Each service uses its own set of criteria, and thus, no set of rankings is ever exactly the same. Recruiting rankings are inherently an inexact science so each talent evaluator is going to have differing opinions about certain players and their long-term potential.
The biggest factor, according to the experts, is a prospect's game film. This is where the experts can get the best feel for a player's actual ability in the flow of a game. For the majority of the recruiting experts, this is preferred to combines and camps. However, one potential downside is with the rise of Hudl and xOS, recruiting analysts now have to wade through more game film and highlight tape than ever before. (ESPN-Luginbill has a system to avoid the overload)
Rivals.com puts the most emphasis on camp$ and combine$ out of the four major recruiting services.
ESPN reviews the game film and then breaks it down to a "hit tape," which according to national recruiting director Tom Luginbill, culls from three to four games and is "comprised of really good plays, really poor plays and mediocre plays." Luginbill then uses that information to put together the most comprehensive evaluation for each recruit out of the major services.
BTW, anyone can pull up the film (which I do)and watch it for themselves, while being at all the various camps is not realistic. For the blindly trusting and or the paid $hills, taking the word of others is always an easy/lazy option...
ESPN Recruit Rankings:
Rare prospects: 100-90 [Five stars] - (they hand out the least at only 20 per class)
These players demonstrate rare abilities and can create mismatches that have an obvious impact on the game. These players have all the skills to take over a game and could make a possible impact as true freshmen. They should also push for All-America honors with the potential to have a three-and-out college career with early entry into the NFL draft.
Outstanding prospects: 89-80 [Four stars]
These players have the ability to create mismatches versus most opponents and have dominant performances. These players could contribute as a true freshmen and could end up as all-conference or All-America candidates during their college careers and develop into difference-makers over time.
Good prospects: 79-70 [Three stars]
These players show flashes of dominance, but not on a consistent basis -- especially when matched up against the top players in the country. Players closer to a 79 rating possess BCS-caliber ability and the potential to be a quality starter or all-conference player. Players closer to a 70 rating are likely non-BCS conference caliber prospects.
Solid prospects: 69-60 [Two stars]
These players are overmatched versus the better players in the nation. Their weaknesses will be exposed against top competition, but have the ability to develop into solid contributors at the non-BCS FBS level and could be a quality fit for the FCS level of play.
============
And as I've already said, use whichever underwear service that FITS YOUR OWN BIAS.
But I'm sticking with the 'Professionals' that have actually 'been there and done that.'
3* Dan finally got his first player in rivals top 250 when the lizzerds flipped Ole piss recruit Black ( my guess he flips back)
3* Dan currently sits at #35 in rivals recruiting rankings
