This guy gets it.

[animate]

http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...d-mike-holder-wants-mike-gundy-recruit-better

So, Dennis/Coker, are we barking (lol) up the wrong tree?

Should we be sending TSIO podcasts to Tig Ol Bitties Jen Cohen?

So she can squeeze Petersen's nuts a little?

Fuck!

 

[dnc]

Calling out your employee who makes 7 times more than you do. Fucking. Stupid.

It's a lot easier to find another Mike Holder.

 

[BleachedAnusDawg]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

 

[NorwegianHusky]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

According to what? Our class was #13 in the composite rankings.

 

[animate]

Calling out your employee who makes 7 times more than you do. Fucking. Stupid.

It's a lot easier to find another Mike Holder.

I agree. I just find it interesting.

Either he's got big balls... Or t. Boone Pickens has his ear and Gundy knows not to fuck with that guy.

 

[whatshouldicareabout]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

According to what? Our class was #13 in the composite rankings.

#9 for 247's own rankings, #13 using composite

 

[Swaye]

Composite ranking are utter bullshit because ESPN.

 

[DawgFader]

I used a composite bat in HS and though I was raking. Then the bat broke, which was total bullshit.

 

[bananasnblondes]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

According to what? Our class was #13 in the composite rankings.

Composite rankings are for queers

 

[WaSooner]

Calling out your employee who makes 7 times more than you do. Fucking. Stupid.

It's a lot easier to find another Mike Holder.

I agree. I just find it interesting.

Either he's got big balls... Or t. Boone Pickens has his ear and Gundy knows not to fuck with that guy.

Remember he is a man he’s 40 and have the players mama feeding them.

Oops my bad That was a few years ago

 

[FireCohen]

Let’s not pretend like we understand how composite ranking works. We need roaddawg to explain

 

[NorwegianHusky]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

According to what? Our class was #13 in the composite rankings.

Composite rankings are for queers

And?

 

[Dennis_DeYoung]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

According to what? Our class was #13 in the composite rankings.

Composite rankings are for queers

No they're not. I go by the 247 ones.

 

[dnc]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

According to what? Our class was #13 in the composite rankings.

Composite rankings are for queers

No they're not. I go by the 247 ones.

So right now you're the married straight keyboardist of a mediocre late 70's/early 80's rock band, not the gay black dude we all know and secretly lust after?

Sometims I have trouble keeping your personas straight.

 

[Dennis_DeYoung]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

According to what? Our class was #13 in the composite rankings.

Composite rankings are for queers

No they're not. I go by the 247 ones.

So right now you're the married straight keyboardist of a mediocre late 70's/early 80's rock band, not the gay black dude we all know and secretly lust after?

Sometims I have trouble keeping your personas straight.

My point was AS A GAY MAN I don't use the composite ratings. LEARN TO READ.

 

[dnc]

#9 class last year. Getting a little too alarmist around here the past month. Is the bored always like this in June? I'm too lazy to dig up old TBS threads.

According to what? Our class was #13 in the composite rankings.

Composite rankings are for queers

No they're not. I go by the 247 ones.

So right now you're the married straight keyboardist of a mediocre late 70's/early 80's rock band, not the gay black dude we all know and secretly lust after?

Sometims I have trouble keeping your personas straight.

My point was AS A GAY MAN I don't use the composite ratings. LEARN TO READ.

LOL I totally whiffed on that.

I would like to apologize to you and the entire black gay community for my ignorance.

 

[AIRWOLF]

There are pros and cons to using the Composite Rankings.

I use them for a lot of the analysis I do because there is a more robust history, because the rankings scale is more granular, and because having inputs from multiple sources ought to theoretically remove[/i] bias, rather than introduce it.

There are two problems with this, however.

The first is that the composite rankings used to be based on four independent inputs (Rivals, 24/7, ESPN and Scout). Now, with 24/7's acquisition of Scout, that is reduced to just three. That is a little less good but isn't a problem except...

that ESPN's rankings are clearly incomplete and probably without real merit on any prospects West of Texas. And now, ESPN's bad data on the West is a third of the total inputs, rather than just a quarter.

So, in general I'd say the composite rankings have value, but that for prospects and programs in the West they are problematic.

 

[dnc]

There are pros and cons to using the Composite Rankings.

I use them for a lot of the analysis I do because there is a more robust history, because the rankings scale is more granular, and because having inputs from multiple sources ought to theoretically remove[/i] bias, rather than introduce it.

There are two problems with this, however.

The first is that the composite rankings used to be based on four independent inputs (Rivals, 24/7, ESPN and Scout). Now, with 24/7's acquisition of Scout, that is reduced to just three. That is a little less good but isn't a problem except...

that ESPN's rankings are clearly incomplete and probably without real merit on any prospects West of Texas. And now, ESPN's bad data on the West is a third of the total inputs, rather than just a quarter.

So, in general I'd say the composite rankings have value, but that for prospects and programs in the West they are problematic.

The composite rankings use a hell of a lot more inputs than those. If those were all the inputs they used it might be okay. The problem is they use a shit load of inputs and (to my knowledge) have not divulged what all the inputs are. But there have been a number of cases of the composite rankings spitting out far different results than what just Scout/247/Rivals/ESPN would have.

If they've reduced down to just those (minus Scout, RIP) then that's a recent change.

 

[AIRWOLF]

I just typed a response and it disappeared, saying that it will appear after it is approved. Bravo Vanilla and Stalin!

You're right, of course. The Composite Ratings, which are on a decimal scale (with a high degree of false precision) from about 70-100, have to take into account more than 3-4 individual star ranks. I should have said those are the PRIMARY inputs. They probably take into account state and positional rankings, to some degree. And they may also make an adjustment for quality and/or quantity of offers.

But they are highly correlated with the individual ratings from each service. And they are very predictive of which players make it to the NFL.

I'd say it is the best data on recruiting overall[/i], but that it is problematic for teams and recruits in the West, especially when you get beyond just the super high-profile recruits out of California.

 

[Dennis_DeYoung]

I just typed a response and it disappeared, saying that it will appear after it is approved. Bravo Vanilla and Stalin!

You're right, of course. The Composite Ratings, which are on a decimal scale (with a high degree of false precision) from about 70-100, have to take into account more than 3-4 individual star ranks. I should have said those are the PRIMARY inputs. They probably take into account state and positional rankings, to some degree. And they may also make an adjustment for quality and/or quantity of offers.

But they are highly correlated with the individual ratings from each service. And they are very predictive of which players make it to the NFL.

I'd say it is the best data on recruiting overall[/i], but that it is problematic for teams and recruits in the West, especially when you get beyond just the super high-profile recruits out of California.

You have to love that 70-100 scale!