(02-07-2018 02:01 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:57 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  is it september yet?

I would hope most of this class sits out this year.

no doubt. I think Quin could potentially compete though for solid starting time.

Even without this class, I think the product on the field is going to be much better than what we saw last year.

(02-07-2018 02:01 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:57 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  is it september yet?

I would hope most of this class sits out this year.

We only had 8 seniors and most of them did not start IIRC might be a ton of RS this year.

(02-07-2018 02:04 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:01 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:57 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  is it september yet?

I would hope most of this class sits out this year.

no doubt. I think Quin could potentially compete though for solid starting time.

Even without this class, I think the product on the field is going to be much better than what we saw last year.

Almost impossible not to be better...only have to win three games lol. Winning the FCS game will be a step up from day one...never thought I would be saying that.

ESPN giving props to a couple of the early SBC signing period classes.

https://twitter.com/AStateFB/status/9612...34272?s=17

(02-07-2018 02:51 PM)stAte_3 Wrote:  ESPN giving props to a couple of the early SBC signing period classes.

https://twitter.com/AStateFB/status/9612...34272?s=17

Is it a coincidence that all four programs have been consistent winners?

(02-07-2018 02:57 PM)JTApps1 Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:51 PM)stAte_3 Wrote:  ESPN giving props to a couple of the early SBC signing period classes.

https://twitter.com/AStateFB/status/9612...34272?s=17

Is it a coincidence that all four programs have been consistent winners?

Which four?

(02-07-2018 01:50 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:40 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Oh, well if they say offers don't play any role then it must be true. Come on, JC, they aren't going to admit to being lazy or non-thorough with these ratings.

Yes so if you dont have proof just call them liars got it....

Critics of recruiting rankings are quick to reference the two-star or three-star prospect who far outperformed his ranking. These examples happen every year and will continue to happen every year.

But recruiting rankings continue to be good predictors of future success. There are always exceptions, but the schools that sign the best recruiting classes typically have the most on-field success. The last three national champions -- Ohio State, Florida State and Alabama -- have all done a terrific job signing top-rated recruiting classes. A 2014 SB Nation story showed that every BCS champion since 2005 signed more four and five-star prospects than lesser-ranked players.

You and others need to learn the difference between being reliable vs being 100%. Also the meaning of anecdotal would be nice as well.

I cant fathom how this is hard to grasp. They are reliable for every level not fool proof and NOBODY has ever said they were. If you have team A or conference A with a higher ranked roster their CHANCES of being more successful than team B or conference with lower ranked roster is greater the wider the look the more reliable they are. This is why conf ratings are more consistent than team rankings team rankings have less variation than player rankings. I took one class in stats and this is basic stuff....

HERE HERE.

(02-07-2018 03:13 PM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:57 PM)JTApps1 Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 02:51 PM)stAte_3 Wrote:  ESPN giving props to a couple of the early SBC signing period classes.

https://twitter.com/AStateFB/status/9612...34272?s=17

Is it a coincidence that all four programs have been consistent winners?

Which four?

Arkansas State, Appalachian State, Boise State and South Florida

(02-07-2018 01:39 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:36 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:32 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:10 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  I've had in depth conversations with administrators from all three of our sites about these ratings systems. According to those guys this is how the system works.

First and foremost it's impossible for each service to scout and rate every prospect. Being that different people are doing the rating not everyone is graded on the same criteria. That in and of itself makes it a flawed system. Many players begin getting "offers" from P5 programs, but those aren't commitable. Even though those "offers" aren't commitable their initial rankings reflect that P5 interest. Once the interest from the P5 ends and they end up committing to a G5, that is when the re-evaluation process begins and those same players will get downgraded to a lower rating. Simply because they went G5. So, even if they're rated higher before they commit to a G5 their rating decline due to the loss of interest by the P5

In other words, classes can chase those higher ratings levels, but they're working against declining scores in a number of instances. The final 2018 recalculation took place before the December 20th signing date, so anyone who was still unsigned after that date will avoid the downgrade simply because they were still on the open market. By not signing they avoid the re-calculation scrutiny and end up with a higher "final" rating than they would've likely gotten otherwise. Explains why were all of these high three-stars guys are still available even though they only hold maybe 1-2 G5 offers that are actually commit-able.

Coaches look for guys who fit what they do and don't really care if they don't "grade out" as highly for the ratings analysts. A defensive lineman that everyone else might called undersized, another staff might grade out as exactly what they want due to quickness and agility. So, the rating scale used by the services doesn't take into consideration what a particular coach might be looking for.

