|
|
|
|
Rank | School | 99 | 98 | 97 | 96 | 95 | 94 | Total |
1 | Michigan | 4 | 2 | 4 | 7 | 7 | 4 | 28 |
2 | Florida St | 15 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 28 |
3 | Notre Dame | 8 | 3 | 9 | 6 | 1 | 7 | 34 |
4 | Florida | 7 | 7 | 3 | 13 | 3 | 14 | 47 |
5 | TENNESSEE | 13 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 18 | 1 | 56 |
6 | Southern Cal | 14 | 16 | 14 | 5 | 9 | 2 | 60 |
7 | Penn St | 28 | 11 | 2 | 1 | 6 | 12 | 60 |
8 | Ohio St | 2 | 13 | 16 | 2 | 28 | 9 | 70 |
9 | Alabama | 3 | 6 | 6 | 37 | 12 | 6 | 70 |
10 | Texas | 1 | 10 | 7 | 12 | 20 | 25 | 75 |
11 | Nebraska | 17 | 17 | 19 | 4 | 8 | 20 | 85 |
12 | Miami | 11 | 30 | 13 | 18 | 16 | 5 | 93 |
13 | Georgia | 10 | 5 | 33 | 17 | 22 | 8 | 95 |
14 | North Carolina | 12 | 12 | 10 | 40 | 13 | 11 | 98 |
15 | Texas A&M | 5 | 33 | 12 | 28 | 4 | 17 | 99 |
16 | LSU | 9 | 11 | 10 | 31 | 26 | X | 104 |
17 | UCLA | 6 | 1 | 29 | 25 | 17 | 28 | 106 |
18 | Clemson | 24 | 26 | 15 | 14 | 11 | 16 | 106 |
19 | Auburn | 27 | 39 | 20 | 22 | 5 | 27 | 113 |
20 | Stanford | 20 | 18 | 22 | 29 | 30 | 13 | 132 |
Thoughts from the Jumpmaster:
I've received numerous emails and guestbook comments asking me to rank recruits and recruiting classes. I'm not a talent scout, and seldom get to see any of these recruits play. I will leave the ranking and comparing to the so-called "Gurus". I did want to make an effort to provide some of the available information from the analysts, though. Using the links and the table above, you can get a feel for rankings from a number of different sources. The analyst I have found to be the most objective and best predictor of college success is NRA's Bobby Burton out of Austin, Texas. If a high-schooler is an NRA All-America, it's a good bet that he will play as a true freshman and become a star in major college football. Burton ranked Tennessee's '99 class a few notches higher than most other analysts did. Burton's comparison of classes is based on the Top 10-15 players in a signing class. Because of the high quality, but relatively low numbers in this year's class, the Vols fared better in Burton's rankings than in others. Another highly recommended link above is the one comparing a school's recruiting class rankings with the cumulative AP rank throughout the 1990s. Recruiting is extremely important, but high recruiting rankings don't necessarily equate to a high level of success on the field (as in the case of Notre Dame, third-best recruiting program this decade, but on average ranked only 11th in the AP Poll...and no bowl victories for the last several years). On the other extreme is Nebraska, average recruiting class rank is 14th, but the Huskers' average AP rank is #3 and they've won three National Championships this decade. Tennessee, like Nebraska, has been an "overachiever," developing our 9th-ranked recruits into the 4th-ranked AP program and playing in the BCS/Bowl Alliance National Championship game two years in a row. For what it is worth, I tell my visitors this: This is a Tennessee
Recruiting Page. Because the Vols have reached the level of perennial
SEC and National Championship contenders, they will be involved with several
of the county's most highly-regarded recruits. Any player that Phil
Fulmer and his staff offer a scholarship, is a "blue-chip" in my book,
no matter what Max Emfinger, Bill Buchalter or Jamie Newburg think.
In the future, I may expand this page to cover the national recruiting
picture. But for now, my intent is to focus solely on Tennessee's
football recruiting efforts.
|