Consensus Team Rankings - NSD Final

[ETGator1]

NSD Final (10:30 PM EST) - Top 12 based on the combined rankings of ESPN, 247 Sports, Rivals, and Scout:

1. Alabama 1+1+1+3=6
2. Ohio State 3+5+2+1=11
3. Notre Dame 4+3+3+4=14
4. Florida 2+4+4+8=18
5. Michigan 6+8+5+2=21
6. Mississippi 5+2+7+9=23
7. Louisiana State 7+6+6+6T=25
8. Texas A&M 8+7+10+6T=31
9. UCLA 12+11+11+5=39
10. Auburn 11+10+8+13=42
11. Florida State 9+9+9+16=43
12. Georgia 10+12+12+10=44

[ETGator1]

Good article - the rankings matter:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...rankings-right

[regurgigator]

Originally Posted by ETGator1

Good article - the rankings matter:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...rankings-right

Yes, thanks for the link. Pretty clearly shows that high star ratings have a very strong statistical correlation to individual player and team success.

[The_Graygator]

Originally Posted by ETGator1

NSD Final (10:30 PM EST) - Top 12 based on the combined rankings of ESPN, 247 Sports, Rivals, and Scout:

1. Alabama 1+1+1+3=6
2. Ohio State 3+5+2+1=11
3. Notre Dame 4+3+3+4=14
4. Florida 2+4+4+8=18
5. Michigan 6+8+5+2=21
6. Mississippi 5+2+7+9=23
7. Louisiana State 7+6+6+6T=25
8. Texas A&M 8+7+10+6T=31
9. UCLA 12+11+11+5=39
10. Auburn 11+10+8+13=42
11. Florida State 9+9+9+16=43
12. Georgia 10+12+12+10=44

The Gators have had the #5 and #4 ranked classes the last two years and FSU actually dropped from #10 last year to #11 this year.

[elrongator]

If you throw out the Scout rankings as retarded, because they are, then you end up with a three way tie for second place between UF, Notre Dame, and Ohio State.
If you then take into account that we landed arguably the top two OL jucos who are not factored into the Rival rankings, inappropriately skewing rankings in favor of Ohio State and Notre Dame, I think ESPN got it right.
We are a close second to Alabama.
Simple

[DieAGator]

Originally Posted by elrongator

If you throw out the Scout rankings as retarded, because they are, then you end up with a three way tie for second place between UF, Notre Dame, and Ohio State.
If you then take into account that we landed arguably the top two OL jucos who are not factored into the Rival rankings, inappropriately skewing rankings in favor of Ohio State and Notre Dame, I think ESPN got it right.
We are a close second to Alabama.
Simple

I don't understand why this board has such hard feelings towards Scout. They actually bumped-up our WRs as the season progressed. They aren't manipulating to the detriment of UF or SEC.

[qwghlmgator]

Originally Posted by DieAGator

I don't understand why this board has such hard feelings towards Scout. They actually bumped-up our WRs as the season progressed. They aren't manipulating to the detriment of UF or SEC.

Their rankings don't even pass the glance test. And they're always weighted to the upper midewest/Big 16 or whatever they are today and the west (i.e. population centers with the most potential subscribers). tOSU #1? Michigan #2? UCLA #5 Really?

If there are seven classes out there better than ours I'll eat my shorts. Heck, if there are two better classes than Bama's I'll eat my shorts.

[DieAGator]

Originally Posted by qwghlmgator

Their rankings don't even pass the glance test.

Nothing personal but you would have to be an expert nationally to see that, then have to prove it. Unfortunately Ohio State has a damn good class, not as good as ours at some positions but as good or better in others. I wish I didn't have to say that.

And they're always weighted to the upper midewest/Big 16 or whatever they are today and the west (i.e. population centers with the most potential subscribers).

Would like to see some examples. But I agree, for the most part I would take a top 20 player from Florida/Louisiana/Alabama/Georgia over a top 20 player from Midwest or NE.

tOSU #1? Michigan #2? UCLA #5 Really?

Michigan's class is strong as well. Four top OTs and OGs, 2 top RBs/1 top FB, 3 decent WRs, top QB, top TE. It doesn't get that much better, on paper. They have talent and/or numbers at every position on defense: 3 top 25 DL(a little light), 2 top 20 LBs(a little light), 2 top safeties and excellent CB class.

The good news is they are a threat to tarnish Urban Meyer's cakewalk to the NC.

UCLA's class not that good top to bottom but really strong as some positions- love their OL class. But for that matter, Bama's class is not great all around. They got 3 OL(two are JUCOs), 2LBs, ZERO safeties.

If there are seven classes out there better than ours I'll eat my shorts. Heck, if there are two better classes than Bama's I'll eat my shorts.

There is margin for error in Scout's system but the difference in their system between our class and Bama/Mich's/Bama's is essentially the extra point value they place on their 5 star recipients. I believe if we would have landed those 5 stars we would have the points, not Bama/Mich/OSU. So I just don't see it as unfair, unless someone can prove Scout is incorrectly evaluating players.

