Rivals top 250 and the Big Ten presence

WoodyHayes1951

Well-known member
This really needs to get better if the CONFERENCE is going to be better

1. ann arbor 14

2. OSU 11

3. PSU 4(don't hold your breath that these guys stick around)

4.Nebraska 2

4.Illinois 2

4. Wisconsin 2

7. Indiana 1

7.Purdue 1

Iowa, MSU, Minny and Northwestern are not represented.

 
Still......compared to the Big XII right now

Texas 9

OU 5

TTU 1

Baylor 1

Okie Lite 1

Iowa State, Kansas State, Kansas, TCU,WVU have none

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ACC

Clemson 8

FSU 6

Miami of Florida 4

Maryland 3

VPI 3

GIT 2

Carolina 2

UVA 2

The rest have none. dont want to post them
default_tongue.png


 
SEC

LSU 12

Bama 11

UF 10

UGA 7

A&M 7

R-Barn 7

UT 4

Mizzou 2

Miss St. 2

Ole Miss 1

USC lite 2

R-Kansas 1

Vandy 1

Only UK doesn't have one

 
The SEC slaughters the competition. The Big Ten, Pac-12 and ACC are all close and the Pac-12 better thank USC for that since they have more than HALF of their top recruits

SEC 67

Big Ten 37

PAC-12 34

ACC 30

Big XII 17

Big East 1(South Florida has a top recruit)

Notice : obviously not all the recruits have committed but I don't expect too much to change in terms of the conference rankings. The ACC might jump to #2. I think that will probably happen.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks, I'm surprised to see the Big XII doing so poorly. I guess aside from OU and UT where would kids want to go?

 
Thanks, I'm surprised to see the Big XII doing so poorly. I guess aside from OU and UT where would kids want to go?


Still early but I don't expect high profile recruits to be interested in TTU,TCU,Baylor,ISU,KSU,KU or WVU.

Diet Oklahoma might be able to get some good recruits from the State of Texas but yeah, It's an OU and UT centered conference.

The OU vs UT game is now the only "National" conference game the Big XII has too since A&M left.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This stat befuddles me! $EC biased at its finest! Question..... Let's say everyone BAMA has secured commitments from are committed to Nebraska and vice versa. Do these rankings still hold up?

 
I don't think they see where kids commit and then rank them afterward. Top to bottom when you look at the SEC they have better facilities, better recruiters, more passionate fans, better pro potential, more TV time and more of an emphasis on football than any other conference. They're number one for a reason. Media attention (and theorized bias) follows success, it doesn't necessarily create it.

If I'm a top recruit I'd consider just about every SEC school save for UK, Vandy and the schools from Mississippi though MSU is improving greatly.

Yea we all know they over sign and otherwise "cheat" blah blah blah save the spiel. It is what it is. They're just plain better.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd be interested to see the distribution of the recruits' home states. I'm guessing a lot of them stayed within a 200 mile radius, which explains a lot of it. The south's population has been increasing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd be interested to see the distribution of the recruits' home states. I'm guessing a lot of them stayed within a 200 mile radius, which explains a lot of it. The south's population has been increasing.


Nothing to do with population.

It has to do with quality of HS football.

No one claims that NY football is better than GA football even though population blow them out of the water.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd be interested to see the distribution of the recruits' home states. I'm guessing a lot of them stayed within a 200 mile radius, which explains a lot of it. The south's population has been increasing.


Nothing to do with population.

It has to do with quality of HS football.

No one clames that NY football is better than GA football even though population blow them out of the water.
Ya, I worded that badly. A place that already had a large number of recruits has also been gaining in % of national population which only increases the number of recruits who are from there. I wasn't saying more people lived in the southern areas than in NYC/Boston/D.C.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top