Grades and Recruit Rankings

[notanative]

How is it that Rivals and others can rank a recruit so high when it is known that they have academic issues? Case in point is this from the DMN:

"Texas A&M’s wide receiver recruiting class took a slight hit Wednesday when Rivals.com four-star recruit Derrick Griffin did not sign with the Aggies on national signing day as Sam Khan Jr. of ESPN reports.
***
"Neither Teyki or anyone at Texas A&M has said the reason for Griffin not receive papers to sign on national signing day but Griffin has struggled with grades in the past, as Khan Jr. writes, and academic eligibility could have been the cause."

As the article points out, it was known that he struggled with grades, so being rated as the third best receiver IN THE NATION by Rivals is meaningless if it's likely the kid won't qualify for any decent college. In addition, TAMU did not even send the kid a letter of intent to sign. Even I can see that failure to send a letter of intent can hardly qualify as taking a hit - more like opening your eyes.

We've got to stop this recruiting circus.

 

[aggressor]

It was known for a while that he wasn't getting in. The final rankings reflected he wasn't signing. A&M doesn't have any real grade risks for now, they dropped Huggins a month ago (or told him he could grayshirt because he didn't have the grades) and he "decommitted" and actually signed with OU even though he has a very small chance of getting in.

Ironically Griffin is really working his tail off to get his ACT and grades up and if he can A&M still has a ship for him, otherwise he will have to go JUCO or Prep school. He's a good kid that came from a rough situation and didn't really realize what he would be missing and got excellent grades in the Fall. Just tough to make up for 3 bad years with 1 good one.

I will agree that some past A&M coaches were bad about this. They took a lot of kids that had no chance of qualifying so things looked great in February even though they never set foot on campus.