"the other state school"

GT65_UGA89

We’re a Coca-Cola school
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
12,010
http://blogs.ajc.com/jeff-schultz-b...takes-a-shot/?cxntfid=blogs_jeff_schultz_blog

Jeff Schultz:

But I still stopped by there for a few minutes and spoke to coach Paul Johnson for a few minutes. As always, he had a couple of interesting and pointed comments.

I know Johnson, Georgia coach Mark Richt and most college coaches have the same opinion I do — that the attention paid to this whole recruiting thing has gotten way out of control and that the grades and rankings given by websites like Rivals and Scout are relatively nonsensical.

Interesting observation from Johnson, whose recruiting class not surprisingly was ranked in the 40s nationally by most websites: “I’ll give you a great example about these rankings. All four of our defensive back commitments were recruited by the other state school [Georgia]. So I wonder if they had gotten them, how high would they have been ranked.”

(How about Johnson referring to Georgia as “the other state school”?)

Obvious question to Johnson: So you’re suggesting some schools get the benefit of the doubt?

Johnson smiled and said, “It’s whoever has the most subscriptions, I guess.”

More from the Tech coach: “The whole process has gone bonkers. You’re talking about kids who’ve never played a down yet. Nobody can pick who’s going to be the next great player. It’s all about how hard are you wlling to work. There’s so many factors involved.
 
Mark Richt should downplay rankings because with the talent he's supposedly pulling into that cesspool, they should be winning a lot more.
 
I thought I read about about this same topic last year, some one called it the Notre Dame factor. A kid can be a three start prior to signing but once puts ink to paper for ND, he magically becomes a 4 or even a 5 star.
 
Mark Richt should downplay rankings because with the talent he's supposedly pulling into that cesspool, they should be winning a lot more.

Well, there is that...and the fact that they're right - the ranking system is stupid.
 
Well, there is that...and the fact that they're right - the ranking system is stupid.
Oh it is, no doubt about that. But if UGA isn't a ship sinking down into the cesspool of Athens, do you think that Richt is this critical? If it made him look good, he'd be talking about how important it was to get recruits and that rankings were important.
 
The ranking system is, for the most part, really really stupid. But when a team like Florida gets a zillion players who are wanted by everybody and who the general consensus are the best of the best, then it matters. Florida's loaded. It'll be fun to kick their ass for the national championship.
 
Recruiting only 4/5-star players REALLY matters a lot if you're playing video-game football. I think that's why UGA fans focus so much on it. They fill their Xbox trophy cases to distract themselves from their relatively empty real trophy case, and they apply the formula of success there to reality.

Of course, if that worked, Notre Dame would be beating UGA for the national championship every year.
 
The ranking system is, for the most part, really really stupid. But when a team like Florida gets a zillion players who are wanted by everybody and who the general consensus are the best of the best, then it matters. Florida's loaded. It'll be fun to kick their ass for the national championship.

At the very least I am looking forward to years of mutt beatings at the hands of the Gators. Now if only lil' dooley can whip UT into shape and stomp the mutts, that would be nice
 
at recruiting time every year we discuss the same crap, etc etc

every year it doesn't change, people are excited when 4 stars commit and bash when unkown 2 stars commit.

So we can say what this article says ALL WE WANT, the reality is no one lives it.

Crap, even the coaches in the speaches yesterday called him a 4 star guy or 3 star guy.

Everyone lives it...whether they want to or not, agree with it or not. You have to put a number on someone period.

Using this logic, whats the difference between the 23rd ranked team vs 21st? Can you tell me? Ok great..then why have team rankings?

$-hit lets just forego the regular season...and start week one with a 116 team playoff.

Point is..we like our numbers, have fun with them, don't live eat sleep em, but more times than not they are an indication. 2007 class ranked high...guess...what it panned out. Not everytime, but most times.
 
Johnson smiled and said, “It’s whoever has the most subscriptions, I guess.”


Paul Johnson. Professional badass.


 
at recruiting time every year we discuss the same crap, etc etc

every year it doesn't change, people are excited when 4 stars commit and bash when unkown 2 stars commit.

So we can say what this article says ALL WE WANT, the reality is no one lives it.

