Just a little tidbit for some who might be into the Football Recruiting like myself.
Here is the article. So FWIW it seems Scout has it over Rivals in regards to player evaluation.
Analysis says Scout.com is the best
Sunday, January 29, 2006
JON SOLOMON
News staff writer
In the past four years, Texas, Southern Cal, Tennessee, Louisiana State and Nebraska each received a No. 1 ranking for a football recruiting class by at least one of the top four recruiting services.
Southern Cal, Texas and LSU own all of college football's national championships in the past three seasons.
Nebraska, fresh off a No. 1 recruiting ranking last year, rebounded from a 5-6 record to go 8-4. Tennessee, also with a No. 1 rating in 2005, stumbled from 10-3 to 5-6.
College football fans be warned: The rankings are "fool's gold," said Allen Wallace, national analyst for SuperPrep and Scout.com. He places coaching above recruiting for team success.
"Sure, you could say we're pandering to the public's desire for information," Wallace said. "But even if the fans didn't like them, I'd do rankings ... There has to be some truth that exists, fundamental insights, that we can take out of all this homework we've done. You're copping out if you're not sticking your neck out."
In an analysis by The Birmingham News that covered four years, Scout.com stuck its neck out the best. The class rankings for Scout.com, Wallace, Tom Lemming and Rivals.com from 2002 to 2005 were averaged and compared with team records and the final Associated Press poll from 2005. The premise was that four years of good recruiting would translate into on-field success by 2005.
Scout.com finished first or tied atop all five categories of measurable comparisons used by The News:
Number of teams among each service's Top 25 classes that finished in the Top 25 in the final AP poll in 2005.
Number of teams among each service's Top 10 classes that finished in the Top 10 in the final AP poll in 2005.
Fewest teams among each service's Top 25 classes that finished 2005 with losing records.
Highest winning percentage in 2005 among each service's Top 25 classes.
Highest winning percentage in 2005 among each service's Top 10 classes.
The News' analysis is hardly flawless, but then neither is recruiting services' information.
"I think we're good. I think we can get a lot better," said Jamie Newberg, national analyst for Scout.com. "Like anything else, it's an ever-evolving process. We hit on a lot of kids and miss on kids, just like the NFL and the college coaches."
The recruiting rankings of elite teams are quite similar - just flip around the order every now and then. Either each service evaluates the teams very evenly, or they're keeping an eye on their competitors.
The average four-year rankings for Scout.com, Rivals.com, Wallace and Lemming showed only 12 teams among their Top 10s. USC, Miami, Oklahoma, Georgia, Florida State, Tennessee and Michigan were consensus Top 10s. Of those, only USC and Georgia finished among the Top 10 in the final 2005 AP poll.
Coaching stability is a theme among the highest-ranked recruiting classes. Nine of the 12 Top 10 teams in the average rankings have employed the same head coach since 2001.
By contrast, Washington stands 3-19 during the past two seasons despite cracking the average Top 25 of Rivals.com, Lemming and Wallace. Washington has employed three head coaches since June 2003.
Are they credible?:
Analysts say they rank players based on video, statistics, college offers, the caliber of high school competition, and the opinions of prep and college coaches. Wallace is satisfied if half of his All-Americans start at least two years and make all-conference.
Most analysts have no playing experience beyond high school. Rivals.com editor Bobby Burton worked as an undergraduate video assistant at Texas and a graduate recruiting assistant at Houston.
Wallace was a lawyer for eight years. Newberg, who aspires to become an NFL scout, entered the field after majoring in psychology and sociology in college.
"You don't have to have played," ABC Sports broadcaster and former Auburn head coach Terry Bowden said. "If you're a legitimate recruiting guy, you can learn how to see talent."
Bowden believes the rankings are credible to a degree because many analysts rely heavily on college recruiting coordinators.
"I'm not sure colleges recruit the guys that analysts rank. I think they rank the guys colleges are recruiting," Bowden said. "They (recruiting services) have a difficult relationship with recruiting coordinators. If you get too close to a coordinator, he's not going to give you information unless you rank his player high."
Bowden said he was leery of analysts when coaching but learned quickly at Auburn to "play the game and take it seriously. You may be happy with the people you recruit, but you don't want to get a reputation of never being ranked by analysts."
Auburn coach Tommy Tuberville credits recruiting analysts for "usually doing their homework."
"I think sometimes the opinions are off base," Tuberville said. "For instance, I coached nine years at Miami and I don't think we were ever a top recruiting class, yet we won three national championships."
Rivals and Scout have publishers who operate Web sites devoted to particular schools. Lemming believes they are "all homers toward their school."
That could involve rating a player or a school's class higher than it should be.
Bowden noted intrigue at how high recruiting services rate Southern schools. As of last Thursday, six of the top 13 teams rated by Rivals.com play in the SEC, and no other conference had more than two teams that high.
"Where is college football most rabid?" Bowden said. "If I'm a businessman, if I'm going to make a mistake, I'll rank a Southern team high since they're buying the material."
Rivals.com would not reveal the formula it uses to rate teams.
"It's kind of a company secret," Southeastern analyst JC Shurburtt said. "People say we skew rankings. It is designed where that does not happen."
AuburnSports.com senior editor Bryan Matthews said he makes his player evaluations independent of outside influences. "I come to my own opinion of how good a player someone is."
Connecticut coach Randy Edsall, a vocal critic of the industry, said Web sites mislead immature recruits by promising four- or five-star reviews - the highest possible - in exchange for their playing in particular all-star games or exclusive access to their recruiting news. Edsall said one site that hosts an all-star game offered to rank a recruit No. 1 if he played in the game.
"They're using the kids for their benefit. I don't think the rankings are very objective at all," Edsall said.
Regardless, the rankings continue. Florida appears to be the runaway winner for 2006, the top recruiting services agree.
"Somebody has to win in American life," Wallace said. "... And between all the college staffs out there, they know there's a winner and they know there's a loser."
E-mail: jsolomon@bhamnews.com "Like anything else, it's an ever-evolving process. We hit on a lot of kids and miss on kids, just like the NFL and the college coaches."Jamie Newberg, national analyst for Scout.com
http://www.al.com/sports/birminghamnews/...thispage=1
/
Birmingham News/Scout.com most accurate in rating players
