- Jun 12, 2014
- 16,336
- 14,798
Founding Member
We finished 6th because some nerds evaluated high school kids and attempt to order them. I think rankings as a big picture are important, teams need talent. But how correctly can you quantify Broderick jones talent over issiah Walker's? Or elias Rick's over Jabari Rodgers? How does scheme fit at the next level play into how well talent is maximized? I dont think it's an exact science where one can quantify the difference.
So what you are saying are people who see these athletes on a decent basis, in camps where they compete against one another, their measurables, etc... have no clue what they are doing? They haven't done their job with enough expertise over decades of data points out there that they are going to be more right than wrong? That the specialization of the recruiting, through the camps, film, organizations might not have a good clue?
When you continually get the types of lower graded talent, you might have one or two that break the mold, but overall the statistic is fairly accurate. Now over the 4 years that difference becomes more noticeable because as your talent starts to reach the potential of their grade, so does theirs.
UGA has an average player grade of 3.96 where is ours is 3.7... are you saying that doesn't matter. That the services with all the data they collect are going to be so wrong that UGA completely over recruited inferior talent and we got gems on every level. If so can you share the crack you are smoking, because that is some good stuff