Rivals ranking: 19 to 15

[aubiescottie 1]

Up from 19 to 15. Not that the ranking matters, and at this point things are very fluid, but it sets my mind at ease a little.

I'd say if we can hold around that spot, thats pretty damn good for a 'down' year. And a year when the overall class isn't even that critical.

[otterinbham 0]

Up from 19 to 15. Not that the ranking matters, and at this point things are very fluid, but it sets my mind at ease a little.

I'd say if we can hold around that spot, thats pretty damn good for a 'down' year. And a year when the overall class isn't even that critical.

Well, given the coaching turmoil out there and the fact that CTT is one heck of a closer, I wouldn't be surprised to see us slip into the Top Ten again.

[PChamp119 96]

The overall class isn't critical this year? Every year is critical.

Let's hear you state that in 4 or 5 years when they are the senior class. Isn't that what we heard all this season from members of this board, about how 2003-2004 was a bad recruiting year because of Jetgate?

[aubiescottie 1]

The overall class isn't critical this year? Every year is critical.

Let's hear you state that in 4 or 5 years when they are the senior class. Isn't that what we heard all this season from members of this board, about how 2003-2004 was a bad recruiting year because of Jetgate?

Its not overly critical. Last year's class was large and exceptional and is already paying dividends. The 2006 class was very good as well. (Ranked 10th with avg stars of 3.52) One thing that hasn't been pointed out was that the 2005 class also wasn't very good. It was small [21] and avg stars of 3.19. 2004 was terrible with an avg star ranking of 2.67 So basically we had 3 years of not very good classes. That's what made things bad, not one particular year being bad. Next years' class will again be critical. This years' is important, not critical.

[FootballFanatic 4]

Id disagree, we need to maintain quality. I know our rankings will rise now that things are moving forward.

I don't doubt we are recruitng right now of the deap period hasn't landed already.

[Ryan Sanders 123]

The overall class isn't critical this year? Every year is critical.

Let's hear you state that in 4 or 5 years when they are the senior class. Isn't that what we heard all this season from members of this board, about how 2003-2004 was a bad recruiting year because of Jetgate?

Agreed

[WarTim 3,456]

#1 Rankings to NOT matter so long as the COACHES get the players THEY "rank" high. Anyone, in their right mind, knows this to be a fact.

#2 pchump...the NEW bg.............

[townhallsavoy 2]

#1 Rankings to NOT matter so long as the COACHES get the players THEY "rank" high. Anyone, in their right mind, knows this to be a fact.

#2 pchump...the NEW bg.............

I NOW PROCLAIM THIS TO BE WARTIMNATION.NET.

ANYONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND KNOWS THIS TO BE A FACT.

So, WarTim, we're beating Bama this year in recruiting?

[mcgufcm 4,107]

I actually agree with the assertion that the class ranking doesn't matter. You're basically eliminated from a top 5/10 spot if you're signing a limited number of players regardless of what you do (unless you're USC who will always be overrated). It would be a disappointment to fall outside the top 10 in a "big class" year, where we sign 25-30 guys. I'd say being in the top 15/20 in a year with less than 25 signees is solid.

What needs to happen (and what is happening) is the overall quality needs to stay around the same. If the coaches get a large percentage of the guys we offer early, we're fine. We have better talent evaluators than scout or rivals. As far as the rankings, average player rating is probably the best indicator... not class rankings. That's completely skewed by the number of guys signing in a given year.

[kingfish 73]

#1 Rankings do NOT matter so long as the COACHES get the players THEY "rank" high.

A recruiting truth in capsule form ... well said ... concise and to the point.

[WarTim 3,456]

Thank you. I have never thought that you could judge the intangibles well enough to truly "rank" a HUMAN.

[autigeremt 6,654]

What's the matter with you guys??? There's more mud slinging in here between AU supporters than rivals....

It's the best time of year (do not include how much money you have spent into this)

[Ryan Sanders 123]

I don't think anyone is really saying that we are truly worried about the rank we get at Rivals.. but to say that this year's recruiting class isn't that crucial is an overstatement.

