Rivals.com Top 25 Recruiting Classes (2002-Present)

[Okie35]

Here is the first part of our "Rivals at 10" package, where we look at the overall top 25 schools in recruiting rankings in Rivals.com's 10 recruiting cycles (2002-11).

To get the top 25, we simply added up where a school finished in the recruiting rankings each year from 2002-11; obviously, the lower the total, the better.

7. OKLAHOMA
Total points: 85
Coach: Bob Stoops
High: 3rd (2005)
Low: 14th (twice, most recent in 2011)
Top 10s: 7
On-field winning percentage, 2002-10: 80.3 (sixth)

The rest:
http://collegefootball.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1238729

[jumperstop]

Why 2002?

[Okie35]

Why 2002?

10 recruiting cycles, it says it. I don't know why they only chose ten but whatever.

[jumperstop]

10 recruiting cycles, it says it. I don't know why they only chose ten but whatever.

Ohh I didn't even read the article. Just looked at the rankings. I guess that would make sense...:D

[Mad Dog Madsen]

I can't believe we've never had a higher ranking than 3rd in the recruiting ranks...

[BillyBall]

They should rank the classes after they are done playing. We had 3 5 stars in Stephen Good, RJ Washington and Jermie Calhoun one year.

We had years with players like Iglesias and Bradford sitting at 3 stars. Recruiting rankings are bs, let the coaches evaluate the players not a website.

[BetterSoonerThanLater]

^true true

[PLaw]

key phrase: "where a school finished in the recruiting rankings each year from 2002-11"

Recruiting ranks according to who? Rivals, I assume, in this case. It's such BS to "rank" recruiting classes - it's just another mechanism for selling somebody's opinion. The blue bloods of college football will always be loaded and * will continue to do less with more than any of them.

The only ranking that matters is the last one that determines No. 1 and No. 2 in the final BCS poll before the bowl season.

BOOMER

[Mississippi Sooner]

Rivals isn't a bad site, all in all. They do have some pertinent information, but they also have several articles every year where the whole point seems to be blowing their own horn. They have this need to prove, no matter how twisted the logic may sometimes be, that their rankings really mean more than anyone else's.