Bottom line is it appears even the guys who run the sites think the system is basically flawed.

Cool story bro... Yet not one link to prove or support any of it lol....par for the course. AppManDG heard it so its credible...Still cant explain all those offers to high rated guys lol.

if app signed a class full of 4 stars, appman would tell us that they were indeed the best fits for app state, and then brag about how they pulled in the best class in g5 history. lol

Hmm actual quotes from actual raters say offers play little to no role for most...I even have a link...

Out of the four recruiting experts, Shurburtt is the only one who says offers factor in at all and he gives it only 10 percent of the total equation. One thing 247Sports does is look at the track record of college programs putting players into the NFL, especially lower-rated prospects. If a school is known for turning two and three-star prospects into NFL players, the analysts might give the school the benefit of the doubt when they offer a similarly rated player.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/...gs_de.html

Google is easy...

Yes, google APP vs gs rivalry and you will see that APP has won 11 of the last 15 games and 8 of the last 10. I love Google.

(02-07-2018 03:45 PM)AppinSC Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:39 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:36 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:32 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:10 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  I've had in depth conversations with administrators from all three of our sites about these ratings systems. According to those guys this is how the system works.

First and foremost it's impossible for each service to scout and rate every prospect. Being that different people are doing the rating not everyone is graded on the same criteria. That in and of itself makes it a flawed system. Many players begin getting "offers" from P5 programs, but those aren't commitable. Even though those "offers" aren't commitable their initial rankings reflect that P5 interest. Once the interest from the P5 ends and they end up committing to a G5, that is when the re-evaluation process begins and those same players will get downgraded to a lower rating. Simply because they went G5. So, even if they're rated higher before they commit to a G5 their rating decline due to the loss of interest by the P5

In other words, classes can chase those higher ratings levels, but they're working against declining scores in a number of instances. The final 2018 recalculation took place before the December 20th signing date, so anyone who was still unsigned after that date will avoid the downgrade simply because they were still on the open market. By not signing they avoid the re-calculation scrutiny and end up with a higher "final" rating than they would've likely gotten otherwise. Explains why were all of these high three-stars guys are still available even though they only hold maybe 1-2 G5 offers that are actually commit-able.

Coaches look for guys who fit what they do and don't really care if they don't "grade out" as highly for the ratings analysts. A defensive lineman that everyone else might called undersized, another staff might grade out as exactly what they want due to quickness and agility. So, the rating scale used by the services doesn't take into consideration what a particular coach might be looking for.

Bottom line is it appears even the guys who run the sites think the system is basically flawed.

Cool story bro... Yet not one link to prove or support any of it lol....par for the course. AppManDG heard it so its credible...Still cant explain all those offers to high rated guys lol.

if app signed a class full of 4 stars, appman would tell us that they were indeed the best fits for app state, and then brag about how they pulled in the best class in g5 history. lol

Hmm actual quotes from actual raters say offers play little to no role for most...I even have a link...

Out of the four recruiting experts, Shurburtt is the only one who says offers factor in at all and he gives it only 10 percent of the total equation. One thing 247Sports does is look at the track record of college programs putting players into the NFL, especially lower-rated prospects. If a school is known for turning two and three-star prospects into NFL players, the analysts might give the school the benefit of the doubt when they offer a similarly rated player.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/...gs_de.html

Google is easy...

Yes, google APP vs gs rivalry and you will see that APP has won 11 of the last 15 games and 8 of the last 10. I love Google.

Well only the 100th time this has been said and still has nothing to to with the subject...or anything really

and again App has lead the conference in points and per recruit avg since 2014 sooo what is your point? and again what team has App beat that has had any type of meaningful talent advantage. We both lost to UMASS go back to sleep.

(02-07-2018 03:59 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 03:45 PM)AppinSC Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:39 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:36 PM)NCeagle Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:32 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  Cool story bro... Yet not one link to prove or support any of it lol....par for the course. AppManDG heard it so its credible...Still cant explain all those offers to high rated guys lol.

if app signed a class full of 4 stars, appman would tell us that they were indeed the best fits for app state, and then brag about how they pulled in the best class in g5 history. lol

Hmm actual quotes from actual raters say offers play little to no role for most...I even have a link...

Out of the four recruiting experts, Shurburtt is the only one who says offers factor in at all and he gives it only 10 percent of the total equation. One thing 247Sports does is look at the track record of college programs putting players into the NFL, especially lower-rated prospects. If a school is known for turning two and three-star prospects into NFL players, the analysts might give the school the benefit of the doubt when they offer a similarly rated player.

