Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2014 13:06:19 GMT -5
Looks like Big 10 getting 7 of the Top 10. 2 Wisconsin 2 Illinois 2 Texas 1 Illinois 1 Purdue 1 Nebraska 1 Stanford Well, that's not correct.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2014 13:07:26 GMT -5
Minnesota has sss in top 10
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Sept 10, 2014 13:07:51 GMT -5
Looks like Big 10 getting 7 of the Top 10. 2 Wisconsin 2 Illinois 2 Texas 1 Illinois 1 Purdue 1 Nebraska 1 Stanford Well, that's not correct. Replace the 2nd Illinois with Minnesota. I could be wrong but process of elimination.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 10, 2014 13:08:29 GMT -5
Looks like Big 10 getting 7 of the Top 10. 2 Wisconsin 2 Illinois 2 Texas 1 Illinois 1 Purdue 1 Nebraska 1 Stanford Not surprised in the slightest. We knew this was going to be a solid Big 10 recruiting year a couple years ago.
|
|
|
Post by southie on Sept 10, 2014 13:22:07 GMT -5
20. Cal 19. UCLA 18. Creighton 17. Purdue 16. USC 15. UCSB 14. Baylor 13. Oregon 12. Wisconsin 11. Texas I wonder if that's Baylor's highest ranked recruit ever . . .
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Sept 10, 2014 13:23:18 GMT -5
20. Cal 19. UCLA 18. Creighton 17. Purdue 16. USC 15. UCSB 14. Baylor 13. Oregon 12. Wisconsin 11. Texas I wonder if that's Baylor's highest ranked recruit ever . . . Probably. Oregon, UCSB and probably Creighton also getting program bests.
|
|
|
Post by sunsuphornsup on Sept 10, 2014 13:27:16 GMT -5
So who's going to get the #1 Ranked Recruiting class? Wisconsin?
|
|
PTW winner
Junior
Enter your message here...
Posts: 465
|
Post by PTW winner on Sept 10, 2014 13:39:26 GMT -5
20. Cal 19. UCLA 18. Creighton 17. Purdue 16. USC 15. UCSB 14. Baylor 13. Oregon 12. Wisconsin 11. Texas I wonder if that's Baylor's highest ranked recruit ever . . . No, they got the #2 recruit back in 2000 can't recall her name. Taylor Barnes was top 20 but Vail looks like the 2nd highest. Baylor also got this year S. Fanning who is in the 60's. I've seen both Vail and Fanning play. Vail is a freak athlete but Fanning is a much better player and a physical player. Surprised Fanning wasn't top 20. They also got a kid from Willobrook VBC a 6-2 Lefty, Fritcher who should have been top 100 easy. Lot of good kids so it's got to be hard to make this list.
|
|
|
Post by southie on Sept 10, 2014 13:39:37 GMT -5
Is the 2015 class considered stronger/weaker more/less talented than the 2014 or 2016 classes? Just wondering.
|
|
|
Post by hammer on Sept 10, 2014 13:41:14 GMT -5
So who's going to get the #1 Ranked Recruiting class? Wisconsin? Pay attention ... you'll need to ask the all knowing pelcj11, as he is the final arbiter.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbill on Sept 10, 2014 13:51:56 GMT -5
My best guess at the top 10:
10: SSS 9: Allison Bastianelli 8: Madison Dueello 7: Mikaya White 6: Alexa Smith 5: Jordyn Poulter 4: Tionna Williams 3: Yasmmen Bedart_Gani 2: Mikaela Foeke 1: Hayley Hodson
|
|
|
Post by Longhorn20 on Sept 10, 2014 13:55:40 GMT -5
My best guess at the top 10: 10: SSS 9: Allison Bastianelli 8: Madison Dueello 7: Mikaya White 6: Alexa Smith 5: Jordyn Poulter 4: Tionna Williams 3: Yasmmen Bedart_Gani 2: Mikaela Foeke 1: Hayley Hodson I think move Williams to 6 and move up Poulter and Smith and this is right on.
|
|
|
Post by badgerbreath on Sept 10, 2014 13:56:58 GMT -5
Texas and Wisco together have half of the top 12. So it really is between those two schools for top 1-2 classes, I would think. Getting top would be pretty precedent setting for the badgers.
That's said, this kind of hair splitting ranking scheme always strikes me as good to talk about, but a little bit of a fantasy of precision - especially since we're talking about potential of high school kids here. Also, big athletic types that really pound the ball, but maybe have lesser passing skills seem to get the slight nod over more well rounded players. It's hard to rank multiple skills along a single axis. I'd be more interested in where the big breaks in potential lay in this ranking, or in breakdowns by position as it doesn't seem the different positions get accorded the same weight.
I also wonder if the rankings are actually affected by the programs by whom these kids are recruited. If you have two kids with similar resumes and one happens to be recruited by Stanford, Texas and Penn St (maybe they all need setters that year but not middle blockers), and the other by Purdue, NC State and Oregon (maybe they really need a middle blockers but not setters), does the former automatically get bumped a couple positions above the latter? Is there a circularity built into the whole ranking system.
I doubt that it is a major deal, but when we start talking whether someone is in the top ten vs 10-15, I have to wonder. Maybe Wisco's performance this round is the argument against that scenario, but maybe their recruits would be ranked even higher!
Anyway, that was a spasm of conscience...sorry to be a curmudgeon. Go on...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2014 14:12:45 GMT -5
So who's going to get the #1 Ranked Recruiting class? Wisconsin? Pay attention ... you'll need to ask the all knowing pelcj11, as he is the final arbiter. I think it's gotta be Wisconsin at this point.
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Sept 10, 2014 14:17:08 GMT -5
I have to say, the blurbs about the players are becoming more and more clever as we get closer to the #1 recruit.
Also, YAY that just 1 Wisconsin recruit is on the 20-11 list. That means that both the remining recruits are in the top 10!
|
|