Bama signed 32 or so last year, is that why they were #1? Did they have an advantage because of the # they signed? They couldn't all go to Bama in August, so is their class now a little lower because of non qualifiers from last year? Just wondering.
I guess I'll address your post and Bmy. I think they took away credit for some player named Murphy cuz he didn't qualify, and that dropped them to #2. Some Bama poster addressed it on TD I think, and he said that Murphy ended up qualifying in the Spring maybe and that Bama was given the credit again. Who knows. Doesn't really matter. Signing 32 players didn't matter in terms of rivals.com formula only looking at the 20 highest ranked players. But let's say that at 25 recruits, only 16 were either 4 or 5 star plays, and that out of the next 7 they got 4 more 4 star players. Then obviously, getting from 25 to 32 put them over the top and had a significant impact on where they finished. Conversely if the last 7 players were all 3 star and under, it would not have helped very much at all (but this was not likely the case, anyway). Hopefully that made sense.
Anyone have some good news for Florida on someone like Jelani Jenkins? I need a pick me up after tonight's basketball game.
I went through the Bama bias myth on Scout/Rivals. I only did 4/5 stars and did not do JUCO due to the fact that Rivals lists their JUCO commit as a guard while Rivals lists him as a tackle. Compared to..
Thanks Bmy. Neat bit of analysis. I look forward to seeing the LSU comparision. It might also be interesting comparing other areas than just two schools in the SEC. For instance, how each service looks at USC recruits and high profile schools from other conferences.