runswithscissors 33 Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 there were only three that did not qualify academically, and that was Murphy, Lewis and Bolton. i don't think Murphy will ever play a down for UA. i think the reporter in the linked story was incorrect about Lewis appealing, as a story on BOL advises it was a rumor and that he was not going to appeal (it has long been known he was going to be a casualty). Bolton has already enrolled in JUCO. Hood and Ray opted for MLB, but honestly Ray probably would not have qualified academically anyways. Hood would have qualified i think. i really have no idea what it would be ranked if you took out those five guys. they were all 4 stars, but take them out and that still leaves 14 four stars and two five stars. so total, not counting academic casualties, UA had 25 total (which i think Rivals bases it on your top 25 anyways). Notre Dame ranked #2 with 23 signees, Florida ranked #3 with 22 signees, Ohio State ranked #4 with 20 signees, and Miami ranked #5 with 33 signees. i have no idea what casualties any of those teams had, and i have no idea the formula they use to assess points to each player at each position. i think we would probably still be #1, and if not at least in the top 3 probably. just my .02 and before you go all "Rivals is biased" on me, here's an article from Scout: http://cfn.scout.com/2/766383.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAR-MATT 2 Posted July 7, 2008 Share Posted July 7, 2008 there were only three that did not qualify academically, and that was Murphy, Lewis and Bolton. i don't think Murphy will ever play a down for UA. i think the reporter in the linked story was incorrect about Lewis appealing, as a story on BOL advises it was a rumor and that he was not going to appeal (it has long been known he was going to be a casualty). Bolton has already enrolled in JUCO. Hood and Ray opted for MLB, but honestly Ray probably would not have qualified academically anyways. Hood would have qualified i think. i really have no idea what it would be ranked if you took out those five guys. they were all 4 stars, but take them out and that still leaves 14 four stars and two five stars. so total, not counting academic casualties, UA had 25 total (which i think Rivals bases it on your top 25 anyways). Notre Dame ranked #2 with 23 signees, Florida ranked #3 with 22 signees, Ohio State ranked #4 with 20 signees, and Miami ranked #5 with 33 signees. i have no idea what casualties any of those teams had, and i have no idea the formula they use to assess points to each player at each position. i think we would probably still be #1, and if not at least in the top 3 probably. just my .02 and before you go all "Rivals is biased" on me, here's an article from Scout: http://cfn.scout.com/2/766383.html that isn't what ESPN says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runswithscissors 33 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 there were only three that did not qualify academically, and that was Murphy, Lewis and Bolton. i don't think Murphy will ever play a down for UA. i think the reporter in the linked story was incorrect about Lewis appealing, as a story on BOL advises it was a rumor and that he was not going to appeal (it has long been known he was going to be a casualty). Bolton has already enrolled in JUCO. Hood and Ray opted for MLB, but honestly Ray probably would not have qualified academically anyways. Hood would have qualified i think. i really have no idea what it would be ranked if you took out those five guys. they were all 4 stars, but take them out and that still leaves 14 four stars and two five stars. so total, not counting academic casualties, UA had 25 total (which i think Rivals bases it on your top 25 anyways). Notre Dame ranked #2 with 23 signees, Florida ranked #3 with 22 signees, Ohio State ranked #4 with 20 signees, and Miami ranked #5 with 33 signees. i have no idea what casualties any of those teams had, and i have no idea the formula they use to assess points to each player at each position. i think we would probably still be #1, and if not at least in the top 3 probably. just my .02 and before you go all "Rivals is biased" on me, here's an article from Scout: http://cfn.scout.com/2/766383.html that isn't what ESPN says. that isn't what ESPN says regarding which part of my post? about where we might be when you minus academics? well, ESPN ranked UA #3. how they rank Clemson #2 when Rivals and Scout both ranked them 12 and 11 respectively, i have no idea. how many times have people on this board talked about how clueless ESPN is? Miami was ranked #1 by ESPN, and at least you could make an argument there as they had a class comparable to Alabama. you have to remember that if you are going to penalize Alabama for ineligibility or guys going MLB, you have to do the same with everybody else. good luck with that. either way you cut it, i think we pulled in a talented class. its nice to be able to lose four 4* guys and not even be worried about it and have plenty of talent left in the class. thats a luxury not every school has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WAR-MATT 2 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 there were only three that did not qualify academically, and that was Murphy, Lewis and Bolton. i don't think Murphy will ever play a down for UA. i think the reporter in the linked story was incorrect about Lewis appealing, as a story on BOL advises it was a rumor and that he was not