Conference Recruiting Comparison
I wanted to take a quick look at how the major conferences stacked up against each other in this year's recruiting. I broke it down into five categories. For the first two categories, I averaged the results between Scout, Rivals, and ESPN's rankings. These two categories are top 10 and top 25 ranked teams.
For the last three categories, I relied only on Scout's rankings. The rationale being ESPN does not rank beyond the top 25 and Rivals' rankings get shaky after the top teams. The third category is top 40 teams and the fourth category is the number of teams with 3.0 or better 'star average'. The final category is the average ranking of all the teams in a conference. In parentheses is the conference rank. The results:
Conference Top 10 Top 25 Top 40 3.0+ AVG
SEC 4.66 (1) 7.66 (1) 10 (1) 7 (T1) 23 (1)
PAC 10 2 (T2) 5 (2) 9 (T2) 7 (T1) 26 (2)
BIG 12 2 (T2) 4 (3) 9 (T2) 6 (T3) 42 (5)
ACC 1 (4) 3.66 (4) 5 (T4) 6 (T3) 40 (3)
Big Ten .33 (5) 2.66 (5) 5 (T4) 4 (5) 41 (4)
Big East 0 (6) .66 (6) 2 (6) 2 (6) 47 (6)
It is inherent that these rankings are flawed to a degree. Not the least of which is the reliance on an inexact science. However, the first four categories are affected by the number of teams in a conference. More teams = a higher chance to have teams ranked highly. For this reason, it is impressive that the Pac-10 was consistently second ahead of several conferences with more teams. The last category is the most telling of overall conference depth. Despite the large number of SEC teams ranked very highly, they just barely bested the Pac-10 in overall depth of recruiting. (Thanks to MattPD for the help)
This FanPost does not necessarily reflect the views of the site's writers or editors, who may not have verified its accuracy. It does, however, reflect the views of this particular fan, which is just as important as the views of our writers or editors.
0 recs |
6 comments
Comments
Nice work.
The rich (SEC) get richer (and richer, and richer).
by TiltingRight on Feb 6, 2010 3:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
I wish the table would have come out better. It looks perfect, then I hit ‘publish’ and it looks like it does. I guess that is what I get for using Word to do this, Ow well.
by spencer peaty on Feb 6, 2010 4:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Making tables on SBN publisher can be a chore.
CougCenter WSU's second main blog
by Dancing Football on Feb 6, 2010 11:11 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Best piece of advice I can give you
Do the table in excel. Copy it. Then, when you’re working on the post, click the button that has the Word logo over a clipboard. Paste your text into there. That should resolve most of your formatting issues.
If that doesn’t work, I recommend using screen capture. (But that’s a pain.)
by Jeff Nusser on Feb 7, 2010 8:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Screen capture is my weapon of choice.
CougCenter WSU's second main blog
by Dancing Football on Feb 7, 2010 8:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah good work
The PAC 10 definitely had a strong year recruiting and these numbers reflect that.
by MattPD on Feb 6, 2010 4:48 PM PST via mobile reply actions 0 recs

by 









