The Junkyard

Both of Floridas 5* are the two most overhyped 5*s

I think it just depends what you mean by "greater impact". Auburn will have a pretty good defensive line. We certainly didn't get the bodies up front to stop those guys a couple years from now, and it means we will be crossing our fingers that Theus doesn't leave early.

I think you have to consider it with how far the other teams needed to go to get to where we are. In doing so, I think we are clearly not keeping up with Bama, LSU, and UF.

I don't think Ole Miss is going to be able to put together enough successive recruiting classes to compete with Bama, UF, LSU, and UGA.

Auburn and Georgia got comparable classes in ranking, but Auburn has a lot go to be able to compete with UGA.

In other words, I like Georgia's recruiting class relative to what it has coming back more than I like Ole Miss and Auburn Relative to what they have coming back.

As for A&M, it is a little bit closer, but I like the balance of our class a little more than theirs, especially if we can get back in on Toby.

Just a quick note on the team rankings.

24/7 uses a Gaussian distribution (aka "Normal" or "Bell Curve"). Because of this, the top players are more heavily weighted than the lower players. In fact, UGA's ranking if we had only signed our top 16 would be 740.06, rather than 746.43. So, we would have only dropped behind USC and Clemson (and if only top 17, we would have stayed ahead of both)

This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but you just have to understand exactly what the ranking is telling you. So, basically, the team rankings wouldn't change if we lost Shaq Fluker, LeMay, Seymour, Rico Johnson, Jordan Davis, Cardiello, Bynum, DeAndre, McGee, Green, Bostick, Mayes, Mauger, Johnson, and Douglas.

If we had added Montravious. we would have jumped to 754. (Good for 8th place.)

So, basically the rankings are saying getting Montravious is better than those 15 players I listed.

Here's the weighting (based on our 32 recruits)

#1 - 12.5% of ranking
#2 - 12.2%
#3 - 11.8%
#4 - 11%
#5 - 10%
#6 - 8.8%
#7 - 7.6%
#8 - 6.3%
#9 - 5.1%
#10 - 4%
#11 - 3.1%
#12 - 2.3%
#13 - 1.7%
#14 - 1.2%
#15 - 0.82%
#16 - 0.55%
#17 - 0.36%
#18 - 0.23%
#19 - 0.14%
#20 - 0.08%
#21 - 0.05%
#22 - #32 (combined .056%)

Personally, I think the Gaussian distribution is OK, but it seems the player rankings themselves are based off Gaussian, and therein causes the huge huge disparity since you are applying a Gaussian to a Gaussian.

True the DL & OL are not as critical this year but we are now in a position of when it does become critical we will be depending on incoming freshmen to man the positions. Don't get me wrong, I love our class. Go Dawgs.

Also, for giggles, I checked to see if we signed 32 4-star prospects (using Bellamy's .8937 score for those below .8937) and we would have a total score of 746.73, which means we would still be ranked #12.

Again, not a huge deal, as long as you understand 24/7 basically is only really ranking the teams based on their top 10 (~90% of total score is based off the top 10, ~95% off top 12, and ~99% off top 16)

In fact, just to break into top 10, we would have to sign Matthews, Ramsey, Terry, Shaq Wiggins, and 28 other prospects equally good as Shaq Wiggins.

Would you rather have Montravious Adams + our current prospects, or Matthews/Ramsey/Terry/Shaq and 28 other prospects equally as good as Shaq?

Haha, thanks for taking the time to do that. Definitely puts the rankings into perspective