(07-25-2018 12:02 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  This might just end up being a rambling, tl;dr post that no one will read but I'll give it a try:

Every player comes with a floor and ceiling. It's impossible to know exactly how they'll play once they get to the college game. A guy that's rated higher on 247 most likely has a higher floor and ceiling than one that isn't rated as high. The question is how much overlap is there in a floor or ceiling of 0.77 guys, 0.80 guys, and 0.83 guys?

Example: Our coaches released a depth chart at the end of spring practice. Of the 10 guys on our roster with an 0.83 or more 247 rating, 4 are projected first-string and 8 are on the two-deep. Those guys were obviously more likely to make the 2-deep for 1st string than all of the other players.

Statistically there is a real difference, but the question is how big of a practical difference is it? Would it be worth finding a coach who could bring in a few extra high-3-stars a year to sacrifice someone who can scout the 0.77 and 0.80 rated guys and make them fit the system?

If I counted right (not including 2018 signees), GS has 10 guys with 0.83+ ratings on the roster, Ark State has 6, South Alabama 6, Troy and App have 2. How much will that translate to a overall talent advantage on the field? Unfortunately for us, even with a competent coach I don't think it'll be all that big.

It is a numbers game the likelihood of finding a baller from four .85 guys vs four .75 guys is not close. Can a .75 guy mature into a legit 5 star NFL first rounder yes but it is NOT LIKELY. While it is VERY LIKELY a five star guy is a NFL prospect from day one. I have to find it but a five star kid had IIRC a 600% higher chance to make the NFL than a two and below kid. What folks like AppManDG do is ignore what happens 70% of the time and cling to the hope that the can live in the 30% that slightly bucks the trend. No matter what you look at awards, draft, wins, bowls, conference championships or NC's recruit rankings prove reliable which does not mean 100%. I am going to go out on a limb and say Vandy is not going to win the SEC and it has nothing to do with coaching. Yes coaching, conditioning and culture matter just a ton less than who is on your roster. Most coaches at the FBS get jobs because they have proven to be an adequate coach but sometimes you get a Tyson Summers that would lose with AL players but it is rare just as rare as landing a Chris Peterson that can win anywhere.

Which other SBC programs have outperformed their recruiting ranks by 4-5 spots on average the last four years?

Interest choice of percentages 30/70, reminds me of a similar percentage the last ten times we've played someone.

(07-25-2018 02:06 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 10:26 AM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:39 AM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:03 AM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  APP always seems to have the lowest rated players doing well. It's a testament to their coaching.

No they dont.

2014 #1
2015 #7
2016 #6
2017 #6
2018 #6

Pretty sure we have had more than six teams since App joined the Belt.

The difference between 6 and 1 most years is maybe two or three players in the Belt typically. Outside of the worst teams we are all pretty close in recruiting year to year. I think there have been maybe three or four classes in Belt history that were significantly higher nationally rated than the pack. Yes they have a great HC and have had a great staff but beginning to be poached like all successfull G5's. I think Satt is the man that runs things though so they should be fine as long as he is there and continue to beat below average FBS teams mainly.

You just like to argue. If you look statistically, they are the only team in the SBC that consistently outperforms their recruiting rankings. Typically, middle of the pack recruiting on 247 has meant middle of the pack results on the field. There are some outliers here and there. Georgia State and Idaho have outperformed at times, and Texas State has underperformed. That said, APP has typically been in the title hunt despite having middle of the pack recruiting per 247. They are the ones consistently defying what 247 has to say about their talent.

The 247 ratings are definitely not the end all be all by any means, and I don't really feel like having that long drawn out discussion for the 13th time, so that's all I'll say on that.

Thanks Forrest,

You say something false I correct it and that is arguing? You said lowest now it is middle pack. Be careful back peddling so fast and I also said and if you took two seconds to look the difference between mid pack Belt and one not significant. Between one and 11 then that would be something but that is not what App is and you falsely stated.

