Texas #8 23 recruits with an average star rating of 91.24
Aggies #9 26 recruits with an average of 92.10


Texas with 9 3 stars Aggies with 2 3 stars


I dont put a lot of stock in the rankings, but dont understand the math

I don't know, but my guess is that is has to do with where the players line up within their star ranking. There are a few hundred 4-star guys, so there is a large difference in value between the highest 4-stars and the lowest 4-stars, for example.

https://texags.com/forums/5/topics/3259420/replies/61062220

The link is a little dated since on3 is now a part of the mix, but the general idea is still the same.

The quick takeaway is that the formula weighs the more talented kids slightly more heavily, since they tend to have more of an impact on a program, and because you can only have so many kids on the field at the same time. There are major flaws in this system, but it is generally more accurate than just looking at average talent rating.

2040huck said:

---

Can someone explain how 247 rankings work?

---

Tramp96 said:

---

2040huck said:

---

Can someone explain how 247 rankings work?

---

---

1. Decide where you want tu to be in the rankings based on the hotseat status of the current coach.
2. Adjust the ranking system to match the desired ranking for tu
3. ....
4. Profit!

Texas has two composite 5 stars. That's the only reason their class is ranked higher. Our class is way deeper with legit 4 star talent and the players are ranked higher on average.

I actually like our class better than all but maybe 3 of the 7 classes above us. It's a top 5 class as far as I'm concerned.

Focus solely on Avg. Star Rating. Nothing else matters. 247 came out with their "updated" rankings 2 weeks ago with Arrington, Givens, Perry-Wright, and Singleton all dropping.

If they're sip they get a ratings bump just enough to ensure they stay ahead of us.

Seven Costanza said:

---

I don't know, but my guess is that is has to do with where the players line up within their star ranking. There are a few hundred 4-star guys, so there is a large difference in value between the highest 4-stars and the lowest 4-stars, for example.

---

Why wouldnt that be reflected in the average? Say, a 97 verses a 92? Overall, the Aggies have a higher average, and more recruits. Still dont get it

2040huck said:

---

Seven Costanza said:

---

I don't know, but my guess is that is has to do with where the players line up within their star ranking. There are a few hundred 4-star guys, so there is a large difference in value between the highest 4-stars and the lowest 4-stars, for example.

---

Why wouldnt that be reflected in the average? Say, a 97 verses a 92? Overall, the Aggies have a higher average, and more recruits. Still don't get it

---

Because it's not just a function of player ratings and number of players. Higher players are weighted more heavily via a different point formula that doesn't show up in the player recruiting profiles. If you go to the website and play around with their class calculator, you will see how it works.