SEC recruiting battle

Discussion in 'LSU RECRUITING' started by Bengal Buddy, Mar 31, 2008.

  1. JM Tiger

    JM Tiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    373
    Likes Received:
    46
  2. TigerBait3

    TigerBait3 Guest

    Ttap, they rank players initially on just film or from junior combines. The initial rankings that come out are subject to change drastically. A lot of it has to do with guys moving ahead of him -- players they had not seen initially. You mention that top teams wanted him and imply that Rival's didnt think he was a good player. Three stars aren't bad players. In fact players with a RR of 5.5-5.7 are described as...
    You post players here that dropped but almost every single team had players drop, not to mention you are assuming that none of them deserved to drop in the rankings in the first place. At the same time, quite a few moved up.
     
  3. TerryP

    TerryP Founding Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Messages:
    7,981
    Likes Received:
    2,068
    Among the staff members at Rivals, and this isn't limited to just
    SEC schools, Mike S. is considered a joke. It goes back for years. He dug his own grave (in terms of credibility) when he told Bobby Burton that every DB Saban recruited should be a 5 star player because "Saban knows defensive backs."

    IF there is one thing I think we all can take from the star ratings is the majority of the time they'll give you an idea one who quickly a player can contribute. With those 5 star players, you'll see them in the field their true freshman year. When it comes to the 3 and 4 stars, it's a 2nd or 3rd year contributor. And that, differs with the position they play. A 4 star OLman probably won't see the field until his Jr. year. A 4 star DB, LB, RB, WR, etc., is likely to see playing time earlier.

    What I find intriguing is these are evaluations made by people. You'll find the same group of people evaluating the same regions and their opinions differ. Personally, I think the guy that handles the evals for Scout tends to underestimate (call it conservative) a lot of the players he sees. Rivals tends to be quick to boost a players rankings, but you see a lot of those evals drop when the All-Star games being played. Then again, you see a few players jump. (Alonzo Lawrence is a recent and prime example)

    The joke of the business right now is Lugenbill. Some of the antics he pulled this past season destroyed any credibility he may have had before evals started.
     
    1 person likes this.
  4. TigerBait3

    TigerBait3 Guest

    Im not sure what your point is about me only quoting half of it and how it changed it. If you think everyone is out to get Louisiana you need to grow up. Not everyone is after poor poor you and those were their opinions on the rankings. They didn't evaluate Louisiana properly nor did they for 20 other states -- they admitted the mistakes and the network is growing and improvements will be made. Your comments seem to be heavily hindered by P&G glasses...look at the big picture.

    I would like for Rivals and Scout to not publish a top 100 list and make Lugenbill do his first. He would crap his pants.
     
  5. TerryP

    TerryP Founding Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Messages:
    7,981
    Likes Received:
    2,068
    It wasn't his rankings that ticked me off, it was some of the things he was saying to players that had yet to publicly commit. His Jerrell Harris interaction was enough to get him fired, IMO.

    A lot about ESPN's recruiting evaluations are left to be determined, the way I see it. They are spending the money to get evaluators on the road. What return they get for their 4mm+ investment is left to be seen.
     
  6. TigerBait3

    TigerBait3 Guest

    They have the resources to be very successful. But Lugenbill always comes on the radio and tries to put down others that have outworked him easily. He is just an arrogant man that thinks he is at the top of the mountain.
     

Share This Page