So far on this board we have seen nothing but raves about our recruiting and denigrating remarks about Auburn's recruiting. (2009)
I have looked over the lists to date and, quite frankly, they look a lot alike. Neither could do much bragging at this time. Both have a few four stars but mostly threes.
Would someone who really knows recruiting please explain how our collection of mostly three stars is better than their collection of mostly three stars?
While this has been discussed many times on here the reasoning for many of us is that while we both have many 3 stars the TRUTH of the matter is the 3 star recruits we have landed are being recruited by most of the top programs in the SEC and in some cases the nation.
While I do not think star ratings are an indication of their true ability I do KNOW that top teams do not just throw offers out there to kids just to have their name on a list. If we land a kid who is recruited by 6 teams in the SEC and the likes of USC and OU then we land him I got to believe this kid has skills and due to his position or lack of publicity will not get the star rating..
If you also look at the players the barn is getting they are mostly skill positions while ours is the beef players who usually do not get the 4 - 5 star ratings due to the limited amount that rivals and scout are able to dish out.. Again it goes back to which schools are recruiting the players... I will take a guy who has offers from 6 SEC teams over a guy who is getting the offers from usm, troy and uab.. All you have to do is go and look at their commit list and check their profile and see who was offering them, if tubbs thinks he has landed all these under rated 5 star players he must be the only one because NONE of the big boys are after them~!~
Last edited: