Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21
  1. #1

    2008 Recruiting Class

    Here is a link of what ESPN thinks of our recruits. We were ranked honorable mention in the top 25 poll for the 2008 class. UCLA was 1. If you click on the players name, it will give you a more in depth analysis on the individual player.

    http://insider.espn.go.com/ncb/recru...6season%3d2008

  2. #2
    Supporting Member Juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,835
    Holloway got a lower ranking that I would have expected.

  3. #3
    Supporting Member X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Nodak
    Posts
    5,516
    I put absolutely ZERO stock in ESPN's recruiting coverage (ie. rankings, evaluations, etc.)

    I'll stick with Rivals and Scout when it comes to recruiting.

    They have Holloway listed as the 57th best PG in the '08 class! That's a joke right? And Redford as the 76th best PG? Ok. They don't even have Lyons rated.

    If you check out their Top 150, there are huge differences compared to Rivals and Scout. They have guys that have reclassified to 2009 still in their '08 list. It says it's been updated 5/21/08, but it sure doesn't look like it.

    I'll stick with Rivals who has Frease at 42, Holloway at 100 and Lyons at 102.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    146
    The rivals rating system is a joke. Just look at it's historical accuracy.

  5. #5
    What are the "pressures" that a journalist has to support when writing/evaluating? I would suggest that this rating is just anouther example of the "pecking order" that many "under-cover" agents within the NCAA promote. Its a pile of crap and the "proof of the pudding" will be the slap on the hand that the "Maoists" will receive.

  6. #6
    Nothing special kyxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Arnold Horshack View Post
    The rivals rating system is a joke. Just look at it's historical accuracy.
    I agree that too much stock is put into these things, but more often than not, they get it right. What are the glaring historical inaccuracies of which you speak?

  7. #7
    Sophomore Smails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Arnold Horshack View Post
    The rivals rating system is a joke. Just look at it's historical accuracy.

    Maybe true to an extent. But it's no coincidence that the programs that regularly win the Rivals recruiting rankings are consistently in the top 5 in their respective sports. In football, schools like OSU, LSU, Fla and USC have dominated the rivals rankings and that success has spliied over to the field. In hoops, UNC, Kansas, Memphis and Fla. are in the exact same boat.

    While rivals and scout might miss the boat on certain individual players, there is always a strong connection between their recruiting rankings and the end of the year polls...

    ESPN blows goats when it comes to recruiting...has for a while
    dayton will lose by 40 and we will loot tonight.
    -Pablo

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    146
    All of those services have the top programs consistantly at the top of the rankings. No science there.

  9. #9
    Nothing special kyxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Arnold Horshack View Post
    All of those services have the top programs consistantly at the top of the rankings. No science there.
    Right, and why do you think those programs are where they are?

  10. #10
    Of course, if ESPN had Xavier listed in the top 20, all of you would be marvelling over the sageness of the writing staff.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •