Saw this breakdown of the NW schools recruiting rankings this morning on Enjoy the Enjoyment.
If you average out where Rivals and Scout ranked the Northwest teams, here’s what you get:
Washington: 18.5 (#14 Scout, #25 Rivals)
Oregon: 21.5 (#24 Scout, #19 Rivals)
Oregon St.: 56.5 (#61 Scout, #52 Rivals)
Wazzu: 81 (#75 Scout, #87 Rivals)
The thing that stands out to me, and that I can’t figure out, is how UW is ranked #14 by Scout and #25 by Rivals. I understand there’s a similar difference in OSU and WSU rankings as well, but once you get down that far, it’s understandable.
I’m not a huge believer in the star rankings, based on the fact that OSU routinely finishes in the bottom to the Pac-10 in recruiting, but finds a way to finish in the top-5. See this or this.
How in the world could those rankings be so different? What made Scout think this was a Top-15 class and Rivals only a Top-25 class? Anyone have insight on that?
Bruce Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Scout.com is based in Seattle!
kharry Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Yes the scout.com head of recruiting in the PNW is a husky grad.
It’s pretty shameful.
wheaton4prez Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
If you really want to add to the confusion, look at the ESPN rankings. You will find even wider variations of rankings between players and teams between them and the others.
It would be interesting for someone to do some kind of statistical analysis to see how accurate the predictions are. Remember that they ARE predictions.
heavyduck Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Yes, I will admit that the Beavers are a good example of how good coaching can take medium players and produce more than just good results. Another factor to consider also is that the spread otption gets more out of less talent, due to smart tricky plays while spreading the defense into a one-on-one football game. If that’s the case, how much more can the Ducks do with great talent?!!! I not too concerned about who’s got the best recruiting class. When the spread option is involved, anything can happen. It’s the great neutralizer. Great talent is just a bonus which puts the icing on the cake! That’s why I’m optomistic!
Go Ducks!!!
jtlight Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
This seems like the normal Beaver whining (they whine almost as much as Fresno State fans). Yes, they have done very well without the “talent” of other teams. But lets be honest, they have not come close to competing for a Pac-10 title since 2000. It is commendable that they finish in the top half of the Pac-10, but I don’t see them moving past that anytime soon. If that’s where OSU fans are content with, then hooray for them.
They have done better that us in the past few years, but lets be honest, the difference is marginal at best. In my opinion, there is very little difference between all the crappy lower Pac-10 bowls. I hope OSU fans enjoy many more years in El Paso, Las Vegas, and San Francisco.
Joe Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
ranking HS payers is relatively new. Not such a science…yet. But, so is the pro draft?
All I can say it’s nice for Oregon to get this kind of attention across the nation right now. You get a sense that Oregon isn’t a wanna be anymore.
Whether we land TP, or not, the last 5 months has been good for the future of Oregon football. I am perfectly happy moving ahead with DT running the spread.
Joe Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
oops, that HS PLAYERS
Matt Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
Scout.com puts way too much emphasis on the number of players in my opinion. I think the average # of stars is the most important (along with balance, filling positions of need, etc). The number of players teams need year to year is cyclical, over a 4-5 year period, everyone needs the same amount. Seems silly to award more point to a recruiting class just because they have more guys.
Ducksilly Says:
February 7th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
The proof is in the season.