Rivals RB Scores

[SANJAY]

I looked at the points awarded to different schools for running backs recruited this year.  Interesting.  We have a 5 star and have lower points than other schools with lower ranked backs.  I do not think it is a conspiracy.  However it is another example how the overall rankings are inaccurate/incomplete.

School                                                                                       Total Points

South Florida: 2 (5-star & 2-star) Avg-3.50                                    21

Louisville: 2(4-star & 2-star) Avg-2.00                                             30

Colorado: 3(4-star & 2-2star) Avg-2.67                                             61

Iowa State: 2(4-star & 2-star) Avg-3.00                                        37

Texas A&M: 1 (4-star) Avg- 4.00                                             30

Minnesota: 2 (3-star, 2-star) Avg-2.50                                              23

UCLA: 1 (4-star) Avg-4.00                                                              49

Georgia: 1 (4-star) Avg-4.00                                                              33

Mississippi State: 2 (3-star, 2-star) Avg-2.50                              23

[Joe]

Points aren't based on stars...

And they haven't cleaned up a lot of the rankings. I wouldn't worry about their rankings at all, worry about what we got.

[SANJAY]

Joe,

If you know, what are points based on then?  I would assume a team with a 5-star would have more points than a team with a 4-star, even if not based solely on the stars.  

I do agree that we should worry about what we have, but I am just trying to understand how rivals and scout do what they do.

[Joe]

Rivals Ratings system, it uses 5 catagories I believe, there is an explaination somewhere on the site.

[mellobull]

Rivals Ratings system, it uses 5 catagories I believe, there is an explaination somewhere on the site.

on the scout sight you go to team recruiting rankings, at the bottom of the page you will see "  how are these rankings calculated "... of course you have to be a registered member to access ...

[SANJAY]

The "how we do it" from Rivals is below.  So they put some sort of numerical system which based on the above they are not following.

"Next to the national player rankings, recruiting fans want to know how their favorite team stacks up in the race for the recruiting national championship. Rivals100 has developed a state of the art point system for the team rankings that allows teams to be rewarded for landing the top players in a number of different criteria areas.

Teams are awarded points through a formula that rewards them for both the quantity of commitments and the quality of those players. Prospects with higher star ratings earn more points for the school to which they commit; prospects that are ranked among the top at their positions earn still more points; and prospects that are ranked on the Rivals 100 earn even more bonus points."

http://usf.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=59026

[Matt]

"teams are awarded points based on how many subscriptions we can sell their fans and keep them interested in recruiting."

[Velcro]

The Mississippi St example proves how lame it is...

We have a 5 star and a 2 star and get 21 pts.

they have a 3 star and a 2 star and get 23 pts.

Why would a 5 star be worth 2 pts less than a 3 star?

A 3 star is not going to get bonus points for being a top 100...

and as far as I know, there are not 100 5 star players out there... so Ford should be in the top 100.

[Joe]

Ford is not in the top 100 because he is a prep transfer

[SANJAY]

Actually Ford is not currently listed in Juco, Prep or HS lists.