NebraskaShellback Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 10 months from now, Riley and crew will have a big welcome to the B1G. Great visionary! Really! I just stated they will have a big welcome into the conference. I did not say a negative or did you interpret as one? Quote Link to comment
NebraskaShellback Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 (edited) 10 months from now, Riley and crew will have a big welcome to the B1G. Great visionary! Really! I just stated they will have a big welcome into the conference. I did not say a negative or did you interpret as one? Welcome to the board. Welcome to the board. Edited December 7, 2014 by NebraskaShellback Quote Link to comment
RunRedRun Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 My goodness, most of you suck at math. The rankings are ordered by total points of your top 20 recruits If you have a small class due to scholarship limitations, you're not even going to have 20 players. 14 x 4 = 56 20 x 3 = 60 Is a class of 20 3 stars really better? Debate that all you want but quit saying stupid crap about how terrible a class with less than 20 players is just because the total is smaller. not sure where the "math" thing comes in... I was questioning the statement of a 38th ranked class being "solid".. funny how those that can justify a statement move to alt excuses... Quote Link to comment
okaive Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 10 months from now, Riley and crew will have a big welcome to the B1G. Great visionary! Really! I just stated they will have a big welcome into the conference. I did not say a negative or did you interpret as one? I believe it was more of a "thanks for pointing out the obvious" type of comment. Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 My goodness, most of you suck at math. The rankings are ordered by total points of your top 20 recruits If you have a small class due to scholarship limitations, you're not even going to have 20 players. 14 x 4 = 56 20 x 3 = 60 Is a class of 20 3 stars really better? Debate that all you want but quit saying stupid crap about how terrible a class with less than 20 players is just because the total is smaller. not sure where the "math" thing comes in... I was questioning the statement of a 38th ranked class being "solid".. funny how those that can justify a statement move to alt excuses... The position of your post could not possibly be more dense*** Quote Link to comment
RunRedRun Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 My goodness, most of you suck at math. The rankings are ordered by total points of your top 20 recruits If you have a small class due to scholarship limitations, you're not even going to have 20 players. 14 x 4 = 56 20 x 3 = 60 Is a class of 20 3 stars really better? Debate that all you want but quit saying stupid crap about how terrible a class with less than 20 players is just because the total is smaller. not sure where the "math" thing comes in... I was questioning the statement of a 38th ranked class being "solid".. funny how those that can justify a statement move to alt excuses... The position of your post could not possibly be more dense*** how so...I understand the math, do you consider 38th to be a solid recruiting class? Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 how so...I understand the math, do you consider 38th to be a solid recruiting class? I understand our recruiting class to be a solid recruiting class. The number 38 means very little to me, because it is representative of an imperfect metric that doesn't accurately assess the quality of our class as it pertains to our program. Quote Link to comment
RunRedRun Posted December 7, 2014 Share Posted December 7, 2014 how so...I understand the math, do you consider 38th to be a solid recruiting class? I understand our recruiting class to be a solid recruiting class. The number 38 means very little to me, because it is representative of an imperfect metric that doesn't accurately assess the quality of our class as it pertains to our program. Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 how so...I understand the math, do you consider 38th to be a solid recruiting class? I understand our recruiting class to be a solid recruiting class. The number 38 means very little to me, because it is representative of an imperfect metric that doesn't accurately assess the quality of our class as it pertains to our program. Get over it man. If you don't like the class, don't like it for an actual reason other than an arbitrary number that lacks context. This is the same class that was ranked as high as 7th early on in the season. It hasn't dropped because other teams have all the sudden got way better players - it's dropped because other teams have all the sudden got way MORE players. Recruiting rankings highly favor quantity. I don't know how to make it any more simple for you than it has already been made. If you look at average star rating, which is a better indicator at least of the quality of players overall, we are second in the conference and 21st nationally. Quote Link to comment
