Scout 2013 updated rankings by position
- Thread starter dirtroadlizard
- Start date
It's not you. Of the four major recruiting sites Scout is easily at the bottom of the list IMHO.
We can agree to disagree about who is the best , but I don't think there is any debate about who is the worst (Scout), unless, of course, you throw maxpreps into the equation. Maxpreps is painfully bad. As an example, they ranked Gunner Kiel #2, Zeke Pike #50 and Eddie Williams #83 overall.
I'm probably the only one, but I put the most stock in ESPN's player rankings (although the difference isn't that notable).
If you look back over the last few years, all the other services tend to move their initial rankings closer to what ESPN had from the beginning. Just this year, for example, ESPN started Zeke Pike as a 3-star at a time when every other service had him as a borderline 5-star player (below is ESPN's statement about Zeke Pike when they first released their rankings). By the end of the year, his ranking plummeted on the other sites, and they were saying the same things that ESPN had said 6+ months earlier. Another player that started much lower on ESPN was Brent Calloway. By the end of the year, the rest of the services had dropped him closer to where ESPN had him (though he was still pretty high on all the services).
Finally, if you look at Brandon Greene and Adrian Hubbard, ESPN had them highly rated very early in the process, while they were not even on the radar of the other services until much later.
With all of that said, I look at ESPN, 247 and Rivals collectively and don't believe any one of those is inherently better than the others. However, I would like to see the size of their staffs and their budgets to know who is doing the most due diligence.
******
Tom Luginbill in response to a question about Zeke Pike being a 3-star: "Watch Pike on tape and watch him in person which I have done in person on 3 separate occasions. I feel very confident we got this one right. Also, if you want to compare for yourself. Go to Youtube, watch QB Nate Sudfeld on tape and his workout video and do the same with Pike and makethe decision for yourself. One guy claims to have 30 offers, the other has 3 and I can tell you which one is better."
Corey Long on the same issue: "I saw Zeke at the Columbus Elite 11 and I thought he struggled. He threw the ball a little better at the NFTC that next day, which showed me the kid's ability to bounce back a little, but overall he did not look like a top-flight quarterback to me."
I'm probably the only one, but I put the most stock in ESPN's player rankings (although the difference isn't that notable).
If you look back over the last few years, all the other services tend to move their initial rankings closer to what ESPN had from the beginning. Just this year, for example, ESPN started Zeke Pike as a 3-star at a time when every other service had him as a borderline 5-star player (below is ESPN's statement about Zeke Pike when they first released their rankings). By the end of the year, his ranking plummeted on the other sites, and they were saying the same things that ESPN had said 6+ months earlier. Another player that started much lower on ESPN was Brent Calloway. By the end of the year, the rest of the services had dropped him closer to where ESPN had him (though he was still pretty high on all the services).
Finally, if you look at Brandon Greene and Adrian Hubbard, ESPN had them highly rated very early in the process, while they were not even on the radar of the other services until much later.
With all of that said, I look at ESPN, 247 and Rivals collectively and don't believe any one of those is inherently better than the others. However, I would like to see the size of their staffs and their budgets to know who is doing the most due diligence.
******
Tom Luginbill in response to a question about Zeke Pike being a 3-star: "Watch Pike on tape and watch him in person which I have done in person on 3 separate occasions. I feel very confident we got this one right. Also, if you want to compare for yourself. Go to Youtube, watch QB Nate Sudfeld on tape and his workout video and do the same with Pike and makethe decision for yourself. One guy claims to have 30 offers, the other has 3 and I can tell you which one is better."
Corey Long on the same issue: "I saw Zeke at the Columbus Elite 11 and I thought he struggled. He threw the ball a little better at the NFTC that next day, which showed me the kid's ability to bounce back a little, but overall he did not look like a top-flight quarterback to me."
I agree Scout is the weakest and I agree with za that ESPN is overall the best and I made this comment in a thread about 6-9 months ago when comparing the services. I think ESPN has seen how fast football recruiting has grown and they are spending a lot more $ on getting good people, seeing prospects and having events to evaluate prospects and promote their services.
They also have a great scouting report for each player. You used to be able to read the full report for free, but now you have to be an insider. Their tide site is also developing nicely. If they continue to get more and more unique content on that site, I'll have to consider becoming an insider.
I posted the link because there was some good information on players Bama was recruiting .I read the article and thought I would share with those that had not seen it . If you don't like Scout , then don't click the link .
Eh, honestly it's surprising that Scout is even still in business.
Fox Sports gave tens of millions for them several years ago, which turned out to be an absolute abomination of a deal. Massive overpayment to put it kindly. A lot of people thought Fox would spin them off for pennies on the dollar once the class action settled, but I guess the institutional inertia of not wanting to admit that it was such a terrible decision keeps them hanging on a bit longer.
That said, the fact that Scout is still operating off the same software platform they had running six or seven years ago, with no meaningful technological upgrades, multimedia integration, or any major additions of affiliates / scouts / writers in ages ought to tell you where they are standing. Fox might not be willing to admit defeat on this one just yet, but they have made it clear for many years now that they would not be dumping any more dollars down this black hole.
