Recruiting grades

[Mavric]

Posted this in another thread, but am re-posting it here (thank you copy and paste):

 

 

There are 120 schools that are in the FBS.

 

1 - 10 = A+

11 - 20 = A

21 - 25 = A-

26 -34 = B+

35 - 44 = B

45 - 54 = B-

55 - 64 = C+

65 - 74 = C

75 - 84 = C-

85 - 94 = D+

95 - 104 = D

105 - 114 = D-

115 - 120 = F

 

It makes sense that since there are 120 FBS schools, that just under 25% would be A's as that's only a quarter of the overall total.

 

Thus, I think Nebraska's grade for this recruiting class in an A-.

 

If all things were equal, I'd agree with you.

 

But all things are decidedly not equal.

[HuskermanMike]

 

Posted this in another thread, but am re-posting it here (thank you copy and paste):

 

 

There are 120 schools that are in the FBS.

 

1 - 10 = A+

11 - 20 = A

21 - 25 = A-

26 -34 = B+

35 - 44 = B

45 - 54 = B-

55 - 64 = C+

65 - 74 = C

75 - 84 = C-

85 - 94 = D+

95 - 104 = D

105 - 114 = D-

115 - 120 = F

 

It makes sense that since there are 120 FBS schools, that just under 25% would be A's as that's only a quarter of the overall total.

 

Thus, I think Nebraska's grade for this recruiting class in an A-.

If all things were equal, I'd agree with you.

 

But all things are decidedly not equal.

 

I was thinking of a grade like you did at first making c. I realized it was too easy to give us that high of a grade. IMO outside top 60 is an F. It can go down the list from there. Top 25 class deserves a B and top 30 a b- so I would give this class a B. One or two spots higher and I would say it could be closer to a B+. but a solid B is fair for this class.

[The Dude]

1-10 = A

11-20 = B

21- 30 = C

31-40 = D

41-120 = F

 

 

So B- or C+ for this class.

[NoLongerN]

Posted this in another thread, but am re-posting it here (thank you copy and paste):

 

 

There are 120 schools that are in the FBS.

 

1 - 10 = A+

11 - 20 = A

21 - 25 = A-

26 -34 = B+

35 - 44 = B

45 - 54 = B-

55 - 64 = C+

65 - 74 = C

75 - 84 = C-

85 - 94 = D+

95 - 104 = D

105 - 114 = D-

115 - 120 = F

 

It makes sense that since there are 120 FBS schools, that just under 25% would be A's as that's only a quarter of the overall total.

 

Thus, I think Nebraska's grade for this recruiting class in an A-.

This scale is quite humorous.

[Huskers44]

 

 

Posted this in another thread, but am re-posting it here (thank you copy and paste):

 

 

There are 120 schools that are in the FBS.

 

1 - 10 = A+

11 - 20 = A

21 - 25 = A-

26 -34 = B+

35 - 44 = B

45 - 54 = B-

55 - 64 = C+

65 - 74 = C

75 - 84 = C-

85 - 94 = D+

95 - 104 = D

105 - 114 = D-

115 - 120 = F

 

It makes sense that since there are 120 FBS schools, that just under 25% would be A's as that's only a quarter of the overall total.

 

Thus, I think Nebraska's grade for this recruiting class in an A-.

If all things were equal, I'd agree with you.

 

But all things are decidedly not equal.

How about you go power 5 conferences and add in Notre Dame and take the top 5 schools from each power 5 and Nebraska should be somewhere in there. Probably higher honestly.

[Making Chimichangas]

 

Posted this in another thread, but am re-posting it here (thank you copy and paste):

 

 

There are 120 schools that are in the FBS.

 

1 - 10 = A+

11 - 20 = A

21 - 25 = A-

26 -34 = B+

35 - 44 = B

45 - 54 = B-

55 - 64 = C+

65 - 74 = C

75 - 84 = C-

85 - 94 = D+

95 - 104 = D

105 - 114 = D-

115 - 120 = F

 

It makes sense that since there are 120 FBS schools, that just under 25% would be A's as that's only a quarter of the overall total.

 

Thus, I think Nebraska's grade for this recruiting class in an A-.

This scale is quite humorous.

 

 

So is seeing you naked.

 

Saying that a recruiting class ranked 40 and lower is an "F" is what's "humorous."

 

You do realize that Wisconsin has been literally dominating Nebraska since we entered the Big 10?

 

While schools like Northwestern, Purdue, and Illinois among others, give us all we can handle every year.

 

And, the Badgers have been doing it recruiting classes from 2011-2017 have averaged 44th nationally.

 

A supposed "F" according to you extremely intelligent fellas.

 

Wisconsin's 2017 class is rated 35th by rivals.com

 

Wisconsin's 2016 class is rated 35th by rivals.com

 

Wisconsin's 2015 class is rated 44th by rivals.com

 

Wisconsin's 2014 class is rated 33rd by rivals.com

 

Wisconsin's 2013 class is rated 54th by rivals.com

 

Wisconsin's 2012 class is rated 60th by rivals.com

 

Wisconsin's 2011 class is rated 41st by rivals.com

 

Want to rethink your grading system?

 

Because I think this notion you and others are putting out that any recruiting class 40th or lower is an "F" is completely absurd.

[Making Chimichangas]

I'm curious how others would grade NU's recruiting from season to season. Under Pelini our average class rankings across all services was around 25 to 27. Riley was brought in to dramatically improve our recruiting, and I think we can all agree that is needed after bad losses in 2016. Here is how I would grade our recruiting when averaging the team ranking across major services (like Rivals, Scout, 247, and ESPN) if we really want to get back to being competitive on a national level.

 

Ranked 1 to 10: A+

Ranked 11-14: A

Ranked 15-16: A-

Ranked 17-18: B+

Ranked 19-21: B

Ranked 22-23: B-

Ranked 24-26: C+

Ranked 27-28: C

Ranked 29-30: C-

Ranked 31-35: D

Ranked 35 or below: F

 

 

 

So you're saying that Wisconsin has been dominating us since 2011 with consistently rated "F" classes? Seems legit.

[HuskermanMike]

 

I'm curious how others would grade NU's recruiting from season to season. Under Pelini our average class rankings across all services was around 25 to 27. Riley was brought in to dramatically improve our recruiting, and I think we can all agree that is needed after bad losses in 2016. Here is how I would grade our recruiting when averaging the team ranking across major services (like Rivals, Scout, 247, and ESPN) if we really want to get back to being competitive on a national level.

 

Ranked 1 to 10: A+

Ranked 11-14: A

Ranked 15-16: A-

Ranked 17-18: B+

Ranked 19-21: B

Ranked 22-23: B-

Ranked 24-26: C+

Ranked 27-28: C

Ranked 29-30: C-

Ranked 31-35: D

Ranked 35 or below: F

 

 

 

So you're saying that Wisconsin has been dominating us since 2011 with consistently rated "F" classes? Seems legit.

 

I don't think thy are saying Wisconsin's recruiting is necessarily bad, rather if Nebraska recruited at that number it would be an F. That is what I am taking what they are saying. I have no problem with your class rankings as it is your opinion, I feel like if it is top 25 for Nebraska it is good. We need some big boy classes also with rankings in the top 15 and sometimes a top 10 class. I think classes 16-25 are fairly similar if you look at it from a broader view, but any class in the top 15 is elite and they separate themselves with each ranking.

[Making Chimichangas]

HuskermanMike said: I don't think thy are saying Wisconsin's recruiting is necessarily and , rather if Nebraska recruited at that number it would be an F. That is what I am taking what they are saying. I have no problem with your class rankings as it is your opinion, I feel like if it is top 25 for Nebraska it is good. We need some big boy classes also with rankings in the top 15 and sometimes a top 10 class. I think classes 16-25 are fairly similar if you look at it from a broader view, but any class in the top 15 is elite and they separate themselves with each ranking.