[aubiescottie 1]

I actually agree with the assertion that the class ranking doesn't matter. You're basically eliminated from a top 5/10 spot if you're signing a limited number of players regardless of what you do (unless you're USC who will always be overrated). It would be a disappointment to fall outside the top 10 in a "big class" year, where we sign 25-30 guys. I'd say being in the top 15/20 in a year with less than 25 signees is solid.

What needs to happen (and what is happening) is the overall quality needs to stay around the same. If the coaches get a large percentage of the guys we offer early, we're fine. We have better talent evaluators than scout or rivals. As far as the rankings, average player rating is probably the best indicator... not class rankings. That's completely skewed by the number of guys signing in a given year.

Exactly...we need good quality guys, not A LOT of good quality guys. Critical classes are when you are looking to sign 25-30 guys. This year its important to maintain that quality by filling specific spots, and getting a few high-ceiling guys.

Calling every year critical is like calling every drive in a football game critical. Sometimes you have to score. Sometimes you just need to eat clock and not let anything crazy happen.

[PChamp119 96]

Calling every year critical is like calling every drive in a football game critical. Sometimes you have to score. Sometimes you just need to eat clock and not let anything crazy happen.

I think I know what you mean. Certain drives are 100% must be made critical. Like the last drive of the MSU game was one of those situations.

The only time a drive is not critical is if you are winning big or if you got the ball with like 30 seconds left on your own twenty. Otherwise, we wouldn't have needed that most critical drive against MSU if we drove the ball down the field every drive.

In games against the likes of LSU and Florida, every drive is critical. Sometimes you play field position, but you damn better try to score every drive. Sitting on the ball will cost you games. It almost bit us in the a** against Arkansas and it certainly didn't help against MSU. Call it turnovers, or whatever. Fact was: When Auburn needed to drive the ball they did. When they didn't care, it showed. That attitude disgusts me

[mcgufcm 4,107]

Your attitude is much-akin to stepping to the plate and trying to hit a home run every time... because you're always trying to score. Sometimes, you just slap it to opposite field, get on first base, and try to build something. Some classes are about filling holes, some are about swinging for the fences. Both are critical (if you don't have quality in the small classes, you won't be set up to have big years), but their importance looks very different.

[townhallsavoy 2]

Your attitude is much-akin to stepping to the plate and trying to hit a home run every time... because you're always trying to score. Sometimes, you just slap it to opposite field, get on first base, and try to build something. Some classes are about filling holes, some are about swinging for the fences. Both are critical (if you don't have quality in the small classes, you won't be set up to have big years), but their importance looks very different.

I think this is some of the beef fans have with this class compared to Bama's.

I think Harry Adams will be a helluva player at Auburn. However, I think Julio Jones will be a helluva player in the NFL. Based on talent alone, which would you like to have?

I think our recruiting class this year is the same as it's been every year for the past five years. Hell, we don't normally sign five star recruits - we've got two this year. I have no reason to expect us to lose production on the field.

I do, however, think Bama will have a much improved team in two years. They have a very good recruiting class, and unless Saban has really lost it, he'll get them competing.

[metafour 4,969]

Your attitude is much-akin to stepping to the plate and trying to hit a home run every time... because you're always trying to score. Sometimes, you just slap it to opposite field, get on first base, and try to build something. Some classes are about filling holes, some are about swinging for the fences. Both are critical (if you don't have quality in the small classes, you won't be set up to have big years), but their importance looks very different.

I think Harry Adams will be a helluva player at Auburn. However, I think Julio Jones will be a helluva player in the NFL. Based on talent alone, which would you like to have?

Absolutely terrible comparison. On pure potential, Harry Adams is right up there with the top 5-star WR prospects. If you ranked players on potential alone he would be a 5-star. Athletically speaking, he has NFL potential.