Also being consistent at 6th does not mean they have mid pack talent. I know this is hard to understand for guys like you and old man river AppManDumbGoof but if other teams are bouncing above and below 6th which everyone but ArkSt has then they could have top two talent. Lets do some simple math, if App has back to back 6th ranked classes and UL has a 4th best class then has the 8th best class who has the better two year recruiting results all other things being equal in terms of conference finish? You falsely assume all other teams stay the same year to year which could not be further from the truth when it comes to Belt recruiting. There is not a huge difference nationally we are at the bottom of the ratings being 90th vs 96th in the country is not huge. App has done slightly better than there overall roster talent would indicate but I laid out who they have beaten which is nobody of significance.

You're not even listening. APP has the lowest rated players doing well. That's what I said. I did not say they have the lowest rated players. There is a difference in semantics that you obviously cannot pick up on.

Clearly middle of the pack, like I said:
https://247sports.com/Season/2017-Footba...erence=SBC

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what I wrote. While you're back-peddling back to the trough, I'm gonna go have a beer.

(07-25-2018 02:52 PM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 02:06 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 10:26 AM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:39 AM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(07-25-2018 09:03 AM)TroyFootball05 Wrote:  APP always seems to have the lowest rated players doing well. It's a testament to their coaching.

No they dont.

2014 #1
2015 #7
2016 #6
2017 #6
2018 #6

Pretty sure we have had more than six teams since App joined the Belt.

The difference between 6 and 1 most years is maybe two or three players in the Belt typically. Outside of the worst teams we are all pretty close in recruiting year to year. I think there have been maybe three or four classes in Belt history that were significantly higher nationally rated than the pack. Yes they have a great HC and have had a great staff but beginning to be poached like all successfull G5's. I think Satt is the man that runs things though so they should be fine as long as he is there and continue to beat below average FBS teams mainly.

You just like to argue. If you look statistically, they are the only team in the SBC that consistently outperforms their recruiting rankings. Typically, middle of the pack recruiting on 247 has meant middle of the pack results on the field. There are some outliers here and there. Georgia State and Idaho have outperformed at times, and Texas State has underperformed. That said, APP has typically been in the title hunt despite having middle of the pack recruiting per 247. They are the ones consistently defying what 247 has to say about their talent.

The 247 ratings are definitely not the end all be all by any means, and I don't really feel like having that long drawn out discussion for the 13th time, so that's all I'll say on that.

Thanks Forrest,

You say something false I correct it and that is arguing? You said lowest now it is middle pack. Be careful back peddling so fast and I also said and if you took two seconds to look the difference between mid pack Belt and one not significant. Between one and 11 then that would be something but that is not what App is and you falsely stated.

Also being consistent at 6th does not mean they have mid pack talent. I know this is hard to understand for guys like you and old man river AppManDumbGoof but if other teams are bouncing above and below 6th which everyone but ArkSt has then they could have top two talent. Lets do some simple math, if App has back to back 6th ranked classes and UL has a 4th best class then has the 8th best class who has the better two year recruiting results all other things being equal in terms of conference finish? You falsely assume all other teams stay the same year to year which could not be further from the truth when it comes to Belt recruiting. There is not a huge difference nationally we are at the bottom of the ratings being 90th vs 96th in the country is not huge. App has done slightly better than there overall roster talent would indicate but I laid out who they have beaten which is nobody of significance.

You're not even listening. APP has the lowest rated players doing well. That's what I said. I did not say they have the lowest rated players. There is a difference in semantics that you obviously cannot pick up on.

Clearly middle of the pack, like I said:
https://247sports.com/Season/2017-Footba...erence=SBC

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand what I wrote. While you're back-peddling back to the trough, I'm gonna go have a beer.

Again they dont Forrest as most of our players are between a mid two and low three that is not anything of significance. So go drink your natural light and still be wrong.

stAte is gonna kick your f'n teeth in 24/7 be damned . . .

(07-28-2018 08:28 PM)WinstonTheWolf Wrote:  stAte is gonna kick your f'n teeth in 24/7 be damned . . .

ArkSt is the most consistent in terms of recruiting and getting good transfers so I am not shocked they have been the best and most consistent winning team despite coaching changes.