February NSD Class of 2024

[winwave]

but take them all as somebody's opinion and often not indicative of that player's future success

mb= first off its a fan forum and it's NSD so it's always going to be discussed. Then there's the fact that it has proven pretty accurate over the years. Yes someone will always say what about Forte. Of course there are misses but not a whole lot or the services would have been out of business long ago. As to 23 wins the last 2 years you have to factor in that it's a new day and age with the wide open transfers. We finally hit on our transfers in that period. So they were right with their evaluation of our HS class otherwise we wouldn't have needed those transfers. Hopefully we have hit on them yet again this year.

I agree 100% that rivals is the best source for accuracy. But they’re all speculators and a whole lot of ALL of their rankings is based upon who is recruiting the player. Look at the all-time highest ranked Tulane recruits. More than half of them I’ve never heard of or I’ve heard of them and they’ve done nothing to justify being one of our highest ranked recruits of all time. Not all, mind you, but more than half.

winwave, you didn’t tell me anything I don’t already know about the services. The only reason I brought up ON3 is some other posters have used them and pointed them out, and it was idiotic that they were dropping our rankings when we were having a good day. And as much as you think the rating services are accurate over time, see my argument above about their lists of Tulane highest all-time ranked recruits. They’re not worth the paper they’re not written on.

D- if they weren't worth the paper they were written on you wouldn't have even bothered looking at the rankings. As to your post above I'm not sure which ones you are referring too and what service.

[greenie78]

Excited to see Sumrall building an o-line. I knew he will coach these guys up. Also wondering which recruits will come out of no where like Makhi Hughes.

[mbissanti]

mb= first off its a fan forum and it's NSD so it's always going to be discussed. Then there's the fact that it has proven pretty accurate over the years. Yes someone will always say what about Forte. Of course there are misses but not a whole lot or the services would have been out of business long ago. As to 23 wins the last 2 years you have to factor in that it's a new day and age with the wide open transfers. We finally hit on our transfers in that period. So they were right with their evaluation of our HS class otherwise we wouldn't have needed those transfers. Hopefully we have hit on them yet again this year.

I agree 100% that rivals is the best source for accuracy. But they’re all speculators and a whole lot of ALL of their rankings is based upon who is recruiting the player. Look at the all-time highest ranked Tulane recruits. More than half of them I’ve never heard of or I’ve heard of them and they’ve done nothing to justify being one of our highest ranked recruits of all time. Not all, mind you, but more than half.

winwave, you didn’t tell me anything I don’t already know about the services. The only reason I brought up ON3 is some other posters have used them and pointed them out, and it was idiotic that they were dropping our rankings when we were having a good day. And as much as you think the rating services are accurate over time, see my argument above about their lists of Tulane highest all-time ranked recruits. They’re not worth the paper they’re not written on.

D- if they weren't worth the paper they were written on you wouldn't have even bothered looking at the rankings. As to your post above I'm not sure which ones you are referring too and what service.

The answer is in between both of you. The rankings are worth looking at, but they are not very accurate. They are just a guide to familiarize yourself with an expectation that will often be exceeded or not met.

[JerseyWave]

I was listening to a sports talk radio show this morning and Boomer Esiason mentioned that Coach Prime feels he has to recruit extensively out of the portal instead of recruiting high schools in order to compete because he's getting a more mature, developed player. That might explain why Zycarl Lewis came available from his Colorado commitment.

[Greeniegb]

Comparing final 247 Sports vs ON3 2024 Recruiting ratings
Greenwave: 65 vs 78

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/other/ ... b707&ei=45

[winwave]

I agree 100% that rivals is the best source for accuracy. But they’re all speculators and a whole lot of ALL of their rankings is based upon who is recruiting the player. Look at the all-time highest ranked Tulane recruits. More than half of them I’ve never heard of or I’ve heard of them and they’ve done nothing to justify being one of our highest ranked recruits of all time. Not all, mind you, but more than half.

winwave, you didn’t tell me anything I don’t already know about the services. The only reason I brought up ON3 is some other posters have used them and pointed them out, and it was idiotic that they were dropping our rankings when we were having a good day. And as much as you think the rating services are accurate over time, see my argument above about their lists of Tulane highest all-time ranked recruits. They’re not worth the paper they’re not written on.

D- if they weren't worth the paper they were written on you wouldn't have even bothered looking at the rankings. As to your post above I'm not sure which ones you are referring too and what service.

The answer is in between both of you. The rankings are worth looking at, but they are not very accurate. They are just a guide to familiarize yourself with an expectation that will often be exceeded or not met.

We'll have to agree to disagree about their accuracy. I have said they are not gospel, but they have pretty accurately reflected what our program would be like with those classes in the past. We now get bolstered by the open transfer rules in place.

[mbissanti]

D- if they weren't worth the paper they were written on you wouldn't have even bothered looking at the rankings. As to your post above I'm not sure which ones you are referring too and what service.

The answer is in between both of you. The rankings are worth looking at, but they are not very accurate. They are just a guide to familiarize yourself with an expectation that will often be exceeded or not met.

We'll have to agree to disagree about their accuracy. I have said they are not gospel, but they have pretty accurately reflected what our program would be like with those classes in the past. We now get bolstered by the open transfer rules in place.

sounds good

[arkhou02]

That looks nothing like our classes and would have been rated much higher than 65-80. There are four 4 stars. We've never signed a class like that. People here would have been going bonkers over it. Thirteen out of the 25 are 3 star and above. We needed them b/c they were right about our HS recruiting. Like I said above some of our fans will knocking the ratings b/c they haven't been kind to us but the results fit what they said about those classes since the beginning of this century. Hurrah for the open transfer era.