[Defense(clap clap) 4]

Your attitude is much-akin to stepping to the plate and trying to hit a home run every time... because you're always trying to score. Sometimes, you just slap it to opposite field, get on first base, and try to build something. Some classes are about filling holes, some are about swinging for the fences. Both are critical (if you don't have quality in the small classes, you won't be set up to have big years), but their importance looks very different.

I think Harry Adams will be a helluva player at Auburn. However, I think Julio Jones will be a helluva player in the NFL. Based on talent alone, which would you like to have?

Absolutely terrible comparison. On pure potential, Harry Adams is right up there with the top 5-star WR prospects. If you ranked players on potential alone he would be a 5-star. Athletically speaking, he has NFL potential.

So why do the scouting websites have him at 3 stars? About the only thing I follow in recruiting is the names of these kids so I don't really know too much about them. Why are him and Furr and Fortson only 3 stars when everywhere I see people are saying they should be 4 and 5 stars?

[metafour 4,969]

Your attitude is much-akin to stepping to the plate and trying to hit a home run every time... because you're always trying to score. Sometimes, you just slap it to opposite field, get on first base, and try to build something. Some classes are about filling holes, some are about swinging for the fences. Both are critical (if you don't have quality in the small classes, you won't be set up to have big years), but their importance looks very different.

I think Harry Adams will be a helluva player at Auburn. However, I think Julio Jones will be a helluva player in the NFL. Based on talent alone, which would you like to have?

Absolutely terrible comparison. On pure potential, Harry Adams is right up there with the top 5-star WR prospects. If you ranked players on potential alone he would be a 5-star. Athletically speaking, he has NFL potential.

So why do the scouting websites have him at 3 stars? About the only thing I follow in recruiting is the names of these kids so I don't really know too much about them. Why are him and Furr and Fortson only 3 stars when everywhere I see people are saying they should be 4 and 5 stars?

Scout actually has Harry Adams as a 4-star, and they just upgraded Fortson to 4-star status as well. I'd expect both Furr and Fortson to be re-evaluated by both Scout and Rivals by the time final rankings come out.

To answer your question, recruiting services have to base judgment on a number of variables. Athletic ability and "potential" are big factors, but so is production. Harry Adams has about 2 years of football experience, and his HS really struggled throwing the football so his receiving numbers are nothing special. He is a raw football player as he is essentially a track-star who is being converted into a football player. Because of that, you cant really put him at 5-star status, however, if you looked at JUST athletic potential there would be no reason not to rank him as a 5-star: he has ran numerous 10.2 and 10.3 100 meter times and has incredible speed.

I would put Furr into a similar category. Looking at JUST physical tools he has NFL potential. He is about 6'3 with a thick, muscular build and 4.5 speed. Add a very strong arm and you have a QB who has everything you look for physically. He started out this year as a 3-star because he was REALLY raw passing the ball as a JR. He lacked touch and accuracy and really didn't show the "intangible" passing skills as a QB. He is still a raw passer that will need development collegiately, but he has REALLY improved his overall QB play this year. When you looking at his improvement this year and add his production (he was a big reason why Carver just won a state title) AND mix in his physical tools and potential, I believe that an upgrade to 4-star status would be valid.

[mcgufcm 4,107]

Townhall, I don't see what Bama's success has to do with our's in recruiting. We don't really have a hugely overlapping recruiting base despite the fact that we're both in-state. We generally go head to head on a handful of guys, and I expect to win some of those and lose some of those with or without $aban.

Auburn and Alabama have been and probably will be "up" at the same time. Bama finally found a coach worth a crap. I know a lot of folks on this board want to (or genuinely do) believe he's bad, but $aban's won at every stop barring the NFL. He's going to build that program back into a competitor, but you know what? That's not going to make Auburn fade away. It just won't. We're going to keep recruiting FL and GA and AL and bits of TN, and we're going to keep talent in the cupboard. There's not a whole lot $aban or Bama can do about that.

