For the most part I think that is true. However academic risks and character risks can seperate classes greatly when its all said and done. The top 1-7 are often very close in talent.
Look at Auburn. Here's their recruiting rankings per Rivals and Scout 2009 -- #16/#19 2010 -- #4/#6 2011 -- #2/#7 2012 -- #8/#10 And this last season this is how they performed: 3-9 record (victories over ULM, New Mexico St, Alabama A&M) #65 in scoring defense #81 in total defense #114 in scoring offense #118 in total offense
The 2012 class was ranked by Rivals and Scout. One service ranked it 6th and the other 18, thats a wide range. How can those players as a group be that far off. Not one 5* player in the group, but still LSU played 15 True Freshmen last year, and if not for an injury, would have played 16 total. Looking back, it would be better to rank kids after a couple years in college.
Right, but isn't that like asking the pollsters to not rank teams until about 7 weeks into the season? I think we all would agree that this is probably the road that makes the most sense, but monetarily it doesn't from their point of view. As for me, I think I'll just trust the coaching staff to do their jobs and recruit at a high level, which is what I think most sane people on this board do already.