Given that, it's only a matter of time before Scout fades away. Again, really a surprise it hasn't happened to yet. They've long since been left in the dust by ESPN and Rivals, and 247 has passed them in less than two years. I don't know that they will entirely close shop in the next two or three years, but I do think you'll see them down around the MaxPreps level by 2014 or 2015.
As for ESPN, they have always been the wild card player here. The question was never ability, but Bristol's willingness to pump in the assets necessary to get the job done, and based on recent months it looks like they are willing to do just that.
They could be a gamechanger in this whole deal simply because they have such a huge brand name, an infinitely wider audience, and massive economies of scale. ESPN is barely charging 25% of the annual subscription price that the Rivals and Scouts of the world are charging, and the long-time recruiting companies can never compete at those prices.
If ESPN wants to crush them and move them out of the market, they've got the ability to do so. They can subsidize below-cost recruiting coverage with the massive amounts of money they generate everywhere else. It's just a question of how financially dedicated they are to being the one-stop shop.
Fox Sports gave tens of millions for them several years ago, which turned out to be an absolute abomination of a deal. Massive overpayment to put it kindly. A lot of people thought Fox would spin them off for pennies on the dollar once the class action settled, but I guess the institutional inertia of not wanting to admit that it was such a terrible decision keeps them hanging on a bit longer.
That said, the fact that Scout is still operating off the same software platform they had running six or seven years ago, with no meaningful technological upgrades, multimedia integration, or any major additions of affiliates / scouts / writers in ages ought to tell you where they are standing. Fox might not be willing to admit defeat on this one just yet, but they have made it clear for many years now that they would not be dumping any more dollars down this black hole.
Given that, it's only a matter of time before Scout fades away. Again, really a surprise it hasn't happened to yet. They've long since been left in the dust by ESPN and Rivals, and 247 has passed them in less than two years. I don't know that they will entirely close shop in the next two or three years, but I do think you'll see them down around the MaxPreps level by 2014 or 2015.
As for ESPN, they have always been the wild card player here. The question was never ability, but Bristol's willingness to pump in the assets necessary to get the job done, and based on recent months it looks like they are willing to do just that.
They could be a gamechanger in this whole deal simply because they have such a huge brand name, an infinitely wider audience, and massive economies of scale. ESPN is barely charging 25% of the annual subscription price that the Rivals and Scouts of the world are charging, and the long-time recruiting companies can never compete at those prices.
If ESPN wants to crush them and move them out of the market, they've got the ability to do so. They can subsidize below-cost recruiting coverage with the massive amounts of money they generate everywhere else. It's just a question of how financially dedicated they are to being the one-stop shop.
Last edited:
Again, economies of scale. They can bundle these services because the marginal costs for them of doing so are practically zero, and all of the cross-pollination of the user serves Bristol because it encourages consumers to get all of their sports news from ESPN, whether it be recruiting, NCAA Tournament speculation, fantasy, trade rumors, injury news, etc. The recruiting sites cannot compete here because the marginal cost of them adding such coverage is massive and it far outstrips their capital on hand.
FWIW, Scout.com tried this several years back and failed miserably at it. They didn't have the resources to attract the contributors necessary to support such a widespread network that dealt in NCAA, MLB, NFL, etc., so they basically wasted a bunch of money as a football recruiting site trying to be a one-stop shop for sports fans looking for news in other sports and leagues. Again, their little fiasco just underscores the notion that these small recruiting sites just can't diversify into other markets. They just don't have the resources to pull it off.
The other big advantage a company like ESPN has here is simple market reach. A company like Rivals or 247 has to give it all they have for years and years (ads, social media promotion, teasers, free trial periods, etc.) to get people to read their content. ESPN can just dump whatever they come up with on ESPNU on NSD and have a million viewers before the talking heads get through with introductions. They've always got a lingering nuclear option in this respect.
Anyway, I think the takeaway here for ESPN on the increased recruiting coverage might simply be as a way of driving cheap revenues. Think about this: If ESPN wants to show SEC football, what do they do? They have to enter into TV agreements with the SEC where they pay (literally) billions of dollars for the right to do so. But what if they want to show SEC recruiting, which also draws in massive audiences, how much do they have to pay then? Try $0.00.
Oh sure they have to spend some money for local writers and affiliate sites, plus a few talking heads to put on the air. But you keep costs low by covering only the bigger recruits and the bigger programs (which is where all of the attention is anyway), and you move forward with a viable product. It costs a few bucks, but it's pennies on the gold brick compared to what they have to spend to create revenue through traditional broadcasting ventures.
Latest threads
-
-
-
RollTide.com Nate Oats, Alabama hires Portland Trailblazers assistant Chris Fleming...
- Started by oskie
- Replies: 0
-
Any ideas on American based AT&T support- Started by AlistarWills
- Replies: 0
-
-