As for the question, I don't know the answer. If Julio Jones is as good as folks say (no idea if he is), then I might want him more, but Harry Adams might be exactly what we need. He's blazing fast (much faster than Jones). We've got possession receivers (Smith is a dynamic possession receiver). We don't have explosive downfield threats.

And I think it's silly to look at high school guys and say "I'd rather have him because he's going to be great in the NFL!" as opposed to college. Chase Daniels, for example, is going to be garbage in the NFL, but I'd love to have him in college. Josh Reid has been average at best in the NFL, but he was dominant at WR in college. That list could go on and on and on. To answer your question, I want guys that are good in their four years at Auburn. If they happen to dominate here and bust later, so be it. I never heard Florida fans complain about Ike Hilliard, Jack Jackson, or Reidel Anthony bottoming out in the NFL... I hear them talking about their All-American seasons and 1996 national title.

[townhallsavoy 2]

Your attitude is much-akin to stepping to the plate and trying to hit a home run every time... because you're always trying to score. Sometimes, you just slap it to opposite field, get on first base, and try to build something. Some classes are about filling holes, some are about swinging for the fences. Both are critical (if you don't have quality in the small classes, you won't be set up to have big years), but their importance looks very different.

I think Harry Adams will be a helluva player at Auburn. However, I think Julio Jones will be a helluva player in the NFL. Based on talent alone, which would you like to have?

Absolutely terrible comparison. On pure potential, Harry Adams is right up there with the top 5-star WR prospects. If you ranked players on potential alone he would be a 5-star. Athletically speaking, he has NFL potential.

bull****. Harry Adams is a three star recruit based on the star system. Whatever Metafour system you're using applies to you and you alone. Julio Jones is taller and has more experience. Adams has played football for what, two years? If you absolutely had to choose between the two, you would pick Adams? I think the guy is going to be a great player, but I'd have to give the nod to Julio.

[townhallsavoy 2]

Townhall, I don't see what Bama's success has to do with our's in recruiting. We don't really have a hugely overlapping recruiting base despite the fact that we're both in-state. We generally go head to head on a handful of guys, and I expect to win some of those and lose some of those with or without $aban.

I never said Bama's success has anything to do with our recruiting. Hype affects recruiting. If Bama goes 11-1 with a victory over us next season, it will affect recruiting. It might be hard to remember a time when Bama had a better program than us, but if they were in our position, they would be recruiting much better than us every year; it wouldn't just be one overhyped season. There's no reason to believe that Auburn has some kind of magical aurora that attracts better recruits than everybody else no matter what. We recruit well because we have a good program.

Auburn and Alabama have been and probably will be "up" at the same time. Bama finally found a coach worth a crap. I know a lot of folks on this board want to (or genuinely do) believe he's bad, but $aban's won at every stop barring the NFL. He's going to build that program back into a competitor, but you know what? That's not going to make Auburn fade away. It just won't. We're going to keep recruiting FL and GA and AL and bits of TN, and we're going to keep talent in the cupboard. There's not a whole lot $aban or Bama can do about that.

Agreed. I'm guessing this wasn't directed towards any of my comments.

As for the question, I don't know the answer. If Julio Jones is as good as folks say (no idea if he is), then I might want him more, but Harry Adams might be exactly what we need. He's blazing fast (much faster than Jones). We've got possession receivers (Smith is a dynamic possession receiver). We don't have explosive downfield threats.

None of us truly know the answer as for who's better or who we need. Coming out of high school, Jones is more hyped and has more offers. He's tall, strong, fast and supposedly has a great work ethic. Not to mention, he also has good hands. Something he definitely has over Adams is experience. I think Julio Jones is one of those guys that you just can't turn away regardless of you needs. Reggie Bush, Adrian Peterson, Carnell Williams - those are guys you take out of high school even if you already have enough RBs committed.

