Apparently, big bad USC over on the West Coast is whining because they didn't get the #1 recruiting class. A target of their criticism: Miami's huge 33 player class that features many 2/3 star commits on Rivals.
Q&A Session 1
Q&A Session 2
"Q: Can you explain why some schools (Miami 33 commits) have 30 plus commits ? and does this not just inflate the math when it comes to class ranking??
A: The limit is 25, however if you bring recruits in for the spring, they do not count against the 25-man limit. Like I've said, Matt Meyer does not count against USC's 25-man limit for next season because he is already enrolled. As it turned out, USC did not sign 25 recruits anyways, so it wasn't beneficial from a recruiting standpoint.
What I don't like about recruiting rankings is these point systems that are used. They automatically reward bigger classes over smaller but perhaps better quality classes. As recruiting expert Bobby Burton says of rankings, ``It's a beauty contest.''
Q: These recruiting "ratings" don't make sense. Rivals has Miami rated fourth, with eight "3-stars", and eight "2-stars". Scout has Craft, of UCLA, rated a "5-star"...Rivals has him a "3-star". Quantity rules! My question is: What are the rules regarding the number of scholarships you can offer each year?
A: I explained the 25-scholarship limit in the previous answers today."
My answer to this? Sour grapes, guys. Miami's class is loaded top to bottom. Yes we have plenty of 3 star guys, one of which was Mr. Football, record setting QB for the top team in the nation. Rivals and Scouts grossly underrated many of our players.
Even if "quality" should count over "quantity", I think there is something to be said about convincing 33 young guys to play for your team when it's a struggle to sign any one of them. Not to mention that getting 12 of the ESPN Top 150 isn't exactly a low-quality recruiting class.
2 comments:
...So the ratings system is stupid, but they want to be #1?
Sour grapes indeed.
Post a Comment