Discussion in 'Colorado Football Recruiting Central' started by Mb2658, Jun 6, 2019.
You two are about to get blocked!
idk why you guys have some super high bar for these lists. They're compiled by numerous people from all over the country. Someone could drop just because a few guys below them got ranked higher or performed well at some random camp. This isn't like a baseball top 100 prospects list compiled by 1-2 people (which also changes frequently). Honestly, they're mostly throwing **** at the wall beyond grouping guys into tiers. Wray is still a top tier prospect, his number on the stupid list just changed.
I highly doubt there's some grand conspiracy of people at 247 or rivals or wherever that is waiting for kids to commit to CU so they can nail them with a rankings demotion.
I’m pretty sure they’re still crying about that. We’ll probably hear more come September about how it’s time for revenge.
Odds are you and DBT are both mixttapin’. But mostly him.
I have no clue why his rating dropped. One would have to assume that since he hasn’t played football in 6 months over which time his rating didn’t change until he committed to us, that his commitment to us had something to do with it.
Or they have added prospect evaluations of some more players, some ended up ranked above him, and since they limit the number of blue chip rankings it caused his ranking to adjust down.
CU has largely sucked at recruiting in recent history. Recruiting sites have also clearly discounted CU offers and the ratings of some of the higher rated CU recruits to be more on par with their perception of the offer prestige. They aren't mutually exclusive.
I also believe that the initial 2* and low 3* kids that CU has taken over the last 6-7 years have also received a bump in their ratings due to the CU P5 offer, so this isn't to say that there is some kind of conspiracy against CU's overall team recruiting rankings. It's probably all evened out over the course of a cycle, but let's not try to act like Wray, or any other recruit's ranking, would have dropped in the same way had he committed to Ohio State, Bama, Clemson, Georgia, etc.
That’s a good point. But that still begs the question of how can they evaluate players out of season. What are they basing their revisions on.
If unrated before, they finally looked at film. (Or just slapped a minimum 3* on him if he committed to a P5 school.)
For guys who got bumps over the summer, it's usually a camp performance. Can also be that offers or a commitment causes the sites to take another look at someone and to do a closer evaluation.
To be clear, I do not believe his commitment to CU is why he dropped. I believe there is reason for the perception that he dropped because of his commitment.
Thanks Buffnik, I wasn’t aware of the blue chip limit on recruits, very interesting. I always wondered if the change was due to ratings that were just slapped on too early. But that begs my earlier question, if that’s the case, are they artificially pushing certain schools ratings? He was committed to OSU and was a consensus 4 star and now he’s not. I don’t think it’s some huge conspiracy but it’s certainly just seems fishy. As always, thanks for your intelligent insight, thankfully some around here have it.
The CU fan version of QAnon.
I ask the mods to ban the next person that starts this in a recruit thread.
Definitely. They give weight to scholarship commitments at elite programs. The sites are smart enough to know that certain schools win double digit games every year because they recruit great players. Ratings get adjusted a bit accordingly. To a lesser extent, some schools shade up because of the number of fans they have creating traffic — squeaky wheel and all that. This is why we generally see Nebraska and Texas underperform their class ranks.
Nice! Good for him!
I really want to know what caused that bump. Can anyone explain it?
247 offers a membership subscription for CU fans. Memberships skyrocket. Days later CU's only QB recruit, the most important position on a college football team, is bumped to a four star. Masses are appeased.
Easy, the regionals. Any other easy questions?
You already know but... “In a loaded crop of quarterbacks in Dallas, one dual-threat who deserved recognition was Lewis. The Melissa passer is our Mr. Clean, largely because he was so smooth and so precise all afternoon. Lewis has impressive size, a fluid throwing motion and spot-on accuracy. Without acknowledging his ability to move in and out of the pocket, Lewis was one of the more reliable passers at camp with his stock on the rise. Colorado, Nebraska, Vanderbilt, Missouri and TCU are all after Lewis.”
Stocks been on the rise since late March. You can stop the “I’m always right” nonsense now. Nobody here has claimed it’s some CU conspiracy. We questioned why Wray dropped 3 points, which is quite a lot considering Lewis’ bump is barely 1 point to 4 star status. Never once said his drop was because CU or his commitment here. Simply questioned the drop and said I believe if he stayed committed to OSU they wouldn’t have been so diligent to drop his stock.
You are the one who constantly brings it up, so you seem to care quite a bit. Thankfully, we now have a dump-all thread for you, so knock yourself out.
Not saying I agree with him, but he doesn’t do a bad job of illustrating his point.
It evens out in the end because CU (and any P5 school) gets the benefit of the doubt with "sleeper" prospects. Like I said before, I would be more concerned about those artificial bumps than I would the drops.
As far as Lewis, the recent jump came from his rise in ESPN's rankings of all places. Not exactly credible, but who cares.
I agree with Lewis, he was deserving of the bump. But you have to admit, the Wray drop was pretty random. Not attributing it to a vast conspiracy, but it really doesn’t make a lot of sense this time of year.
It is, but I think that range right at the 3*/4* threshold is prone to odd movements.
Please provide examples of me constantly bringing this up. I’ll wait.
Separate names with a comma.