SCOUT ??

[LikeMike]

It seems that everyday Scout downgrades one or more of our recruits. What's the deal?

Do they ever explain or date the changes?

 

[ntexascardfan]

Who gives a **** what scout thinks.

Let's see what they do on the 40.

 

[ntexascardfan]

Who gives a **** what scout thinks.

Let's see what

 

[LikeMike]

You are no fun.

 

[l00p]

This phenomenon goes on with probably every single school. The Aggies claim that when a kid commits to Texas they get more stars and higher praise yet when they go to College Station they go down in status. I don't know if this is true or not but they are not alone in this. I have heard fans and rivals all say the same thing.

I am pretty sure it is just perception. I equate it to playing poker and your memory of how things went down. You don't remember the times you got lucky or sucked out on somebody as much as when they catch a two outter on you and you lose the hand. We pay more attention to our guys losing stock than when they rise.

We attribute a rise to them just being bad asses and finally being ranked where they belong. If they lose status the service has no clue or hates the Longhorns.

 

[everybodygodeep]

To get people to sign up and to keep them happy, you have to spread around the rankings to different schools. Should not happen, but it does.

 

[GoHornsGo90]

There's a hierarchy, IMO, for how they do the rankings (aside from, like, who's better...and ****):

1. Uncommitted prospects
2. SEC/USC
3. Team distribution (unless it's the SEC or USC)

I definitely agree that they frequently drop players who've recently committed. They aren't as interesting even more. I'm not even sure they do it on purpose all the time.

They probably just don't have to evaluate them as much because of fielding less questions about them, so they don't see them improve or they don't get to see the minor strengths that start to become apparent in the more heavily "film-viewed" prospects. So they psychologically see them as less important, and thus not as worthy as being talked about as a top prospect.

 

[LikeMike]

l00p... you must be a lawyer. Make it up as you go and if you say it with emphasis people will not object.

Scout has been consistently moving our guys down from about 4 weeks ago. We had 7 five stars last week, now 6. WE had 3 guys that were number two at their position and now 2, etc. Many more examples.

I can accept the ideas that they do it to retain interest in the uncommitted, but I am not a subscriber and wonder if they announce that changes are afoot or date them like Rivals.

 

[71grad]

Who gives a **** what scout thinks.

Let's see what they do on the 40.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Scout and Rivals are so important and so accurate. Remember how all those 5* and 4* kids at Alabama And OU just destroyed all those 3* and 2* kids at Utah and Boise St.

 

[longyak]

They have a product to sell and having all the top rated kids committed doesn't sell well. I'd guesstimate around 25% of the top kids across the nation drop so that uncommitted kids can rise and drive interest in their product.

 

[everette]

I quit subscribing to Emfinger's (He is the Scout, right?) rag in the mid 80s. In one of his newsletters, he reported that TU commitment (signee?) Charles Washington has been arrested. Now I could care less who says "TU," but it does indicate where they are coming from.

Hook 'em,
Everette

 

[TigerPride]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[LikeMike]

And remember that Young and Kindle were five stars..

None are perfect, but I's rather have more consensus five star recruits, who have their head no straight..

 

[GoHornsGo90]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[l00p]

LikeMike, have any of our guys moved up since the first rankings came out?

Have any Ag or Sooner guys moved down or are only our guys moving down while everybody else has players moving up?

I know the answer.