The 2024 class includes two 5 star players and two four star kids and our class is hovering at 65-70. Definitely a better class on paper than the previous two years. And don’t forget that Rivals will definitely drop a five star and four star to four and three stars 90% of the time if signing with a school like Tulane. The thought process is how did they end up at Tulane. There must be a problem. We have seen it over and over. And just look at the list above. There are at least 12 players that were rated incorrectly because they were never seen by Rivals and went to G5 schools. The exceptions are Douglas and Small. The typical scenario is Pines. From Baton Rouge, signs with Lamar and is ranked a whopping 2 stars. If a local like him goes to LSU, you bet your ass he is 3 or 4 stars. It’s a joke how they rate these players.

Our 2024 class does not have two 5 stars nor 2 4 stars per Rivals. We have 10 2 stars and 9 3 stars. hat's why we have that ranking of 67.

Rivals combines the transfers and high school kids. Better find another reason to buy into these asinine sites. Name the schools we beat to get these kids. Outstanding!

[winwave]

First off the topic of discussion was our HS ratings which is what most everybody here and elsewhere looks at. As to Rivals ranking of our transfers they only list 5 rather than the 13 we have. I think that is likely because since transfers don't sign with the school they don't count them till they enroll. Of those 5 they have 3 as 4 stars and one as a 3 star. Once we have all 13 that will change the comprehensive ranking you are referring to. Like I said above you don't like them b/c they don't rate us high on our HS rankings but the way those classes have turned out they were pretty accurate in their ratings. We wouldn't have won 23 games in 2 years without hitting on our transfers. So as I've said the transfer changes have been a help. You can hate on them all you want but most people are still going to see them as a useful guide.

[DfromCT]

D- if they weren't worth the paper they were written on you wouldn't have even bothered looking at the rankings. As to your post above I'm not sure which ones you are referring too and what service.

https://247sports.com/college/Tulane/Sp ... eRecruits/

Yes, it's 247. But despite having a record of being more generous with stars, they pretty much align with what Rivals says. In other words, they would have the same or very close to the same list. How many of the top 25 never made an impact at Tulane? A bunch, no doubt.

Do we read the recruiting rankings and summaries? Absolutely. But some of us put little to no stock in them, others think they're accurate gages of future production. I read them for accomplishments and to see who else was interested. But I don't think the rankings accurately predict success and am not sure there's much of a difference between a high or low 3 star recruit. As someone else said, somebody really watch film on all 3400 recruits?

[Eaglewave]

I am impressed with this class from the clips I have seen. I hope these guys come in here and ball out!

[winwave]

D- if they weren't worth the paper they were written on you wouldn't have even bothered looking at the rankings. As to your post above I'm not sure which ones you are referring too and what service.

https://247sports.com/college/Tulane/Sp ... eRecruits/

Yes, it's 247. But despite having a record of being more generous with stars, they pretty much align with what Rivals says. In other words, they would have the same or very close to the same list. How many of the top 25 never made an impact at Tulane? A bunch, no doubt.

Do we read the recruiting rankings and summaries? Absolutely. But some of us put little to no stock in them, others think they're accurate gages of future production. I read them for accomplishments and to see who else was interested. But I don't think the rankings accurately predict success and am not sure there's much of a difference between a high or low 3 star recruit. As someone else said, somebody really watch film on all 3400 recruits?

First off your using 247 so not a good source. They don't align on some I glanced at in this class (247 has Steward and Lewis as 4 stars, Rivals has them as 3 stars, 247 has 8 rated 3 stars that Rivals has as 2 stars-Cargo, Fortenberry, Mirtil, White, Tasby, Nicholas, McGruder and Curry ). You do realize a lot of the top 25 are players from this class, and the last 2 classes. So you've had to have heard of them. They obviously haven't had a lot of time to play and show themselves yet.

[tpstulane]

[Wave755]

D- if they weren't worth the paper they were written on you wouldn't have even bothered looking at the rankings. As to your post above I'm not sure which ones you are referring too and what service.

https://247sports.com/college/Tulane/Sp ... eRecruits/

Yes, it's 247. But despite having a record of being more generous with stars, they pretty much align with what Rivals says. In other words, they would have the same or very close to the same list. How many of the top 25 never made an impact at Tulane? A bunch, no doubt.

Do we read the recruiting rankings and summaries? Absolutely. But some of us put little to no stock in them, others think they're accurate gages of future production. I read them for accomplishments and to see who else was interested. But I don't think the rankings accurately predict success and am not sure there's much of a difference between a high or low 3 star recruit. As someone else said, somebody really watch film on all 3400 recruits?

Both Rivals & 247 rated Tyjae Spears . So thankfully the Sabans of the world didn't even “give him a sniff.”

[DfromCT]

Tyjae might be my favorite Tulane player of all time. It's a toss-up between him and Shaun King, though Pratt has to get consideration. I don't think any of them were close to 4 stars (or even if they had rankings in the 1990s.)

[Jaxwave]

Tyjae was a 3 star and available to Tulane only because he had two major knee surgeries including his senior year.

[Jaxwave]

Guys, some of us are talking out of both sides of our mouth discrediting the recruiting services’ rankings giving P5 schools recruits higher star ratings while gushing over our signees noting their P5 offers. We all know those services talk to the P5 schools and base their star ratings on who’s recruiting the player. It’s all about marketing and generating hits. That being said, they are pretty accurate.

[MicMan]

Tyjae might be my favorite Tulane player of all time. It's a toss-up between him and Shaun King, though Pratt has to get consideration. I don't think any of them were close to 4 stars (or even if they had rankings in the 1990s.)

Matt Forte did more with less his senior year than anybody.

[Ruski]

7/10 AAC. Hopefully it's legit! Need to keep that playoff spot