https://247sports.com/LongFormArticle/C ... 147974176/


Coaches need to pin this one up. Not even a vote.

Uphill battle every year I'm afraid until we either realign conferences or our conference peers are consistently getting votes and or rankings each year. The chances that we will ever be considered as strong as Boise or the AAC frontrunners (preseason anyway) are slim to none until that happens. We'll get there, anybody who is associated with this program knows that we'll get there. At least now we're starting the seasons in the theoretical 30-35 range as opposed to the 50-55 range previously.

We have to stop losing to Ga Southern too.

Not even in receiving votes? Oof.

I need to go back and count but it always seems like there's 0-2 G5 teams in the pre-season polls even though there always end up being more in the actual end of season polls.

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

That's pretty bad, but it's also not a poll anyone actually cares about. I'm sure we'll get plenty of votes when the real polls come out in August. My guess is we'll start out right around the fringe of the rankings.

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

We'd merely "get votes" for 35-40? I can't believe there's finally a mainstream sports news franchise that's worse at their jobs than ESPN.

247 who?

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:09 am

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

We'd merely "get votes" for 35-40? I can't believe there's finally a mainstream sports news franchise that's worse at their jobs than ESPN.

I mean, i don’t know if you’re a gambler or not, but if you look at Vegas handicappers they don’t exactly have us power rated highly either. We’re a developmental program, so our past recruiting rankings do us no favors in power ratings. I’ll be using the Wisconsin game, if it happens, and to a lesser extent Wake, as a benchmark to see if this “poll” is accurate or not.

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:54 am

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:09 am

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

We'd merely "get votes" for 35-40? I can't believe there's finally a mainstream sports news franchise that's worse at their jobs than ESPN.

I mean, i don’t know if you’re a gambler or not, but if you look at Vegas handicappers they don’t exactly have us power rated highly either. We’re a developmental program, so our past recruiting rankings do us no favors in power ratings. I’ll be using the Wisconsin game, if it happens, and to a lesser extent Wake, as a benchmark to see if this “poll” is accurate or not.

That's true and I'm proud that we're a developmental program, but our recruiting rankings have exploded alongside our on-field results recently. I think we've signed our highest rated class ever 3-4 years in a row. We also return our entire team from 2019 minus RB1 and our LBers.

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:54 am

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:09 am

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

We'd merely "get votes" for 35-40? I can't believe there's finally a mainstream sports news franchise that's worse at their jobs than ESPN.

I mean, i don’t know if you’re a gambler or not, but if you look at Vegas handicappers they don’t exactly have us power rated highly either. We’re a developmental program, so our past recruiting rankings do us no favors in power ratings. I’ll be using the Wisconsin game, if it happens, and to a lesser extent Wake, as a benchmark to see if this “poll” is accurate or not.

Considering that the classes that made up last year's team were ranked 7th, 6th, 6th, 7th and 5th in the Sun Belt, we've probably reached the point where we can safely say those are not a very good predictor of results for App football. Otherwise we'd have probably gone about 5-7 last year.

Now if you want to look at analytical ratings that actually measure how well a team plays, I think most had us slightly lower than our AP/coaches rankings, but still top 25-30. Might have actually been a bit higher the year before when the defense was more consistent.

This is just a top 25 most 247 subscribers with a few token G5 thrown in. They have the typical preseason top 25 teams that inevitably end up 7-5 or worse. I can't work up being too offended.

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

I agree with the strength of schedule and I don't think we were top 20 but I think it is fair to say we were a 23-28 caliber team for sure. Most of the magazines have us in the 40s with S&S being the only one to project us in the top 25. They clearly think we should go 13-1 and if we do we will be ranked when it matters most.

With that said, the 247 and other recruiting guys don't want to make us appear to even be a top 25 team because it goes against their ratings. They rated us as a 75-105 type team in recruiting every year so they refuse to believe they messed up the evaluations of our players and underestimated our coaches ability to develop talent as much as they have. They all thought we would lose to UNC and SC and despite playing less than a perfect game and with injuries we still beat both of them. We just need to keep winning and they will eventually get on the bandwagon.

EastHallApp wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 11:30 am

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:54 am

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:09 am

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

We'd merely "get votes" for 35-40? I can't believe there's finally a mainstream sports news franchise that's worse at their jobs than ESPN.

I mean, i don’t know if you’re a gambler or not, but if you look at Vegas handicappers they don’t exactly have us power rated highly either. We’re a developmental program, so our past recruiting rankings do us no favors in power ratings. I’ll be using the Wisconsin game, if it happens, and to a lesser extent Wake, as a benchmark to see if this “poll” is accurate or not.

Considering that the classes that made up last year's team were ranked 7th, 6th, 6th, 7th and 5th in the Sun Belt, we've probably reached the point where we can safely say those are not a very good predictor of results for App football. Otherwise we'd have probably gone about 5-7 last year.

Now if you want to look at analytical ratings that actually measure how well a team plays, I think most had us slightly lower than our AP/coaches rankings, but still top 25-30. Might have actually been a bit higher the year before when the defense was more consistent.

If we are a top 25 team then we should play Wisconsin within 2 TDs or less and beat Wake Forest. We should also sweep the SBC. We also need Louisiana, Troy, GSU, etc. to have good years so those wins are seen as quality. Just being up on 80-130 caliber teams every week does not prove a team is top 25 worthy. I rather lose to Wisconsin by 7 than beat Texas State by 30. Beating Texas State that bad does not prove anything but a close loss to Wisconsin would show we are at least a legit top 25 contender.