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/...gs_de.html

Google is easy...

Yes, google APP vs gs rivalry and you will see that APP has won 11 of the last 15 games and 8 of the last 10. I love Google.

Well only the 100th time this has been said and still has nothing to to with the subject...or anything really

and again App has lead the conference in points and per recruit avg since 2014 sooo what is your point? and again what team has App beat that has had any type of meaningful talent advantage. We both lost to UMASS go back to sleep.

Paging UofToledoFans...

(02-06-2018 05:07 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Ha Ha.. You keep posting articles written by PHD's who've never strapped on a helmet and App will keep winning games with undervalued recruits. Oh by the way, we offer those 4 star guys to get our name out there. It's been a practice of Satterfield's since he became HC. Started doing it when we were a transitional program. Do you think he actually thought we had a shot at 'em? Let's make a deal. You keep on gulping down the Kool Aid and I'll continue talking to our coaches. When you get the opportunity to visit with your new DC about all this ask him about the unique culture at App and approach to our recruiting. I'm sure he will enlighten you on some things. Also be sure to ask him about the term "App Guy" you made so much fun of. Sloan can give you the entire story, especially since he's the one who coined the phrase.

Good post.

I can promise you we have our own version of "App guy". I don't know if we've got a name for it, but we do.

I will repeat myself again...in 2014 we had a first-year head coach and a new offensive and defensive system. We didn't even have 10 guys with three-star ratings with at least one recruiting service and won the Sun Belt and was rated a top 10 G5 team.

And someone will say, "well no one rates the guys that have no FBS offers", and that might be true, but if that's the case what's the point of getting worked up about the number of guys in the class are two-star guys with no offers?

The fact is, there are teams that seem to consistently over-perform relative to their recruiting ratings across multiple coaching staffs. GS, App State, and NDSU seem to be prime examples, and Montana used to be one. And no one who has followed GS and App State can deny both teams have had teams that could compete for titles in a G5 league over the years.

(02-07-2018 04:31 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:07 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Ha Ha.. You keep posting articles written by PHD's who've never strapped on a helmet and App will keep winning games with undervalued recruits. Oh by the way, we offer those 4 star guys to get our name out there. It's been a practice of Satterfield's since he became HC. Started doing it when we were a transitional program. Do you think he actually thought we had a shot at 'em? Let's make a deal. You keep on gulping down the Kool Aid and I'll continue talking to our coaches. When you get the opportunity to visit with your new DC about all this ask him about the unique culture at App and approach to our recruiting. I'm sure he will enlighten you on some things. Also be sure to ask him about the term "App Guy" you made so much fun of. Sloan can give you the entire story, especially since he's the one who coined the phrase.

Good post.

I can promise you we have our own version of "App guy". I don't know if we've got a name for it, but we do.

I will repeat myself again...in 2014 we had a first-year head coach and a new offensive and defensive system. We didn't even have 10 guys with three-star ratings with at least one recruiting service and won the Sun Belt and was rated a top 10 G5 team.

And someone will say, "well no one rates the guys that have no FBS offers", and that might be true, but if that's the case what's the point of getting worked up about the number of guys in the class are two-star guys with no offers?

The fact is, there are teams that seem to consistently over-perform relative to their recruiting ratings across multiple coaching staffs. GS, App State, and NDSU seem to be prime examples, and Montana used to be one. And no one who has followed GS and App State can deny both teams have had teams that could compete for titles in a G5 league over the years.

\\

Thank you and I agree completely.

Bobcats sneak one in late. Now the top rated recruit for TXST

https://247sports.com/player/tyrese-heard-86639

Offers from:
Ole Miss
Miss St
Oregon
Mizzou
Purdue
Washington St
Houston
Tulsa
UL
ULM

(02-07-2018 04:31 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(02-06-2018 05:07 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Ha Ha.. You keep posting articles written by PHD's who've never strapped on a helmet and App will keep winning games with undervalued recruits. Oh by the way, we offer those 4 star guys to get our name out there. It's been a practice of Satterfield's since he became HC. Started doing it when we were a transitional program. Do you think he actually thought we had a shot at 'em? Let's make a deal. You keep on gulping down the Kool Aid and I'll continue talking to our coaches. When you get the opportunity to visit with your new DC about all this ask him about the unique culture at App and approach to our recruiting. I'm sure he will enlighten you on some things. Also be sure to ask him about the term "App Guy" you made so much fun of. Sloan can give you the entire story, especially since he's the one who coined the phrase.

