In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 617
On this Board 466Record: 1816 (5/25/2013)
Online now 605Record: 3266 (10/30/2013)
You have no favorite boards.
JC - This is an example that highlights why LSU fans are extremely peed but other fans should be too. Here a few example of how big a joke ESPN is. (Scout is a hair better). If you are't a player at "The Opening" or an all star game good luck getting properly evaluated by them.
Ill start with our commit last night.....Rashard Robinson.
247: 4 star 16th CB
Rivals:4 star 24th CB
Scout: 3 star 30th CB
ESPN: 3 star 68th CB ----------- wtf?
Now lets look at Tredavious White
247: 4 star 5th ATH
Rivals 4 star 7th ATH
Scout 3 star 36th CB --------- really?
ESPN 4 star 34th ATH ------ really?:
Just for shats and giggles lets look at ILB Melvin Jones
247 4 star 4th ILB
Rivals 4 star 16th ILB
Scout 4 star 8th MLB
ESPN 3 star 68th ATH ----- This has to be a joke.
Again, fair evaluations and rankings are why people come here. There are some people that are more peed than you guys realize I believe. I think if you guys remove ESPN, everyone can live with Scout. Please let us know what the powers think of this as I know alot of people are waiting to see if you guys address this concern.
We definitely needed another thread on this topic...
When you pay for a product you have the right to voice your concern. Just so people know the answer back from the main board guys is that ESPN will adjust and get better later in the year.
This is my last post on it, just thought I would let everyone know what was said when presented with factual data.
Not questioning your right to voice your concern, only the illogic in not voicing it in one of the half dozen or so threads already clogging up the board.
And why not include the "factual data" that ESPN also ranks Dodd, Lawson, Jefferson and Baker higher than any other site does, including 247?
If you posted the differences I bet you could answer your own question.
I already know the answer: you didn't post them because they don't support your argument. But just for fun, here goes...
247: #30 position rank, #315 national rank, 4*
Rivals: #21 position rank, n/r national rank, 3*
Scout: #29 position rank, n/r national rank, 3*
ESPN: #9 position rank, #172 national rank, 4*
247: #39 position rank, #466 national rank, 3*
Rivals: #18 position rank, n/r national rank, 4*
Scout: #45 position rank, n/r national rank, 3*
ESPN: #7 position rank, #135 national rank, 4*
247: #38 position rank, ~#300 national rank, 4*
Rivals: #88 position rank, n/r national rank, 3*
Scout: #51 position rank, n/r national rank, 3*
ESPN: #25 position rank, #182 national rank, 4*
ESPN rated all three of these guys significantly higher than any other network within the position rankings and overall national rankings. I'm not saying ESPN doesn't suck generally, just that it's intellectually dishonest to cherry pick the three biggest discrepancies that support your position, while ignoring that there are also large discrepancies the other way (and that they are more or less consistent beyond those large discrepancies).
This post was edited by Gravitiger on 8/1/2012 at 10:56 AM
This has the makings and fuel for a hot and informative thread - wish we could group or keep them together.
One could argue these ratings are market driven whores. FoxSports.com, Yahoo Sports, ESPN.
It's hard to imagine unbiased or even adequate coverage in assessments. We don't want or need grade inflation.
I don't worry about the rankings too much, when it comes down to it, I trust the coaches to bring in the right players.
It looks like ESPN updated their rankings today. Maybe this will help some.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports