TCU moves to 10-0. Best start in school history.

[bgrch1350]

Not trying to make a moving target, but I arbitrarily stated Top 20. With that said, you have to have NBA players to win a title. The career earnings for Brewer, Noah, Horford, Speights speak for themselves.

If you dig in your link deeper, Brewer was also the top rated 4 star at #31 - they had to cut it off at some point. There are also 17 current NBA players or lottery picks ranked ahead of him...he was a 4 star by default.

Additionally, Horford was #37 - six slots below a five star - and Noah was #75. That class was stacked.

Don't forget. Chris Richard, Dan Werner, and Walter Hodge were 4 star recruits too.

 

[bgrch1350]

http://arizona.scout.com/player/445537n-corey-brewer

Not to mention if scout had him as a 5 star and rivals had him borderline and he won a championship. Scout got the ranking right

 

[StatGeek]

Not to mention if scout had him as a 5 star and rivals had him borderline and he won a championship. Scout got the ranking right

What a joke. Still waiting on the definition.

 

[oSuJeff97]

Do some research- 2013 Louisville won the title- their leading scorer-Russ Smith. He was a 2 star post-grad. Hmmm.... Their top rebounder and 3rd leading scorer, gorgui Dieng-3 star. Something doesn't add up here..

What doesn't add up is using examples at the tail end of the distribution curve to try and "prove" that recruiting rankings don't mean anything.

Go and look at the teams that have made the Final Four and won titles in the past 10 years. Then go look at the teams that have consistently topped the recruiting rankings. I'm guessing there's going to be a pretty strong correlation.

Just because a few 2- or 3- star guys become stars or a few 4- and 5-star guys bust doesn't mean that recruiting rankings don't mean anything or are meaningless.

They certainly don't GUARANTEE anything, but, on the whole, you're going to have a greater level of success the higher your recruits are ranked.

 

[garyeb2]

These recruit rankings are like religion to some of you guys. It seems to be a faith based exercise with hard to find definitive evidence.

 

[StatGeek]

Did you know? That only 4 teams finished in the top 16 of Rivals Team Recruiting Rankings for 2011, 2012 & 2013 (Kentucky, Arizona, North Carolina & Baylor). These teams have combined for 2 final four appearances over that span (Kentucky 2011-Champs, & Kentucky 2013). During this same span UCONN--Champs, Wisconsin & Wichita State have reached the final four without being ranked in the top 16 recruiting rankings for any of those seasons.

 

[bgrch1350]

I refuse to look into the rankings of all services but I have looked into the Rivals rankings and Florida won back to back titles without a single recruit ranked in the top 30. I have no idea what some of those players were ranked on other sites. Florida had a large collection of top 150 players. One or two were ranked in the top 50 but not better than 31.

Did you know? In the history of Rivals Rankings (2003 is as far back as I could find) a #1 rated recruit has never won a National Championship. In fact, the top 3 recruits from 2003 to present have won a total of 2 championships; both by 2011 Kentucky (#2 Anthony Davis, #3 Michael Kidd-Gilchrest). In comparison, recruits ranked 98-100 have won 1 Championship during the same time period--#98 Shabazz Napier, 2013 UCONN.

I like scout so I'm going to use their rankings. I'm going to list the highest rated player that went to college.

2002 - Carmelo Anthony was the highest rated player to go to college. Won national championship
2003 - Luol Deng - final 4
2004 - Rudy Gay - lost in the 2nd rd. returned as a soph and went final4
2005 - Josh McRoberts - lost in sweet 16, returned and lost in 1st rd
2006 - Greg Oden - lost in the national championship
2007 - OJ Mayo - lost in the first rd
2008 - Samardo Samuels - lost in the elite 8, returned lost in the 1st rd
2009 - Derrick Favors - lost in 2nd rd
2010 - Harrison Barnes - lost in the elite 8, returned lost in the elite 8
2011 - Anthony Davis - national championship
2012 - Nerlens Noel - Nit (tore acl)
2013 - Andrew Wiggins - lost in 3rd rd
2014 - Jahlil Okafor - currently #2 in the country

 

[bgrch1350]

Did you know? That only 4 teams finished in the top 16 of Rivals Team Recruiting Rankings for 2011, 2012 & 2013 (Kentucky, Arizona, North Carolina & Baylor). These teams have combined for 2 final four appearances over that span (Kentucky 2011-Champs, & Kentucky 2013). During this same span UCONN--Champs, Wisconsin & Wichita State have reached the final four without being ranked in the top 16 recruiting rankings for any of those seasons.

So your goal is to make it to the final 4? Not to win a championship?

 

[bgrch1350]

These recruit rankings are like religion to some of you guys. It seems to be a faith based exercise with hard to find definitive evidence.

It's hard to look at Kentucky and think...rankings mean nothing. All they have is 5 star recruits and no team has came close to beating them yet. And then look at duke and say rankings mean nothing.

 

[Sooner04]

I like scout so I'm going to use their rankings. I'm going to list the highest rated player that went to college.