Good post.

I can promise you we have our own version of "App guy". I don't know if we've got a name for it, but we do.

I will repeat myself again...in 2014 we had a first-year head coach and a new offensive and defensive system. We didn't even have 10 guys with three-star ratings with at least one recruiting service and won the Sun Belt and was rated a top 10 G5 team.

And someone will say, "well no one rates the guys that have no FBS offers", and that might be true, but if that's the case what's the point of getting worked up about the number of guys in the class are two-star guys with no offers?

The fact is, there are teams that seem to consistently over-perform relative to their recruiting ratings across multiple coaching staffs. GS, App State, and NDSU seem to be prime examples, and Montana used to be one. And no one who has followed GS and App State can deny both teams have had teams that could compete for titles in a G5 league over the years.

http://www.ajc.com/sports/college/colleg...jJAtL82zK/

yawn where are all these low ranked recruits being coached and developed in the NFL or should I say why do four stars regardless of G5 or P5 make it at a higher percentage than three star regardless of P5 or G5 why do three stars regardless P5 or G5 make at a higher percentage of two and unranked..guess the NFL must go back and look at old recruit rankings before drafting or is the vast majority of recruits pan out the way their rankings said they would. The FCS goes like 9-100 against the FBS, the G5 does only slightly better with the P5, the AAC does better than any G5 etc etc but yet NONE of that is attributable to recruiting rankings because NDSU does well against one off games against some mediocre FBS programs. 130 team in the FBS and FCS ....anecdotal is anecdotal, yes not every single team or player follows there rankings to script....and nobody ever said they do but the vast majority do and is why they are reliable, notice the word reliable vs guaranteed, for MOST, notice the word MOST vs ALL, of the thousands of FBS players, 130+/- teams and especially for conference rankings. They get more reliable as you go up obviously if you even the slightest grasp on why.

(02-07-2018 11:36 AM)NCeagle Wrote:  What's the highest rated recruit a Belt team has gotten (non transfer/juco)?

Quin is an 88 on 247. He's certainly our highest rated recruit ever

Our top 3 high school recruits have been
Kaleb Blanchard 86.87 (2013)
Kendric Haynes 86.56 (2017)
Jalen Thompson 85.13 (2015)

(02-07-2018 01:32 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:10 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  I've had in depth conversations with administrators from all three of our sites about these ratings systems. According to those guys this is how the system works.

First and foremost it's impossible for each service to scout and rate every prospect. Being that different people are doing the rating not everyone is graded on the same criteria. That in and of itself makes it a flawed system. Many players begin getting "offers" from P5 programs, but those aren't commitable. Even though those "offers" aren't commitable their initial rankings reflect that P5 interest. Once the interest from the P5 ends and they end up committing to a G5, that is when the re-evaluation process begins and those same players will get downgraded to a lower rating. Simply because they went G5. So, even if they're rated higher before they commit to a G5 their rating decline due to the loss of interest by the P5

In other words, classes can chase those higher ratings levels, but they're working against declining scores in a number of instances. The final 2018 recalculation took place before the December 20th signing date, so anyone who was still unsigned after that date will avoid the downgrade simply because they were still on the open market. By not signing they avoid the re-calculation scrutiny and end up with a higher "final" rating than they would've likely gotten otherwise. Explains why were all of these high three-stars guys are still available even though they only hold maybe 1-2 G5 offers that are actually commit-able.

Coaches look for guys who fit what they do and don't really care if they don't "grade out" as highly for the ratings analysts. A defensive lineman that everyone else might called undersized, another staff might grade out as exactly what they want due to quickness and agility. So, the rating scale used by the services doesn't take into consideration what a particular coach might be looking for.

Bottom line is it appears even the guys who run the sites think the system is basically flawed.

Cool story bro... Yet not one link to prove or support any of it lol....par for the course. AppManDG heard it so its credible...Still cant explain all those offers to high rated guys lol.

All you talk about are links, links, links, links. I don't need any stinking links.
What you can't seem to get through your thick head is none of the facts in those studies pertain to programs at our level.

Case in point.
But recruiting rankings continue to be good predictors of future success. There are always exceptions, but the schools that sign the best recruiting classes typically have the most on-field success. The last three national champions -- Ohio State, Florida State and Alabama -- have all done a terrific job signing top-rated recruiting classes. A 2014 SB Nation story showed that every BCS champion since 2005 signed more four and five-star prospects than lesser-ranked players.

