• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

2011 Rivals/Scout/etc. National & Regional Rankings

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Gatorubet;1864519; said:
I don't think you'd have five losses every year. You guys have an elite school and an elite coach.

And no offense, but I don't think you'd have come close to matching your current streak of six conference championship wins if you played in the SEC.
Click to expand...

You forget that if Ohio State played in the SEC they would have had signed additional fifty players over those ten years.
 
Upvote 0
Muck;1864787; said:
You forget that if Ohio State played in the SEC they would have had signed additional fifty players over those ten years.
Click to expand...
and Joe Thomas, Javon Ringer, Derrell Johnson Koulianos, Patrick Omameh, Zerbie Sanders, etc could have been buckeyes, among many others.
 
Upvote 0
Every year, it's necessary for us Buckeye fans to remind ourselves of a few things regarding recruiting evaluation:

1. We think our recruits are better than the national recruiting "experts" think they are. Because, duh, we're biased fans. Inevitable.

2. Recruiting rankings vary for players because different evaluators have different priorities and different viewpoints. Inevitable.

3. Recruiting rankings are not guarantees. But they are valuable indicators. If you think otherwise, just review Rivals and Scout rankings over the past 10 years and figure out how well, on average, 2-stars did vs. 5-stars.

We do just fine under Tressel. Relax, everybody. One of the most-fun things we do IMO is follow the less-than-elite prospects like Jenkins and Laurinaitis who prosper in the Buckeye system and become outstanding collegians and often fine pros. If Rivals and Scout hadn't been lukewarm about those guys, how would we be able to enjoy this activity? :biggrin:
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck;1864830; said:
Every year, it's necessary for us Buckeye fans to remind ourselves of a few things regarding recruiting evaluation:

1. We think our recruits are better than the national recruiting "experts" think they are. Because, duh, we're biased fans. Inevitable.

2. Recruiting rankings vary for players because different evaluators have different priorities and different viewpoints. Inevitable.

3. Recruiting rankings are not guarantees. But they are valuable indicators. If you think otherwise, just review Rivals and Scout rankings over the past 10 years and figure out how well, on average, 2-stars did vs. 5-stars.

We do just fine under Tressel. Relax, everybody. One of the most-fun things we do IMO is follow the less-than-elite prospects like Jenkins and Laurinaitis who prosper in the Buckeye system and become outstanding collegians and often fine pros. If Rivals and Scout hadn't been lukewarm about those guys, how would we be able to enjoy this activity? :biggrin:
Click to expand...

This should be stickied as the first thing that comes up every time you click on any recruiting thread for a week or so before signing day.
 
Upvote 0
MaxBuck;1864830; said:
Every year, it's necessary for us Buckeye fans to remind ourselves of a few things regarding recruiting evaluation:

1. We think our recruits are better than the national recruiting "experts" think they are. Because, duh, we're biased fans. Inevitable.
Click to expand...

I think it goes further than that. I do agree that we as fans are biased, but that's not the only reason we feel we're getting a raw deal. How many times do you see players that are commit early, drop in the rankings? Often. This is obviously done for business purposes. Reading about committed prospects doesn't generate buzz. By replacing some of those committed guys with uncommitted guys, they are able to build more hype and generate more traffic.
Now, you might be saying, "well it's not like that rule only applys to Ohio State." Well, it often times hits Ohio State the hardest because of the way Ohio State recruits. We usually lock up that majority of our class before the school year even starts. I think this plays a big role in the grand scheme of things.

It's really just funny when you look at the general trend of rankings movement when comparing uncommitted to committed players. Reading the justification for such movements is funny too. Putting a lot of stock in an all-star game- Pure Humor.
 
Upvote 0
southcampus;1864851; said:
Now, you might be saying, "well it's not like that rule only applys to Ohio State." Well, it often times hits Ohio State the hardest because of the way Ohio State recruits. We usually lock up that majority of our class before the school year even starts. I think this plays a big role in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...

Texas, who is the absolute king of locking up 90% of their class by June (in a slow year), has had 3 consecutive top 5 recruiting classes, as well as 5 in the last 6 years.
 
Upvote 0
And they stunk it up this year. Recruiting rankings don't mean as much as everyone would like to believe. Sure their nice to look at and analyze, but good coaching is the single most important thing to a successful football team. We have a pretty good football coach. That's all I care about.
 
Upvote 0
HundedLane;1864590; said:
While i totally agree....

If we were in the SEC, I would presume we would be in the South....
therefore be recruiting players with southern speed and not slow northerners, thus being even more elite.

Something to think about.
Click to expand...


Correct.
But you'd also be coaching against Saban, Miles, Spurrier, Meyer, Tubbs/Chizik....etc

Slightly better at their jobs than Ferentz, Bielema, Rodriguez....no?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top