best political essays of all time
custom essay writers cheapoair
buying college papers unethical advertisements
old english writing system
how to get my research paper done for you
global history homework help
short essays famous writers
professional curriculum vitae writing service ukulele
executive resume writing services toronto mayor
custom dissertation help statistics
i don want to write my essay
library homework help philadelphia address
cheap resume writing services in phoenix
professional resume writing services albany ny airport
community of writers essay
social work personal statement helper
resume of a sales professional
how to write a language analysis essay conclusion
essay about how to help the poor
college level essay buy online
cheap essays to buy
where can i get tamil essays
order zig zag rolling papers
adhd homework help
buy a college report cover
make or buy decision case study
top 10 essay writing service
will someone write my paper
an essay about science in the service of man
report writing for high school students
military resume writer reviews interstellar
essay clear sitemap
torrance library homework helper
resumen cnp770 la toja
resume writing services creative industry jamaica
mba dissertation proposal help wanted
short essay on help the nation
writing a report on an article
essay help usa
beowulf study and homework help
academic writing in english
birth order research paper thesis statements
buy blunt papers
dissertation writing services in south africa
customized paper goods
buy essays best safeties
write my essay please
dissertation database online
buy coloured paper online nz brokers
internal medicine personal statement helper
how to write a thesis essay english about myself
scrap paper buyer in the philippines
assignment help canberra
buy cheap essay papers for sale
custom writing companies
letter writing help uk
resume professional writers com reviews
homework help toronto
custom assignment operator c assignment
hotel service thesis
best custom term paper sites like craigslist
best custom essay writing sites
cover letter customer service airline agent
essay about helping friends through divorce
essay writer orders
paperback writer t shirt
cover letter help monster high dress
resume writing services columbia maryland map
cv and cover letter service ukraine
write my essay please forgive me
write legal essays and addresses
can someone revise my essay
resume writer wizard
buy thesis phd
cover letter for at home customer service
resume professional writers company cbc
what to write my argumentative essay about
scholarships for high school seniors 2013 in california
gopalan enterprises required entertainment service provider at bengalurubangalore
professional resume writers newcastle evening
personal statement help lawyer
help me with my homework proxy settings
your aztec homework helper
custom paper coffee cups canada revenue
writing agency briefs
how to write up an ib lab report
how to write an introduction for a literary analysis essay
research report on consumer buying behaviour theory
pay to do hw
language arts homework help
english essay editing services
scrap paper buyer
how to write timed essays faster
resume writers beaverton oregon weather
best term paper writers
writing literature reviews galvan
buy a paper map
business english writing reports
who are the best resume writing service
how to write essay about chlamydia
college essay writers block game
financial services bill research paper
buy paper patterns online uk nationwide
who can help me write my dissertation for me
mba essays
how to write an analysis and conclusion for lab report
where to buy paper napkins
stamp paper purchase in delhi
doctoral dissertation writing help
essay on how can we help others
buy my roses paper roses lyrics marie
professional essay writing uk
how to write a thesis for a character analysis essay
who to write about for college essay
resume writing services ottawa canada
where to buy papers in montreal
essay on our helpers photos
buy power points online
order an essay
order credit report online
primary homework help roman shields history
essay writing help australia
custom personal essays for dental school
professional resume writers in pittsburgh pa
resume writing services york pa obituaries
write my term paper mill saveall
umi dissertation services ann arbor michigan county
nursing essay writing service australia
online essay helper paragraph
best place to buy paper online
resume writing service orlando fl
lutron homeworks help boston
resume services in minneapolis mn the senser
writers block essay due tomorrow meaning
where to buy raw organic rolling papers
the best american essays of the century summaries
custom home workout
inspired by the power of community service essays
custom homework assignments
hire fiction ghostwriter
persuasive essays high school students
how to write a good conclusion for a character analysis essay
australianessay writers strike
purchase disney paper stock
where do i get a copy of my divorce papers
homework help apls
is homework harmful or helpful arguments for euthanasia
where to buy digest paper
resume service london ontario hotels
buy paper flower bouquets
 

Thomas Goldkamp Media

  • Increase font size
  • Default font size
  • Decrease font size

Which recruiting service is the best - An analysis of the ESPN, Rivals and Scout rankings

Thomas Goldkamp Bio

A beat reporter covering the Florida Gators for GatorCountry.com. Previous experience as an intern at Rivals.com and as a freelancer for the Palm Beach Post. Extensive background in mathematics, having spent two years studying electrical engineering at UF.