Wow!!! A study that proves teams win national championships because they sign more 4 & 5 star players than anyone else. Who would have ever thought that?! Talk about enlightening! Looks like I'm gonna have to start paying attention to these studies!

BTW, let me know when you get a chance to talk to Sloan. I'd love to be there and see his reaction when you lay some of your nonsense on him.

TXSTs top from my quick look

Kwamane Bowens - 87.00 - ended up quitting football after a year
Kieston Roach - 86.03

(02-07-2018 05:09 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:32 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-07-2018 01:10 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  I've had in depth conversations with administrators from all three of our sites about these ratings systems. According to those guys this is how the system works.

First and foremost it's impossible for each service to scout and rate every prospect. Being that different people are doing the rating not everyone is graded on the same criteria. That in and of itself makes it a flawed system. Many players begin getting "offers" from P5 programs, but those aren't commitable. Even though those "offers" aren't commitable their initial rankings reflect that P5 interest. Once the interest from the P5 ends and they end up committing to a G5, that is when the re-evaluation process begins and those same players will get downgraded to a lower rating. Simply because they went G5. So, even if they're rated higher before they commit to a G5 their rating decline due to the loss of interest by the P5

In other words, classes can chase those higher ratings levels, but they're working against declining scores in a number of instances. The final 2018 recalculation took place before the December 20th signing date, so anyone who was still unsigned after that date will avoid the downgrade simply because they were still on the open market. By not signing they avoid the re-calculation scrutiny and end up with a higher "final" rating than they would've likely gotten otherwise. Explains why were all of these high three-stars guys are still available even though they only hold maybe 1-2 G5 offers that are actually commit-able.

Coaches look for guys who fit what they do and don't really care if they don't "grade out" as highly for the ratings analysts. A defensive lineman that everyone else might called undersized, another staff might grade out as exactly what they want due to quickness and agility. So, the rating scale used by the services doesn't take into consideration what a particular coach might be looking for.

Bottom line is it appears even the guys who run the sites think the system is basically flawed.

Cool story bro... Yet not one link to prove or support any of it lol....par for the course. AppManDG heard it so its credible...Still cant explain all those offers to high rated guys lol.

All you talk about are links, links, links, links. I don't need any stinking links.
What you can't seem to get through your thick head is none of the facts in those studies pertain to programs at our level.

Case in point.
But recruiting rankings continue to be good predictors of future success. There are always exceptions, but the schools that sign the best recruiting classes typically have the most on-field success. The last three national champions -- Ohio State, Florida State and Alabama -- have all done a terrific job signing top-rated recruiting classes. A 2014 SB Nation story showed that every BCS champion since 2005 signed more four and five-star prospects than lesser-ranked players.

Wow!!! A study that proves teams win national championships because they sign more 4 & 5 star players than anyone else. Who would have ever thought that?! Talk about enlightening! Looks like I'm gonna have to start paying attention to these studies!

BTW, let me know when you get a chance to talk to Sloan. I'd love to be there and see his reaction when you lay some of your nonsense on him.

Yes links to articles and papers that prove things...how dare I do that and not just go off anecdotal BS. That was on quote out of the entire article that shows star rankings pan out concerning the NFL. AGAIN APP or any team is ONE out of 130+/- so ignore what happens with most of the 130 and only pay attention to App or one recruits I get it.....

Sloan was to busy landing three star recruits, I'll hit him up later. What is he going to say lol, "I see there where higher ranked talented teams at any level win more often, well I know this guy at App that disagrees so it must not be true" LOL.

Again why does App offer higher three and four star guys but do not get them? Why does the FCS barely win any FBS games, why does the G5 have losing records against the P5,

I'll take the top half of the Belt, or all the G5 conference or top of the G5 what every you want in the most recent years recruit rankings and you take the bottom half JUST based off team rankings since they dont matter at are level and lets see how it pans out. I mean its all about landing the the respective "App guys" and coaching and development at our level right? These G5 rankings are just a crap shoot so lets bet!

Some have a partial listing, but I would prefer these sites list the date when a "offer" is made. In the vast majority of cases most are handed out en masse during in the spring and summer prior to their Sr year. Unless the kid is a can't miss prospect none are "on the spot committable". I'm more interested with who is after the young man down the stretch. That is the true indicator of where he stood in the pecking order.