Is this class 13 in the sec ?
If I saw it correctly, they are 9th in the SEC AND 21st nationally. But I could be wrong.
1 Like
That’s also what I saw. Things can still change.
That’s 9th out of 14.
1 Like
According to this piece, it claims the 247 composite rankings don’t include us in the top 25.
Per CBS on their website today we finished 13 of 14 in the SEC. Not good.
That is correct. 247’s own ratings have us 18th, but the composite (which includes Rivals and ESPN) has us 28th.
Sounds familiar same as always. Lot of hype with little results.[quote=“ropedhog, post:8, topic:48968, full:true”]
Sounds familiar same as always. Lot of hype with little results.
[/quote]
You can disagree with me but this class is still in the bottom of the sec. We had a good year for us because several players come back for another year because they could. Certainly not because recruiting was better. We will not be in the top of the sec in football because we don’t or can’t compete with the top teams.
That’s fine with me hope we walk softly but carry the big stick… eventually you got to start coaching… we did a great job this year and I expect us to be very solid if not really good next year despite what these stupid rankings say…
3 Likes
There is really not much difference between 15 and 30 ranking wise. Only the usual suspects plus A$M cleaned up…
1 Like
As an example of what I wrote earlier, Indiana came in 15th on Rivals at a 3.22 star average. We were 26th with Rivals at 3.15 stars average. Unless you are the very top, not much difference .
1 Like
Indiana signed 23 players. We signed 20, and those three extra kids make a big difference in the rankings.
1 Like
We now have several PWOs and some of those kids will develop in solid SEC players….on par with any 3/4/5 star scholarship signee. So, I really don’t take much stock where we rank. The proof is after we have developed them.
3 Likes
There are 3 recruiting services in the 247 composite. Here’s the breakdown:
247 - 18th
Rivals - 26th
ESPN - 21st
247 will not disclose their formula for how they determine the “composite” numbers. The composite number of 28th for Arkansas is probably why they don’t disclose their formula. It makes no sense. If each service was given equal weight, the Hogs would be 22nd, not 28th. It’s even more of a head scratcher when you’d think they would give their own rating more weight. But in this case it’s much less weight?
To be accurate:
247 Sports 18th overall (8th in SEC)
ESPN - 21st overall (9th in the SEC
Rivals - 26th overall (10th in the SC)
247 Sports composite 28th overall (13th in SEC)
None of those include the portal transfer additions.
Myles Rowser’s issues dropped Arkansas 5 to 8 spots in the rankings
Arkansas landed DBs from LSU and Georgia to replace him, Brooks and Foucha.
"Sounds familiar same as always. Lot of hype with little results"
Huh?
Going into this season, Arkansas had won 11 of its last 35 games
Won 9 this season
"Sounds familiar same as always. Lot of hype with little results"
I just can’t agree with that assessment when it is put in context.
2 Likes
From my column from a few weeks ago.
For historical perspective, the highest ranked Razorback recruiting class, per 247 Sports, in the modern era was No. 18 in 2004 and fifth in the SEC.
Arkansas has finished in the top 20 just twice in the last 20 years, per 247 Sports, but has had 11 classes in the top 25 during that same time.
The worst? That would be Chad Morris’ 2018 class, which was 45th nationally and last in the SEC. Arkansas’ 2022 recruiting class is ranked 15th by Rivals, 18th by ESPN and 21st by 247 Sports.
2 Likes
Dudley, how is your’s more accurate? You didn’t use 247’s separate ranking of our class (18th). You just used the composite 247 which already included Rivals and ESPN. 247’s individual class ranking of “18” can be seen directly under the “28” for the class composite ranking.
I was not replying to you. My bad if it came across as if you had put up anything inaccurate.
Replying to poster who asked if Arkansas finished 13th.
Tried to tidy it up after my first post
Sorry, I didn’t even look to see who you were replying to. I was just trying to point out, that in many instances you cannot go by 247 “composite” as actually a true number. Obviously it’s mathematically impossible for an average ranking to be higher (or lower) than any of the individual rankings on which it’s based.
1 Like
I have no idea how they get 28 bc the ave of those 3 rankings is rounded off to 22… that clearly is not how they came up with that but it’s very strange