As the number of recruiting sites continues to grow, the emerging chasm between individual prospect ratings is quite concerning.
Here’s why: When Moody’s provides a rating to a bond, company, or municipality, the other two rating agencies tend to either agree or have a minor discrepancy that is explained thoroughly.
However, the evaluation of Zollers is all over the place. On3 has him as a borderline five star. 247 and ESPN as a high four star and top 100 recruit.
But rivals not only has him as a low 4 star but the 24th ranked QB.
Now am I upset because this is a rivals account and it impacts our team rating. Truly, not at all.
What is concerning is the so called “evaluators” from Rivals have a radically different perspective than the consensus. If that’s the case, we should have a detailed explanation why.
Thoughts?
Here’s why: When Moody’s provides a rating to a bond, company, or municipality, the other two rating agencies tend to either agree or have a minor discrepancy that is explained thoroughly.
However, the evaluation of Zollers is all over the place. On3 has him as a borderline five star. 247 and ESPN as a high four star and top 100 recruit.
But rivals not only has him as a low 4 star but the 24th ranked QB.
Now am I upset because this is a rivals account and it impacts our team rating. Truly, not at all.
What is concerning is the so called “evaluators” from Rivals have a radically different perspective than the consensus. If that’s the case, we should have a detailed explanation why.
Thoughts?