2002 - Carmelo Anthony was the highest rated player to go to college. Won national championship
2003 - Luol Deng - final 4
2004 - Rudy Gay - lost in the 2nd rd. returned as a soph and went final4
2005 - Josh McRoberts - lost in sweet 16, returned and lost in 1st rd
2006 - Greg Oden - lost in the national championship
2007 - OJ Mayo - lost in the first rd
2008 - Samardo Samuels - lost in the elite 8, returned lost in the 1st rd
2009 - Derrick Favors - lost in 2nd rd
2010 - Harrison Barnes - lost in the elite 8, returned lost in the elite 8
2011 - Anthony Davis - national championship
2012 - Nerlens Noel - Nit (tore acl)
2013 - Andrew Wiggins - lost in 3rd rd
2014 - Jahlil Okafor - currently #2 in the country

For clarity's sake: Kansas lost in the round of 32 with Wiggins in 2013. The NCAA has done away with that second round/third round nonsense this year according to Gottlieb.

Samardo Samuels. Wonder where that goof is these days.

Recruiting is a large piece of the puzzle, for sure. It's just not the only piece that some suggest it is.

 

[bgrch1350]

For clarity's sake: Kansas lost in the round of 32 with Wiggins in 2013. The NCAA has done away with that second round/third round nonsense this year according to Gottlieb.

Samardo Samuels. Wonder where that goof is these days.

Recruiting is a large piece of the puzzle, for sure. It's just not the only piece that some suggest it is.

It takes coaching to win a championship. No doubt. But college basketball isn't made up of 1 Kruger and 300 something Fords. Great coaches are everywhere and a lot of them get big time recruits. Those are the ones knocking out championships.

 

[StatGeek]

So your goal is to make it to the final 4? Not to win a championship?

I don't believe that I have ever said anything like that, but You have to make the final four to have a chance at the NC. And both groups had 1 NC.

 

[StatGeek]

It's hard to look at Kentucky and think...rankings mean nothing. All they have is 5 star recruits and no team has came close to beating them yet. And then look at duke and say rankings mean nothing.

Recruiting is important, recruiting rankings not so much.

 

[Laxtothemax12]

Siva, dieng, ware, price, Harrell 4 star recruits

Behanan, blackshear 5 star recruits

Does this add up?

Yes, they had a good supporting cast. But someone said you can't win a national title with your best player being ranked 113th out of high school, when in fact, their best player was a 2 star. I'm not arguing that you don't need highly rated recruits to get to the final four and win, but im saying that sometimes coaches see something different in those 2-3 star guys, like UL's Luke Hancock (unrated GMU commit and transfer to UL) who lit up the final four in their title year. Look at Isaiah, he was a 2-star, but do you really think he deserves a 2 star ranking now?

 

[Laxtothemax12]

What doesn't add up is using examples at the tail end of the distribution curve to try and "prove" that recruiting rankings don't mean anything.

Go and look at the teams that have made the Final Four and won titles in the past 10 years. Then go look at the teams that have consistently topped the recruiting rankings. I'm guessing there's going to be a pretty strong correlation.

Just because a few 2- or 3- star guys become stars or a few 4- and 5-star guys bust doesn't mean that recruiting rankings don't mean anything or are meaningless.

They certainly don't GUARANTEE anything, but, on the whole, you're going to have a greater level of success the higher your recruits are ranked.

I never said they don't mean anything. Look at 2009-10 OU- More McDonalds All-Americans combined on that team than probably ever at OU, yet they had one of the worst records in school history. I know that's an outlier and so was the UL example, but it does prove that you CAN win with a star player who wasn't highly valued in high school.

 

[NickZepp]

This thread turned into saying OU isn't recruiting top players which is true but it started out about comparing OU and TCU and someone saying that TCU has better recruits or something. TCU doesn't have the talent OU has. OU has enough talent to possibly win the conference. Does anyone really think that TCU has that talent?

Does OU have an NBA talent? Do they have the talent to win it all? Maybe not on both but neither does TCU.

 

[jerry]

Get back to me when TCU beats someone.

 

[DenverSooner]

Did you guys hear Manzer say TCU would not finish in the top half of the conference but would upset people in Ft Worth.

 

[NickZepp]

Did you guys hear Manzer say TCU would not finish in the top half of the conference but would upset people in Ft Worth.

That could be true. They may even win enough to make the NCAA Tournament in a tough conference like the Big 12.

 

[bgrch1350]

Yes, they had a good supporting cast. But someone said you can't win a national title with your best player being ranked 113th out of high school, when in fact, their best player was a 2 star. I'm not arguing that you don't need highly rated recruits to get to the final four and win, but im saying that sometimes coaches see something different in those 2-3 star guys, like UL's Luke Hancock (unrated GMU commit and transfer to UL) who lit up the final four in their title year. Look at Isaiah, he was a 2-star, but do you really think he deserves a 2 star ranking now?

"No. I'm saying if your team is led by the 113th player and guys who aren't even ranked. You have no chance at winning a national championship."

This was what I said. Notice the 'and'.

I named 7 or 8 guys who were ranked on that team. 2 5 star recruits to be exact.

I'm not saying guys can't turn out higher or lower then their rankings. I'm saying. The championship teams have 7 guys on the roster that were top 100 players.