RunRedRun Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 how so...I understand the math, do you consider 38th to be a solid recruiting class? I understand our recruiting class to be a solid recruiting class. The number 38 means very little to me, because it is representative of an imperfect metric that doesn't accurately assess the quality of our class as it pertains to our program. Get over it man. If you don't like the class, don't like it for an actual reason other than an arbitrary number that lacks context. This is the same class that was ranked as high as 7th early on in the season. It hasn't dropped because other teams have all the sudden got way better players - it's dropped because other teams have all the sudden got way MORE players. Recruiting rankings highly favor quantity. I don't know how to make it any more simple for you than it has already been made. If you look at average star rating, which is a better indicator at least of the quality of players overall, we are second in the conference and 21st nationally. unfortunately, YOU are the only one that looks at it that way....like I said, maybe YOU and a few others should rank the classes because rivals, SI and ESPN ALL have this class listed as sub-par....but then again, what would they know...right??? Quote Link to comment
zoogs Posted December 8, 2014 Author Share Posted December 8, 2014 Small classes are punished in the overall rankings and large classes are punished in the average rankings. I mean, this seems like a typical Bo Pelini class: pretty decent, not revelatory, small in size, and depending on the final push to February. 2 Quote Link to comment
Landlord Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 unfortunately, YOU are the only one that looks at it that way....like I said, maybe YOU and a few others should rank the classes because rivals, SI and ESPN ALL have this class listed as sub-par....but then again, what would they know...right??? I'm not the only one. There are plenty of people that feel the same way. If you talked with recruiting experts at those companies, they would say, "Don't be an idiot - the rankings don't tell the whole story." You do realize that individual people aren't ranking the classes right? It's just a formula? So you are asking me what a formula knows... it knows what it is programmed to output. Quote Link to comment
74Hunter Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 how so...I understand the math, do you consider 38th to be a solid recruiting class? I understand our recruiting class to be a solid recruiting class. The number 38 means very little to me, because it is representative of an imperfect metric that doesn't accurately assess the quality of our class as it pertains to our program. Get over it man. If you don't like the class, don't like it for an actual reason other than an arbitrary number that lacks context. This is the same class that was ranked as high as 7th early on in the season. It hasn't dropped because other teams have all the sudden got way better players - it's dropped because other teams have all the sudden got way MORE players. Recruiting rankings highly favor quantity. I don't know how to make it any more simple for you than it has already been made. If you look at average star rating, which is a better indicator at least of the quality of players overall, we are second in the conference and 21st nationally. unfortunately, YOU are the only one that looks at it that way....like I said, maybe YOU and a few others should rank the classes because rivals, SI and ESPN ALL have this class listed as sub-par....but then again, what would they know...right??? No he's not. You are that only one looking at it from the way you are spinning the argument. You're not displaying common sense here. It was shaping up to be a solid class. The new guy needs to get off his duff and hold it together Quote Link to comment
jsneb83 Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 Guys, stop arguing with him. I can't take anymore of his nonsense. Quote Link to comment
RunRedRun Posted December 8, 2014 Share Posted December 8, 2014 how so...I understand the math, do you consider 38th to be a solid recruiting class? I understand our recruiting class to be a solid recruiting class. The number 38 means very little to me, because it is representative of an imperfect metric that doesn't accurately assess the quality of our class as it pertains to our program. Get over it man. If you don't like the class, don't like it for an actual reason other than an arbitrary number that lacks context. This is the same class that was ranked as high as 7th early on in the season. It hasn't dropped because other teams have all the sudden got way better players - it's dropped because other teams have all the sudden got way MORE players. Recruiting rankings highly favor quantity. I don't know how to make it any more simple for you than it has already been made. If you look at average star rating, which is a better indicator at least of the quality of players overall, we are second in the conference and 21st nationally. unfortunately, YOU are the only one that looks at it that way....like I said, maybe YOU and a few others should rank the classes because rivals, SI and ESPN ALL have this class listed as sub-par....but then again, what would they know...right??? No he's not. You are that only one looking at it from the way you are spinning the argument. It was shaping up to be a solid class. The new guy needs to get off his duff and hold it together ya, me and the rest of the nation...you guys just keep drinking the pelini kool-aid...catch up to the rest of us when your finished..k!!! Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.