Crap, even the coaches in the speaches yesterday called him a 4 star guy or 3 star guy.

Everyone lives it...whether they want to or not, agree with it or not. You have to put a number on someone period.

Using this logic, whats the difference between the 23rd ranked team vs 21st? Can you tell me? Ok great..then why have team rankings?

$-hit lets just forego the regular season...and start week one with a 116 team playoff.

Point is..we like our numbers, have fun with them, don't live eat sleep em, but more times than not they are an indication. 2007 class ranked high...guess...what it panned out. Not everytime, but most times.

Agree, but I thought a lot about the idea that players rankings go up when they are offered by certain schools. On one hand, you can use that to criticize the rating system because the player didn't get any better or worse based on an offer....

BUT, I think it is legit to rate players based on the level of schools that want him. Without knowing anything about individual players you could devise a system to score based on the associated success of the contenders to recruit him.

If a student is trying to decide between Stanford, Cal Tech, GT, and Harvard then I will think more highly of his academic skills than a student trying to decide between ABAC, Chico State, and Phoenix University.

So, you could say that USC gets high recruiting rankings because the ratings of anyone they recruit automatically go up. Or you could say the rankiings go up because the player is in demand by successful programs, which may mean something.
 
You have to put a number on someone period.

You do? Why?

Using this logic, whats the difference between the 23rd ranked team vs 21st? Can you tell me? Ok great..then why have team rankings?

Maybe for preseason, but at least toward the end of the season, those rankings are based in part on performance on the field. Plus, as dumb as they can be, I think CFB needs rankings in order to let the casual fan know which teams are considered good teams. My objection to rankings is not how stupid they are, but the fact that we actually use them to exclude all but two teams in determining the champion. I wouldn't mind using them to exclude 85-90% of the teams. 98% is a bit much.

Recruiting rankings are just a way to sell football to the fans during the offseason. Period.
 
Recruiting rankings are just a way to sell football to the fans during the offseason. Period.


And your point is.....

He was saying it is inevitable for people to rank and rate so they have some point of comparison for discussion.

Then we talk about which teams overperformed or underperformed based on those talent rankings.

I'd rather lose the recruiting wars and overperform than win the recruiting wars and underperform. But the rule is most teams play to the average talent level they recruit.
 
Using this logic, whats the difference between the 23rd ranked team vs 21st? Can you tell me? Ok great..then why have team rankings?

Because how else are we going to vote on a champion? Do you realize you just described what everyone hates the most about college football?
 
i love CPJ's attitude. doesn't back down to anyone. even big, bad UGA.

hope we can live up to his attitude. if we can it would make it extra sweet.
 
Because how else are we going to vote on a champion? Do you realize you just described what everyone hates the most about college football?

everyone hates yes, but you still need em...EVEN with a playoff because it would determine who is in and out of the playoff.

Guys look, unless you do it like the NFL, where conf champs playoff you need the ranking system. Get used to it.

Now the debate is the BCS. 8 team playoff the debate will be who should be 8 vs 9 vs 7.

It will never end unless you just playoff all conf champs.

Guys get it...seriously...rankings today and for a near future are an evil necessity. like it or not. My point with the post isn't you should like it, its just accept it for what it is right now.
 
You do? Why?



Maybe for preseason, but at least toward the end of the season, those rankings are based in part on performance on the field. Plus, as dumb as they can be, I think CFB needs rankings in order to let the casual fan know which teams are considered good teams. My objection to rankings is not how stupid they are, but the fact that we actually use them to exclude all but two teams in determining the champion. I wouldn't mind using them to exclude 85-90% of the teams. 98% is a bit much.

Recruiting rankings are just a way to sell football to the fans during the offseason. Period.

You have to put a number on someone because you and I both know in competitive athletics you rank...whether its recruiting, draft, or preseason. Yes you don't HAVE to sure...but you do HAVE to as well.

As far as rankings..I hate em. I think we should do it like the NFL. All conf champs playoff, big and small confs everyone...battle it out after the regular season is done...no rankings, no need....it will make conf games SO important. All confs need a championship game. You do this...and BAM...we are talking serious interest in conf titles (play in games) and the big dance.
 
Back
Top