Not picking your post apart to single you out qwgh, just don't see why people dismiss Scout's evaluations and rankings just because UF isn't ranked as highly with them. It's not a conspiracy.

[Gator515151]

Originally Posted by qwghlmgator

Their rankings don't even pass the glance test. And they're always weighted to the upper midewest/Big 16 or whatever they are today and the west (i.e. population centers with the most potential subscribers). tOSU #1? Michigan #2? UCLA #5 Really?

If there are seven classes out there better than ours I'll eat my shorts. Heck, if there are two better classes than Bama's I'll eat my shorts.

Umm eating ones own shorts doesn't impress me.

[themistocles]

Originally Posted by qwghlmgator

Their rankings don't even pass the glance test. And they're always weighted to the upper midewest/Big 16 or whatever they are today and the west (i.e. population centers with the most potential subscribers). tOSU #1? Michigan #2? UCLA #5 Really?

If there are seven classes out there better than ours I'll eat my shorts. Heck, if there are two better classes than Bama's I'll eat my shorts.

You know qwgl, I think that is a safe bet.

[JerseyGator01]

Me thinks recruiting rankings can be overrated since so many teams recruit based on needs at certain positions. If you recruit half a dozen from one position and sign maybe 22, wouldn't that look so-so in the recruiting rankings?

[GatorJeff]

Originally Posted by DieAGator

I don't understand why this board has such hard feelings towards Scout. They actually bumped-up our WRs as the season progressed. They aren't manipulating to the detriment of UF or SEC.

Are you kidding? Comparing ESPN, Rivals and Scout, Scout had 4 of our 5 wide receiver signees (Robinson, Bailey, Hawkins and Thompson) ranked the lowest of all three. Absurd was that they have Bailey (who was extremely impressive during the Under Armor week) ranked as a three star and only the 59th best at his position. Heck, ESPN has Bailey as the 77th best OVERALL PLAYER, and Rivals has him as the #7 WR. Scout has Hawkins as a three star and 79th at his position, while ESPN rates him a four star and 25th at his position. ESPN has Robinson as the #7 WR, Rivals has him #5, while Scout has him #14. Fulwood was the only one the didn't have as lowest, and that was about a tie with Scout rating him #13, Rivals had him #16 and ESPN rated him #14.

[StrangeGator]

Originally Posted by elrongator

If you throw out the Scout rankings as retarded, because they are, then you end up with a three way tie for second place between UF, Notre Dame, and Ohio State.
If you then take into account that we landed arguably the top two OL jucos who are not factored into the Rival rankings, inappropriately skewing rankings in favor of Ohio State and Notre Dame, I think ESPN got it right.
We are a close second to Alabama.
Simple

I don't even know why Scout was included. They've been irrelevant for years.

[1984Gator]

Originally Posted by ETGator1

NSD Final (10:30 PM EST) - Top 12 based on the combined rankings of ESPN, 247 Sports, Rivals, and Scout:

1. Alabama 1+1+1+3=6
2. Ohio State 3+5+2+1=11
3. Notre Dame 4+3+3+4=14
4. Florida 2+4+4+8=18
5. Michigan 6+8+5+2=21
6. Mississippi 5+2+7+9=23
7. Louisiana State 7+6+6+6T=25
8. Texas A&M 8+7+10+6T=31
9. UCLA 12+11+11+5=39
10. Auburn 11+10+8+13=42
11. Florida State 9+9+9+16=43
12. Georgia 10+12+12+10=44

Add out two OL transfers and I'd say we did extremely well!

[demosthenes]

Originally Posted by elrongator

If you throw out the Scout rankings as retarded, because they are, then you end up with a three way tie for second place between UF, Notre Dame, and Ohio State.
If you then take into account that we landed arguably the top two OL jucos who are not factored into the Rival rankings, inappropriately skewing rankings in favor of Ohio State and Notre Dame, I think ESPN got it right.
We are a close second to Alabama.
Simple

And if you only count Florida recruits we're number one!

[ETGator1]

I agree, Scout is the least reliable service. However, averaging the four softens their ineptitude. I don't know how they can make a case for Ohio State at 1 and Michigan at 2 over an Alabama class that is 1 on the other three services. Having UF at 8 is a farce as well.

[gator1986]

Scout is straight garbage... Every big 10 team is highly ranked, stupid ass fox...

[MaceoP]

Originally Posted by gator1986

Scout is straight garbage... Every big 10 team is highly ranked, stupid ass fox...

Nebraska 23,23,17,11

Scout ranks Nebraska 11, the other three services average = 21 ?

I tend to agree with the above quote.

Nebraska fans are not happy with their class.

[lurkingator1]

Originally Posted by gator1986

Scout is straight garbage... Every big 10 team is highly ranked, stupid ass fox...

yep! count me as one that also thinks scout is garbage

[gator7_5]

Every UCLA fan in the country would trade classes with us. Ridiculous.