- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
247 transfer portal rankings, (do not deduct transfers out) LSU #1 now
Posted on 12/28/24 at 4:15 pm
Posted on 12/28/24 at 4:15 pm
I generally like 0n3 but it doesn’t make sense to deduct transfer out to me, you don’t deduct people who leave from your recruiting class. If they transfer out 90% they can’t get playing time for whatever reason, so you maybe losing some depth but that’s it, and no one has that now.
247 football transfer rankings
247 football transfer rankings
11
Posted on 12/28/24 at 4:18 pm to TutHillTiger
Not sure why deducting guys who didn’t play would have such an impact. The only guys who played at all who left were Daniels and Ryan who wasn’t very good
Posted on 12/28/24 at 4:24 pm to TutHillTiger
It’s meaningless, who cares
Posted on 12/28/24 at 4:34 pm to TutHillTiger
quote:
generally like 0n3 but it doesn’t make sense to deduct transfer out to me, you don’t deduct people who leave from your recruiting class.
Sure they do, If you're # 1 and then lose the the top recruit who committed to you, you will drop in the rankings.
But you are not comparing apples to apples. Transfers out are a loss to your team. The only real question is whether they are properly accounting for the value of players who leave but never really played.
I will say that I get both rankings. ON3 should show both.
Posted on 12/28/24 at 5:08 pm to mdomingue
If the players transferring out did not contribute to the team or doesn’t hurt the team then it shouldn’t hurt their portal rankings. Sorry but the On3 ranking system is stupid.
Posted on 12/28/24 at 5:26 pm to TutHillTiger
Transfers out matter and I’m glad they are trying to do this. I just think the transfer ratings are suspect.
Posted on 12/28/24 at 5:36 pm to chadr07
quote:
If the players transferring out did not contribute to the team or doesn’t hurt the team then it shouldn’t hurt their portal rankings.
If a player is a high-value player who did not play for any number of reasons but was expected to be a contributor in the next season, why shouldn't they count?
But I think we agree more than we disagree here, which is why I said
quote:
The only real question is whether they are properly accounting for the value of players who leave but never really played.
I suspect ON3 will tweak the portal math as time goes on to try to get a better representation.
Posted on 12/28/24 at 5:43 pm to TutHillTiger
I mean if we had some sort of WAR stat we could do net WAR but we dont.
So its just dudes making up ratings
So its just dudes making up ratings
Posted on 12/28/24 at 5:48 pm to mdomingue
quote:they are only a loss in the literal definition of the word. Other than that, 90% of the kids that leave LSU, usually have yet to show promise.
Transfers out are a loss to your team.
quote:The answer is HELL NO!
The only real question is whether they are properly accounting for the value of players who leave but never really played.
Posted on 12/28/24 at 5:54 pm to mdomingue
Ole miss lost a good bit and didn’t really add much. Does LSU losing sage and them Gaining Sage hurt us and help them? Maybe on paper but the dude was a liability on the field. They signed Womack, who may or may not amount to anything. They lost a 4 star OT to FSU.
It really doesn’t matter because it’s about filling needs, but their math seems like throwing shite at a wall.
It really doesn’t matter because it’s about filling needs, but their math seems like throwing shite at a wall.
Posted on 12/28/24 at 5:57 pm to DCtiger1
quote:
It really doesn’t matter because it’s about filling needs, but their math seems like throwing shite at a wall.
I do think that is pretty accurate
Posted on 12/28/24 at 6:31 pm to TutHillTiger
My only issue with deducting transfers out is the same as transfers in, the ratings are going to be skewed. A 5* WR from two years ago that has played a few downs but never recorded any catches and only a couple of drops is nowhere near a 5* receiver today. An average player at best.
Posted on 12/28/24 at 7:05 pm to LSUSkip
That is factored in to the rating
Posted on 12/28/24 at 8:27 pm to TutHillTiger
We also have the second highest average per player ranking
Posted on 12/28/24 at 8:31 pm to TutHillTiger
People get way, way too caught up in rankings. They matter to an extent, but the semantics of being #1 on a site and not on another is so irrelevant
Posted on 12/28/24 at 9:41 pm to TutHillTiger
quote:
If they transfer out 90% they can’t get playing time for whatever reason
I mean that's not necessarily true...
Posted on 12/28/24 at 10:12 pm to TutHillTiger
Oregon, Bama, Miami all have higher average rated players. A better eval imo
Posted on 12/28/24 at 10:46 pm to 23hella
Bit without seeing any notable playing time for 2 years, it's impossible to actually have any idea of how to rate someone properly.
Posted on 12/28/24 at 11:47 pm to TutHillTiger
The blue chip ratio right before the season begins might be the most accurate metric for the talent level on current college football rosters that include all high school recruiting and net transfers. 7 of the top 16 blue chip ratio teams are in the CFB playoffs.
Posted on 12/29/24 at 5:36 am to Lester Earl
quote:
It’s meaningless, who cares
I don’t know what’s their infatuation with recruiting rankings
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News