Earlier, on a different board I did a quick study taking the last 5 years worth of recruiting data for all of our opponents. GT's record against those who recruited better than us and those who recruited worse was about the same. Now, lets look at the University of Florida. This year, they are guaranteed a losing season, have lost 6 in a row, and will not go to a bowl. In recent years, they haven't been a huge factor on the national scene either. Here are their national class rankings for the last 5 years (using rivals), accounting for every player that might be on the field today: 2009 (11), 2010 (2), 2011 (12), 2012 (3), 2013 (4). They have averaged a top 6 class for 5 years running!Regardless of what some think on here the rankings make a difference on the field. Eventually.
Well if talent was the only that won FB games then why did GSU beat them on Sat??? *BREAKING NEWS UPDATE* There's more to a football game then how talented the teams are...
I agree recruiting has a major influence on success. I just don't think the "recruiting services" are equipped to measure or rank them in any meaningful way.
If you were a HC and you had to pick which roster your team had to start game 1 of the season with, would you pick UF's roster or GSU's roster?
The talent at UF is good...the coaching, motivation and effort is putrid.
Look at Texas and the ratings they have in recruiting...talk about underachieving.
Is this a fair assessment of the current debate?
1. Everyone agrees that, everything else being equal, better talent results in better teams
IJ7 says that between UF and GSU, the team with vastly better talent will in all probability win the majority of games
Eric says that between UF and GSU, you can't assume the situation is so close to "everything else being equal" to make that conclusion
Is that fair?