***2017 4* JUCO QB Jarrett Stidham Signs with AU!!! (12/14/16)

[Beaker 2,457]

On 12/20/2016 at 5:57 PM, ellitor said:

Posted in the 2017 QB thread. Justin Ferguson of SECCountry  said JS does not have a number yet & Queen (Who has 15) is healthy for the 1st time in a long time.

Queen is pudgy and soft (fat) right now....

[GwillMac6 20,687]

1 minute ago, ellitor said:

They aren't dragging ranking him. They simply won't. They have a company policy, which their new president & Mike Farrell believe in, that players who do not play any joco ball are not to be ranked as juco players. They see him as a FBS transfer & no sites rank FBS transfers. JGT, JLee & BMatt complained to Mike Farrell & The Prez & the response to the 3 was metaphorically go suck an egg.

well then. I had no idea that was a thing. My apologies for being so far behind. That will REALLY hurt our chances of keeping our streak on that site going for top 10 classes.

[ellitor 33,106]

1 minute ago, GwillMac6 said:

well then. I had no idea that was a thing. My apologies for being so far behind. That will REALLY hurt our chances of keeping our streak on that site going for top 10 classes.

Nothing to apologize for. It's never been asked or discussed....Another streak that looks like it will end at 7.

[GwillMac6 20,687]

Just now, ellitor said:

Nothing to apologize for. It's never been asked or discussed....Another streak that looks like it will end at 7.

Is it just me or does rivals really not seem to like our class this year? our guys seem to be rated lower on their than other sites. The worst is moultry at 292 on espn though.......

[ellitor 33,106]

6 minutes ago, GwillMac6 said:

Is it just me or does rivals really not seem to like our class this year? our guys seem to be rated lower on their than other sites. The worst is moultry at 292 on espn though.......

Correct. If JS was properly rated as a 6.1 5* we would still be 11th. The other sites with him included have us 7th or 8th.

[autan 737]

1 hour ago, ellitor said:

They aren't dragging ranking him. They simply won't. They have a company policy, which their new president & Mike Farrell believe in, that players who do not play any joco ball are not to be ranked as juco players. They see him as a FBS transfer & no sites rank FBS transfers. JGT, JLee & BMatt complained to Mike Farrell & The Prez & the response to the 3 was metaphorically go suck an egg.

Is that the reason JS is a 4* Composite? I think 247 and Scout are the only two sites who rank Stidham and he is a 5* with them.

[ellitor 33,106]

Just now, autan said:

Is that the reason JS is a 4* Composite? I think 247 and Scout are the only two sites who rank Stidham and he is a 5* with them.

No. ESPN ranked him but it was a high 4*.

[oracle79 3,569]

21 hours ago, ellitor said:

They aren't dragging ranking him. They simply won't. They have a company policy, which their new president & Mike Farrell believe in, that players who do not play any joco ball are not to be ranked as juco players. They see him as a FBS transfer & no sites rank FBS transfers. JGT, JLee & BMatt complained to Mike Farrell & The Prez & the response to the 3 was metaphorically go suck an egg.

247 composite ranking should ignore Rivals on these types of players and only use the other 3 sites to make their composite ranking.  JS would be a 5 star then correct?

Don't allow one site to totally screw up a kid's rank.  Statistically, they should probably look at all 4 sites and if one site has a drastically different rating, it should probably be dropped when doing their composite ranking.

[AUpreacherman22 3,888]

Any word on how Stidham likes the new OC hire?

CCL likes for the QBs to toss it around so he should be happy. 

[thaitopher 807]

1 hour ago, AUpreacherman22 said:

Any word on how Stidham likes the new OC hire?

CCL likes for the QBs to toss it around so he should be happy. 

He tweeted his excitement about it earlier today saying he can't wait to learn from him, then Sean White made a similar tweet an hour later.

[ellitor 33,106]

3 hours ago, oracle79 said:

247 composite ranking should ignore Rivals on these types of players and only use the other 3 sites to make their composite ranking.  JS would be a 5 star then correct?

