There is zero proof for this
by mocopdx (2019-02-08 13:02:20)
Edited on 2019-02-08 13:03:07

In reply to: Our recruits are also consistently overrated by the services *  posted by Jvan


If we're talking about how they're rated vs other schools.

If you're simply saying all recruits tend to be overrated, sure.


Believe whatever you want
by Jvan  (2019-02-08 17:40:20)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I've talked to people in the recruiting services who admit they inflate ratings of Notre Dame recruits in order to sell subscriptions and increase page views.

The linked article talks about preseason polls vs. actual performance, which is another aspect of the same issue. Various publications overrate Notre Dame in the preseason for the same rea$on$ that the recruiting services employ.

A while back, a poster looked at the bust rate of our five and high four star recruits, and determined that ND is particularly unlucky in getting them to live up to expectations. He concluded they were overrated to begin with. Most here agreed.

Does all of this constitute absolute proof? We're not in court here and it's not a criminal conspiracy to overrate recruits, so I'm not compelled to respond further to your chest puffing about proof. It walks, quacks, and looks like a duck, so I'll continue to say it's a duck.


Also the cohort factor
by SixShutouts66  (2019-02-08 19:38:49)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I have to believe the rating services don't operate in a vacuum. Just as we posters wonder about a recruit that has a "weak cohort" offering and think we've hit gold if we beat a "strong cohort", I have to believe that the rating services consider which marquee schools are seriously interested in a prospect. Many schools besides us have this "problem" that our interest can often inflate a recruit's ratings.