A transfers and other recruiting avenues were truly incorporated into their ratings.

[westexSMU]

No question you are right except we would have liked to have had these guys properly rated this year. Wasn't the other former Hawaii greyshirt that is enrolled at SMU a former All State kid from Ohio ?