EastHallApp wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 11:30 am

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:54 am

Gonzo wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:09 am

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

We'd merely "get votes" for 35-40? I can't believe there's finally a mainstream sports news franchise that's worse at their jobs than ESPN.

I mean, i don’t know if you’re a gambler or not, but if you look at Vegas handicappers they don’t exactly have us power rated highly either. We’re a developmental program, so our past recruiting rankings do us no favors in power ratings. I’ll be using the Wisconsin game, if it happens, and to a lesser extent Wake, as a benchmark to see if this “poll” is accurate or not.

Considering that the classes that made up last year's team were ranked 7th, 6th, 6th, 7th and 5th in the Sun Belt, we've probably reached the point where we can safely say those are not a very good predictor of results for App football. Otherwise we'd have probably gone about 5-7 last year.

Now if you want to look at analytical ratings that actually measure how well a team plays, I think most had us slightly lower than our AP/coaches rankings, but still top 25-30. Might have actually been a bit higher the year before when the defense was more consistent.

Power ratings are what they are. And they’re going to take into account recruiting class rankings. Not saying they’re spot on 100% of the time, but that’s just how the sausage is made.

AppStFan1 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 12:22 pm

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

I agree with the strength of schedule and I don't think we were top 20 but I think it is fair to say we were a 23-28 caliber team for sure. Most of the magazines have us in the 40s with S&S being the only one to project us in the top 25. They clearly think we should go 13-1 and if we do we will be ranked when it matters most.

With that said, the 247 and other recruiting guys don't want to make us appear to even be a top 25 team because it goes against their ratings. They rated us as a 75-105 type team in recruiting every year so they refuse to believe they messed up the evaluations of our players and underestimated our coaches ability to develop talent as much as they have. They all thought we would lose to UNC and SC and despite playing less than a perfect game and with injuries we still beat both of them. We just need to keep winning and they will eventually get on the bandwagon.

I get the gripe with 247. Pretty obvious Colston Powers was dropped from a 4 star to a 3 star simply because he committed here. But also i would say our recruiting class rankings have been warranted. Vast majority of kids on our roster do not have commitable P5 offers, and let’s face it, we’re not beating AAC schools with consistency in the recruiting trail either. I’m in the camp of the offer sheet determines your value in my eye, and our on-field performance mostly has to do with the incredible player development program we have had. All that to say, i can understand why as a POWER RATING we would be ranked say 35-40. Those 35-40 schools in front of us are gonna be P5’s who can get elite talent and G5’s like UCF. I’m fine with that at this point in our programs timeline.

We currently have a top 50 recruiting class according to 247. They are apparently working backwards and might finally be right about App State in a few years.

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 11, 2020 7:43 am

AppStFan1 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 12:22 pm

Yosef10 wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 10, 2020 7:59 am

I chirped Bud Elliot about not even receiving votes on Twitter and he did respond. Said these were more “power rankings” than the traditional top 25. Also said he didn’t believe we should have finished in the top 20 last year, he and a lot of the 247 guys put a lot of stock into the schedule, and it is hard to argue about the SBC SOS to a certain extent. Said if this was a top 35-40 we’d be at least getting votes. I let him know he could consider this as an early invite to jump on the Boise East bandwagon.

I agree with the strength of schedule and I don't think we were top 20 but I think it is fair to say we were a 23-28 caliber team for sure. Most of the magazines have us in the 40s with S&S being the only one to project us in the top 25. They clearly think we should go 13-1 and if we do we will be ranked when it matters most.

With that said, the 247 and other recruiting guys don't want to make us appear to even be a top 25 team because it goes against their ratings. They rated us as a 75-105 type team in recruiting every year so they refuse to believe they messed up the evaluations of our players and underestimated our coaches ability to develop talent as much as they have. They all thought we would lose to UNC and SC and despite playing less than a perfect game and with injuries we still beat both of them. We just need to keep winning and they will eventually get on the bandwagon.

I get the gripe with 247. Pretty obvious Colston Powers was dropped from a 4 star to a 3 star simply because he committed here. But also i would say our recruiting class rankings have been warranted. Vast majority of kids on our roster do not have commitable P5 offers, and let’s face it, we’re not beating AAC schools with consistency in the recruiting trail either. I’m in the camp of the offer sheet determines your value in my eye, and our on-field performance mostly has to do with the incredible player development program we have had. All that to say, i can understand why as a POWER RATING we would be ranked say 35-40. Those 35-40 schools in front of us are gonna be P5’s who can get elite talent and G5’s like UCF. I’m fine with that at this point in our programs timeline.

We aren't hammering the AAC badly but we have beaten them on several guys Jolly had an offer from Memphis and I know his family has said that App State blew away everyone in the AAC who recruited him.

We have have done a great job of evaluating and developing talent. My point is that we never had a 101 ranked class in reality. I would look around the SBC and there are obviously some really good players that I would have loved to have at App. We have at least been a top 2-3 class in the SBC in terms of talent and my thought was that we were more of a 55-75 type class.

If you notice these rankings are typically reactive. Clemson was never ranked super high until they got in the playoffs. They would be ranked in the 15-25 but they were nailing 3-star players pretty good and had the culture. I fully expect us to be ranked in the top 60 or so now if we keep winning but we may not have a better roster than the last two years. We may just be seeing our recruits rated more accurately.