I see a lot of folks a little upset over a number of our recruits dropping in the new Rivals 100 and I get it but... does it really matter? I say this because we've seen over and over again, whether a kid is no. 27 or 311, if the kid got a scholarship offer from us, our coaching staff clearly thinks they could play at the DI level, at a high level at that. As someone posted recently, so far, no plan B or C guys and we're still in the running for at least 6 or 7 highly rated kids. I'd also point out, fwiw, Andrew Nelson, named to the B1G freshman team and 2nd team freshman All American last year, was not a Rivals 100 kid- I know, just one example, but we all know there are lots of examples throughout the Country, including at Penn State. I'm not trying to start the "stars don't matter" argument, that's been debated ad nausium over the years, but at the end of the day, as JVP used to say, "worry about the ones we got"- and as Ryan said, paraphrasing, if they're in the top 100, they're very good so if Sanders and Simmons and Mennet dropped, who cares. I'd also go so far to say that as motivation, those kind of things might be useful- take Jenkins last year. He dropped significantly by the time signing day came around. MF had some pretty harsh things to say about him. So far, he's been doing very well at Penn State- does that have anything to do with the ratings drop and the sharp criticism? I have no idea but I know if I read things like that about me, I'd be a little more motivated to prove the author wrong.
Anyway, don't take it quite so seriously. We all know the only time Rivals gets it wrong, the only team they have huge bias towards, is when they over-inflate Noter Dames recruits ;-)
Anyway, don't take it quite so seriously. We all know the only time Rivals gets it wrong, the only team they have huge bias towards, is when they over-inflate Noter Dames recruits ;-)