going to appeal (it has long been known he was going to be a casualty). Bolton has already enrolled in JUCO. Hood and Ray opted for MLB, but honestly Ray probably would not have qualified academically anyways. Hood would have qualified i think. i really have no idea what it would be ranked if you took out those five guys. they were all 4 stars, but take them out and that still leaves 14 four stars and two five stars. so total, not counting academic casualties, UA had 25 total (which i think Rivals bases it on your top 25 anyways). Notre Dame ranked #2 with 23 signees, Florida ranked #3 with 22 signees, Ohio State ranked #4 with 20 signees, and Miami ranked #5 with 33 signees. i have no idea what casualties any of those teams had, and i have no idea the formula they use to assess points to each player at each position. i think we would probably still be #1, and if not at least in the top 3 probably. just my .02 and before you go all "Rivals is biased" on me, here's an article from Scout: http://cfn.scout.com/2/766383.html that isn't what ESPN says. that isn't what ESPN says regarding which part of my post? about where we might be when you minus academics? well, ESPN ranked UA #3. how they rank Clemson #2 when Rivals and Scout both ranked them 12 and 11 respectively, i have no idea. how many times have people on this board talked about how clueless ESPN is? Miami was ranked #1 by ESPN, and at least you could make an argument there as they had a class comparable to Alabama. you have to remember that if you are going to penalize Alabama for ineligibility or guys going MLB, you have to do the same with everybody else. good luck with that. either way you cut it, i think we pulled in a talented class. its nice to be able to lose four 4* guys and not even be worried about it and have plenty of talent left in the class. thats a luxury not every school has. i was just pulling your chain. i could care less either way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runswithscissors 33 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 there were only three that did not qualify academically, and that was Murphy, Lewis and Bolton. i don't think Murphy will ever play a down for UA. i think the reporter in the linked story was incorrect about Lewis appealing, as a story on BOL advises it was a rumor and that he was not going to appeal (it has long been known he was going to be a casualty). Bolton has already enrolled in JUCO. Hood and Ray opted for MLB, but honestly Ray probably would not have qualified academically anyways. Hood would have qualified i think. i really have no idea what it would be ranked if you took out those five guys. they were all 4 stars, but take them out and that still leaves 14 four stars and two five stars. so total, not counting academic casualties, UA had 25 total (which i think Rivals bases it on your top 25 anyways). Notre Dame ranked #2 with 23 signees, Florida ranked #3 with 22 signees, Ohio State ranked #4 with 20 signees, and Miami ranked #5 with 33 signees. i have no idea what casualties any of those teams had, and i have no idea the formula they use to assess points to each player at each position. i think we would probably still be #1, and if not at least in the top 3 probably. just my .02 and before you go all "Rivals is biased" on me, here's an article from Scout: http://cfn.scout.com/2/766383.html that isn't what ESPN says. that isn't what ESPN says regarding which part of my post? about where we might be when you minus academics? well, ESPN ranked UA #3. how they rank Clemson #2 when Rivals and Scout both ranked them 12 and 11 respectively, i have no idea. how many times have people on this board talked about how clueless ESPN is? Miami was ranked #1 by ESPN, and at least you could make an argument there as they had a class comparable to Alabama. you have to remember that if you are going to penalize Alabama for ineligibility or guys going MLB, you have to do the same with everybody else. good luck with that. either way you cut it, i think we pulled in a talented class. its nice to be able to lose four 4* guys and not even be worried about it and have plenty of talent left in the class. thats a luxury not every school has. i was just pulling your chain. i could care less either way. well, like i said, if they say its the #1 class fine, if not fine. either way i think we brought in a talented group. the real test will be when they get on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proud Tiger 4,261 Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 well, like i said, if they say its the #1 class fine, if not fine. either way i think we brought in a talented group. the real test will be when they get on the field. In all your ramblings, that's the smartest thing you've ever said. Quit while you are ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prowler 1 Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 At some point in August, Rivals will come out with a Updated Rankings for last year's teams, minus players that are going JUCO, Prep, or elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
autigers1 0 Posted July 9, 2008 Share Posted July 9, 2008 well, like i said, if they say its the #1 class fine, if not fine. either way i think we brought in a talented group. the real test will be when they get on the field. In all your ramblings, that's the smartest thing you've ever said. Quit while you are ahead. Hey dude where did you get that pic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.