1. They do. The composite only factors sites that have rated a recruit.

2. Nope. ESPN rated him a 4* which made him a composite 4* with the composite only factoring 3 sites here..

Edited January 22, 2017 by ellitor

[oracle79 3,569]

Thanks @ellitor.  I don't understand the composite formula rankings, but in my head if you are a 5 star, a 5 star, and a 4 star, your composite would be a 5 star.  5 + 5 + 4 = 14.  14 divided by 3 = 4.66 repeating = round up to 5 star composite.  I know that's too simple though.

[ellitor 33,106]

15 minutes ago, oracle79 said:

Thanks @ellitor.  I don't understand the composite formula rankings, but in my head if you are a 5 star, a 5 star, and a 4 star, your composite would be a 5 star.  5 + 5 + 4 = 14.  14 divided by 3 = 4.66 repeating = round up to 5 star composite.  I know that's too simple though.

It is too simple. Composite strictly goes by national average rank order & does not care what stars any site gives a recruit. With JS being a juco all similarly ranked high school recruits have rank priority over him.

[fredst 9,064]

Ultimately though...who cares?! Stidham rocks! WDE !

[autan 737]

11 hours ago, ellitor said:

It is too simple. Composite strictly goes by national average rank order & does not care what stars any site gives a recruit. With JS being a juco all similarly ranked high school recruits have rank priority over him.

A layman would think 5* +  5* +   high 4*   would result in 5* when rank orders are figured, but with this new math (probably discovered at UAT) who knows?

[ellitor 33,106]

6 minutes ago, autan said:

A layman would think 5* +  5* +   high 4*   would result in 5* when rank orders are figured, but with this new math (probably discovered at UAT) who knows?

Again. The national rank order has nothing to with the stars a site placed. I'm not sure what the cut off point is for jucos but for high school kids if your average national ranking using the sites that ranked a player is 42.5 or better then you are a 5* on the composite regardless of what stars sites put on a recruit.

For example. Calvin Ashley is ranked 25, 32, 34, & 48 on the 4 sites. Divide by 4 & his average is 34.75. If it had been 42.75 he would have been a 4* on the composite. Further a player could bee #1 in the nation on 3 sites  but if he is 168 on the 4th site he is a composite 4*. 168+1+1+1=171. 171/4=42.75.

Edited January 22, 2017 by ellitor

[The Plainsman 948]

Juco ranking should count higher than HS ranking however IMO.   Or do we use the out of HS ranking for JUCO guys too?

[ellitor 33,106]

2 minutes ago, The Plainsman said:

Juco ranking should count higher than HS ranking however IMO.   Or do we use the out of HS ranking for JUCO guys too?

Jucos have their own pool and are considered lower in the recruiting world because they don't have as long to make an impact.

Edited January 22, 2017 by ellitor

[alexava 6,973]

I don't see how you rank a player in JUCO that didn't play in JUCO.

[ellitor 33,106]

16 minutes ago, alexava said:

I don't see how you rank a player in JUCO that didn't play in JUCO.

Because juco is only designated by wether you go to juco & get an associates, not by if you play or not. Besides he already played P5 ball.

[gr82b4au 5,568]

9 hours ago, ellitor said:

Besides he already played P5 ball.

And he played it well! 

Can't wait to see this kid play for us. 

[AuburnNTexas 7,153]

It doesn't matter if Stidham's ranking technically hurts our recruiting ranking. The reality is his coming to Auburn greatly improves our team which is what matters. I would rather finish a little lower with him then not have him and get a HS player that helps our rankings but doesn't help our team as much.

[imaolgatiger 523]

On ‎1‎/‎20‎/‎2017 at 6:13 PM, Beaker said:

Queen is pudgy and soft (fat) right now....

What do you base this off of?

[Beaker 2,457]

On campus hearsay; my son sees him now again...personally I hope he is big and bulky, but my son who works out 4 days/week has told me differently.  Long time til August....things can change a lot.  Need Tyler, Woody, Sean and Stidham to compete.

[imaolgatiger 523]

1 hour ago, Beaker said:

On campus hearsay; my son sees him now again...personally I hope he is big and bulky, but my son who works out 4 days/week has told me differently.  Long time til August....things can change a lot.  Need Tyler, Woody, Sean and Stidham to compete.

He is a thick cut fry for sure....2015/2016 showed weights of 241/236...at 6'1"