And I think it's silly to look at high school guys and say "I'd rather have him because he's going to be great in the NFL!" as opposed to college. Chase Daniels, for example, is going to be garbage in the NFL, but I'd love to have him in college. Josh Reid has been average at best in the NFL, but he was dominant at WR in college. That list could go on and on and on. To answer your question, I want guys that are good in their four years at Auburn. If they happen to dominate here and bust later, so be it. I never heard Florida fans complain about Ike Hilliard, Jack Jackson, or Reidel Anthony bottoming out in the NFL... I hear them talking about their All-American seasons and 1996 national title.

Yeah, I agree, but with some cases, I think it's a safe bet to say they can make it in the NFL. If you go back to 2002-2004, even soon-to-be 2005 - the top two recruits on rivals are competing in the NFL right now. They usually get those guys rated correctly. I have no reason to think Julio Jones is any different. Harry Adams is a three star recruit. I'm just saying I'm putting my money on Jones to be the better player.

[mcgufcm 4,107]

If Alabama were in our position, they'd have higher "rankings" in recruiting. Why? Because they always get a nod for the size of their fanbase. They have inflated recruiting rankings every year. Want proof? Alabama's recruiting classes were rated higher than Auburn's two of the last five years (coming into this season), and the two schools were 10 and 11 one year. So over the five years that made up all the players on the field this season, our rankings were basically identical. Now, are there 11 players on that team you'd take over the guy playing their spot at Auburn? Are there even 5?

We don't have magical pixie dust. We have magical coaches that actually know what they're looking for. If we offer a guy in August, I'm ecstatic when he commits. I could care less if he's got 5 stars or 2. Why? Because our coaching staff is right WAAAAAY more often than any recruiting service, and I would argue substantially more often than other SEC coaching staffs. We have magical pixie dust recruiters.

How do I know we have magical pixie dust recruiters? Take 2004 for example. That class was supposedly "down." It had an average "star ranking" from rivals of 2.6. That's not so good. But you know who was in that class? 2 star recruits – Tyronne Green (future NFLer), Jason Bosley (best lineman on the team this year), Chris Evans (leading tackler), and Merrill Johnson. That class also included Pat Sims (future 1st or 2nd rounder), Brad Lester, Tristan Davis, and David Irons. Our "bad years" turn out that many really, really good players. (Bama finished well ahead of us in the team rankings that year)

So you'll have to pardon me if I don't think Bama would be doing better. They might get more attention because they sell more magazines. They're the program that can sell 92K tickets to a spring game; we aren't. That's the main reason for their "success" in recruiting over us. I have a feeling we're going to look back on this class and say stuff like, "man, player X is really good. Can't believe he was so poorly rated." or "I wouldn't trade player X at Auburn for player Y at Bama."

[metafour 4,969]

Your attitude is much-akin to stepping to the plate and trying to hit a home run every time... because you're always trying to score. Sometimes, you just slap it to opposite field, get on first base, and try to build something. Some classes are about filling holes, some are about swinging for the fences. Both are critical (if you don't have quality in the small classes, you won't be set up to have big years), but their importance looks very different.

I think Harry Adams will be a helluva player at Auburn. However, I think Julio Jones will be a helluva player in the NFL. Based on talent alone, which would you like to have?

Absolutely terrible comparison. On pure potential, Harry Adams is right up there with the top 5-star WR prospects. If you ranked players on potential alone he would be a 5-star. Athletically speaking, he has NFL potential.

bull****. Harry Adams is a three star recruit based on the star system. Whatever Metafour system you're using applies to you and you alone. Julio Jones is taller and has more experience. Adams has played football for what, two years? If you absolutely had to choose between the two, you would pick Adams? I think the guy is going to be a great player, but I'd have to give the nod to Julio.

I never said I'd take Harry Adams over Julio Jones, I was just saying that your example was a poor one, and it is. You were more or less implying that Adams should be a great college player but that Julio Jones will be a great NFL player. Harry Adams' ceiling isn't that much lower than Julio Jones', as of now he is further away from his ceiling and therefore less likely to reach it, which is why he is rated later, but it doesn't change the fact that his ceiling is of an NFL-caliber player.