This is what drives me nuts about recruit rankings

[Apis Bull]

They count number of signees as well as their respective stars.  There are several teams in the top 50 right now and part of that is because they oversigned:

#2 FSU - 26 signed

#3 USC - 28

#6 Clemson - 28

#11 Tennessee - 27

#15 North Carolina - 26

#18 Ole Miss - 28

#19 Texas Tech - 27

#20 South Carolina - 33

#22 Washington - 26

#23 Arkansas - 32

#25 Virginia - 26

#27 TCU - 26

#28 Oklahoma State - 27

#34 Kansas - 26

#41 Illinois - 28

#46 Cincinnati - 26

#48 Marshall - 29

#50 UCF - 28

I'm not saying that these schools don't have solid to great classes, but to rank South Carolina #20 when 8 of their recruits won't make it this year is assinine.

[South_Florida_Flip]

Just average out the stars and you get a better indicator of a class.

[Apis Bull]

Or use the top 25

[South_Florida_Flip]

Or use the top 25

Or that, but you might have a hard time knowing who might not be qualifying.

[Reliable Source]

Rivals had UCF ranked no 3 in the country a little while ago. What a joke. You can't make this stuff up. They also had the Akron Zips as no 11, with no ranked players. We were no 44. I think they just sprinkle fairy dust over the rankings and throw a bunch of cards in a bowl and pull em out.

[nobull.Bulls]

Arkansas has 32 committedd?!?!?!

[redfisher78]

Marshall has 35

[Reliable Source]

They count number of signees as well as their respective stars.  There are several teams in the top 50 right now and part of that is because they oversigned:

#2 FSU - 26 signed

#3 USC - 28

#6 Clemson - 28

#11 Tennessee - 27

#15 North Carolina - 26

#18 Ole Miss - 28

#19 Texas Tech - 27

#20 South Carolina - 33

#22 Washington - 26

#23 Arkansas - 32

#25 Virginia - 26

#27 TCU - 26

#28 Oklahoma State - 27

#34 Kansas - 26

#41 Illinois - 28

#46 Cincinnati - 26

#48 Marshall - 29

#50 UCF - 28

I'm not saying that these schools don't have solid to great classes, but to rank South Carolina #20 when 8 of their recruits won't make it this year is assinine.

Hey, they have to. If you sign 33 criminals at least 8 of them are gonna get arrested in any given year. It's a known statistic...<snark>

[DELdaBull]

The rankings should be by "star" average, not aggregate amount of points.  Its kinda stupid that way.  If you only have 85 schollies you should NEVER sign more than 22 in one year. 

THe schollie shoud also be a 4 year committment from the school and not this annual renewal contraact ********

[The Great 8]

The rankings should be by "star" average, not aggregate amount of points.

Why? Class size is a valid determining factor what whether a class is good.

You telling me USC's small classes should be considered one of "the best" despite being on probation because they probably have a high average?

What's best is probably a mix of somesort so that schools that oversigned don't overly benefit from the rankings. IN THE END THE RANKINGS ARE MEANINGLESS THOUGH so don't expect a change.

If you only have 85 schollies you should NEVER sign more than 22 in one year.

Uh, no. Some players redshirt, some don't. Some players transfer or get injured, some don't. Over the long term it should average out to about 22 per year but not every year. You'll have more or less in a given year.

THe schollie shoud also be a 4 year committment from the school and not this annual renewal contraact ********

And, the NFL should have 100% guaranteed contracts I guess. I don't see any reason the annual renewal should not happen. If you guarantee an 18 year old kid a 4 year commitment what's to say they won't just sign and then quit on your team? At least an annual renewal makes sure people keep producing.