Methodology

To come up with a way to objectively determine how well the recruiting services fared each year in their rankings, it was necessary to come up with a concrete system and formula to rank the recruits themselves.

GRADING SCALE
5All-American Player
4All-Conference Player
3Full-time Starter
2Occasional Starter
1Rare Starter / Career Backup
0Never Contributed

What I've done here is create a grading scale for each college prospect and given them a grade from 0-5 based on their performance in college. These grade levels are shown on the table to the right.

After assigning a grade to each player that was ranked by one of the major services, I took two steps to rank the services.

First, I compiled a raw score. This is the total points the recruiting service earned based on the performance of the players it had ranked in its Top 100.

The second calculation is a weighted score. This takes into account where a recruiting service ranked a particular prospect. The higher a player was ranked in the Top 100, the more points he earns in this calculation. The top-ranked prospect in each class earns whatever he graded out at times a multiplier of 1. Players further down the Top 100 have their grade multiplied by a decreasing fraction of 1. (For example: No. 1 Prospect's grade is multiplied by 1.00, No. 2 Prospect's grade is multiplied by 0.99, No. 3 Prospect's grade is multiplied by 0.98, etc.).

This rewards the services for ranking players who went on to have great careers higher on their board. The better the weighted score, the more players the service had high in its ranking who turned out to be stars.

Around this time every year, hard-core college football fans scour the Internet for the latest recruiting news, hoping their team will reel in the next class of superstars.

Every year, more recruitniks appear, to the point where seemingly everyone who follows college football is buzzing about where their team's commits are ranked in this recruiting service or that one.

Inevitably, opposing fans begin to argue which recruiting service is more reliable - more trustworthy - in order to prop up their recruiting haul even more.

But which service is the best? Is there any definitive data to prove one way or the other that one service gets it right more often than the others?

To attempt answer that question, I devised a formula to quantify the success each service has at accurately ranking prospects.

Like recruiting, it's a bit of an inexact science. Simply put, there are too many factors to have a black-and-white answer about which recruiting service is the best.

With that in mind, I'll explain my methodology for ranking the services and provide some results that I've found based on my research of the Top 100 prospects in each recruiting service from 2005-2007.

There are a couple reasons I chose this date range. First, ESPN did not start doing recruiting rankings until 2006. I wanted to include ESPN in the study, so it made sense to incorporate the 2006 and 2007 classes.

I stopped at 2007 because there are still a handful of players in the 2008 class who have not reached their potential based on transfers, injuries, etc.

I would like to go back all the way to 2002 to compare Rivals and Scout. However, I was unable to find Scout's Hot 100 for 2003 or 2004 (not available on their site). Since those two years were unavailable, I decided not to rank the 2002 class because I wouldn't be able to identify trends as easily as if the data were contiguous.

If and when I can get my hands on a copy of Scout's Hot 100 from those two years, I will extend the study to include 2002-04. It may not be immediate due to the immense amount of time it takes to research each of these players, but I will do it at some point in the future. If you can provide me with a copy of one of these lists, please inform me on Twitter at @ThomasGoldkamp.