 

No, guys like bnilhome are saying that a recruiting class rank of 35 or lower is an F.

 

And that is patently, blatantly, obviously, completely absurd.

 

Further, unless I misread it, there was no qualification that "if Nebraska's class is 35th or lower, it is an F."

 

And, even if the supposition that Nebraska's class, ranked 35th or lower is an F, then it logically follows that every other school with a class rated lower than 35 is also an F. Which makes zero sense.

 

I am not here suggesting that Nebraska shouldn't strive for consistent top 15 classes, because that's exactly what we should be striving for.

 

However, to suggest that any class rated 35th or lower is an F, meaning a total failure, doesn't hold up under any legit scrutiny.

[DrunkOffPunch]

It does if you go case by case instead of a broad generalization. UTEP had the 131st ranked class according to 247. It's safe to assume anything better than 75th would be an absolutely astounding class and an A+ by their standards. That doesn't mean 75th or better for any other team would be an A+.

[Making Chimichangas]

It does if you go case by case instead of a broad generalization. UTEP had the 131st ranked class according to 247. It's safe to assume anything better than 75th would be an absolutely astounding class and an A+ by their standards. That doesn't mean 75th or better for any other team would be an A+.

 

What? I hope you guys never quit whatever day jobs you have...lol

[DrunkOffPunch]

 

 

It does if you go case by case instead of a broad generalization. UTEP had the 131st ranked class according to 247. It's safe to assume anything better than 75th would be an absolutely astounding class and an A+ by their standards. That doesn't mean 75th or better for any other team would be an A+.

What? I hope you guys never quit whatever day jobs you have...lol

Care to defend your post instead of trying to make a clever quip?

[Making Chimichangas]

 

 

It does if you go case by case instead of a broad generalization. UTEP had the 131st ranked class according to 247. It's safe to assume anything better than 75th would be an absolutely astounding class and an A+ by their standards. That doesn't mean 75th or better for any other team would be an A+.

What? I hope you guys never quit whatever day jobs you have...lol

Care to defend your post instead of trying to make a clever quip?

 

Read what I have posted above, it's all there.

[Nebfanatic]

I agree with Drunk Off Punch here. In theory you are correct Making Chimichangas, but recruiting success is relative to situation. For example, UCF had a great recruiting class this year, they finished 58th I believe. If we recruited 58th we would be like 8th in the BIG or worse. UCF had the best recruiting class in their conference. That is an A for them. Would you consider 58 an A for us?

[Making Chimichangas]

I agree with Drunk Off Punch here. In theory you are correct Making Chimichangas, but recruiting success is relative to situation. For example, UCF had a great recruiting class this year, they finished 58th I believe. If we recruited 58th we would be like 8th in the BIG or worse. UCF had the best recruiting class in their conference. That is an A for them. Would you consider 58 an A for us?

 

If Nebraska had the 58th rated class, that would be a C+ class.

 

I'll ask again: If we take the notion that any recruiting class below 40 is an F...

 

Then does that mean that since 2011 Wisconsin has been kicking our collective arses up and down the field, every single year, with consistently "F" rated classes?

 

I would love for someone to address this question without moving the goalposts.

 

And remember that Northwestern, Purdue, Illinois, and Iowa (whom we've supposedly out-recruited by a wide margin every single year) consistently play us tough and down to the wire every year.

 

Or, could all you guys just admit that the level of separation from a class rated 20th to a class rated 11th is a matter of perception? Naw, you wouldn't do that...cause seeing all those stars nest to recruits names are pretty.

 

I am not saying we shouldn't recruit the best talent out there, but you guys take opinion (recruiting rankings) and state them as absolute fact.

 

Doesn't ring any "alarm bells" when recruiting analysts say you could, in a given year, swap the #10 team for the #1 team? I mean seriously, these rankings are nothing close to absolute.