2005 ACCURACY RESULTS
Service Raw Score Weighted Score
Scout298158.66
Rivals297159.25

2005 RECRUITING RESULTS
RivalsScout
All-American1312
All-Conference3031
Full-time Starter2729
Occasional Starter108
Rare Starter / Career Backup1111
Never Contributed99

2006 ACCURACY RESULTS
Service Raw Score Weighted Score
Rivals294163.27
Scout289158.44
ESPN280155.72

2006 RECRUITING RESULTS
ESPNRivalsScout
All-American141716
All-Conference151514
Full-time Starter323133
Occasional Starter202120
Rare Starter / Career Backup141414
Never Contributed523

2007 ACCURACY RESULTS
Service Raw Score Weighted Score
Rivals291153.61
Scout262141.70
ESPN244130.33

2007 RECRUITING RESULTS
ESPNRivalsScout
All-American6109
All-Conference192521
Full-time Starter303128
Occasional Starter161719
Rare Starter / Career Backup161613
Never Contributed13210

AVERAGE ACCURACY RESULTS
RawWeighted
Rivals294158.71
Scout283153.10
ESPN262143.03

AVERAGE RECRUITING RESULTS
ESPNRivalsScout
All-American1013.312.3
All-Conference1723.322
Full-time Starter3129.730
Occasional Starter181615.7
Rare Starter / Career Backup1513.712.7
Never Contributed94.37.3

Analysis of the 2005, 2006 and 2007 recruiting rankings

During the course of the three-year span I investigated, one service performed better than the other two.

However, the differences were minimal between the top two recruiting services. While many fans claim that one service is significantly better than another, actual results showed that the top two are similar, while the third is not far behind.

So which service actually came out on top for this three-year period?

According to my research on each prospect ranked in the Top 100 from 2005-07, Rivals.com provided the most accurate rankings.

In each of the three years, Rivals finished first in the weighted calculation from my formula. Rivals also finished first in raw score in two of the three years, with Scout edging Rivals for first in raw score in 2005 by one point.

This means that Rivals was the best at getting players that finished with a great college career high on its board.

Rivals finished with one more All-American on its board than Scout in each of the three years, while finishing with more All-Conference players in its Top 100 ranking in two of the three years.

On the other end of the spectum, ESPN finished with less All-Americans and more busts (Grade 0) than both Rivals and Scout in its first two years ranking prospects. It will be interesting to see how Rivals and Scout fared in their first two years ranking prospects (2002 and 2003) in comparison to ESPN's first years. Naturally, one would assume there is a learning curve and the services will improve with more experience ranking prospects from year to year.

Thus, ESPN's finish in these rankings is not altogether surprising.

Perhaps the most concrete piece of information to come out of my study is that Rivals has done an exceptional job of avoiding ranking future busts. Rivals averaged 3.0 less busts per year than Scout and 5.7 less than ESPN over the three-year span.

When you take into account the fact that several of these busts have been the result of career-ending injuries or off-field situations that are completely unpredictable, Rivals' track record of avoiding these players in its rankings is even more impressive. More research from 2002-04 and in future recruiting classes will be particularly interesting given that this success on Rivals' part could be due to the small sample size.

In terms of the actual year-to-year differences in recruiting classes, there are some interesting notes to be gleaned from my research.

First, there's a different makeup in each class as a whole. In 2006, there were more All-Americans but less All-Conference players than in the other two years.

At the same time, there were significantly less busts in 2006 than there were in either of the other two years. Rivals was the only service over the three-year period to avoid double-digit busts (players who never contributed) in each year.

You can visually compare how each service stacked up by sorting the tables I have provided for each year. I have color coded each grade level so that it is easy to see how each recruiting service fared in its Top 100 ranking.

The more green and less red you see near the top of the table for each service, the better the service did in ranking top prospects near the top of its board.

Information for sorting these tables by recruiting service Top 100, individual player grades or alphabetically by player can be found on the links provided to each year's chart at the bottom of this page.

If you notice any problems with any of my individual player rankings or calculations, please contact me on Twitter at @ThomasGoldkamp. I would like this to be completely accurate and will update it if I have made any mistakes.

General comments should also be directed to my Twitter account.

2005 Recruiting Chart | 2006 Recruiting Chart | 2007 Recruiting Chart