[washingtonismoney]

Last year, posters here and on ESPN said Rivals was best at ranking players accurately and ESPN was the worst, but who knows. It could change from year to year.

Historically Rivals has been the best. ESPN is quirky, but has three distinct biases: they take extreme positions on certain players, relative to the average (Jordan Perez is a four-star player on ESPN, for example); and they like players who play in the southeast and who play in the Under Armour All-American game (which -- surprise! -- they broadcast). Obviously, as you say, with personnel changes and just plain luck, those league tables could bounce around. Still, my favorite now is 247's composite rating, which combines the ratings of the four major recruiting services. Helps work out those uncorrelated errors.

(#1 in conference, #16 in the country by that rating.)

[washingtonismoney]

Last year, posters here and on ESPN said Rivals was best at ranking players accurately and ESPN was the worst, but who knows. It could change from year to year.

Historically Rivals has been the best. ESPN is quirky, but has three distinct biases: they take extreme positions on certain players, relative to the average (Jordan Perez is a four-star player on ESPN, for example); and they like players who play in the southeast and who play in the Under Armour All-American game (which -- surprise! -- they broadcast). Obviously, as you say, with personnel changes and just plain luck, those league tables could bounce around. Still, my favorite now is 247's composite rating, which combines the ratings of the four major recruiting services. Helps work out those uncorrelated errors.

(#1 in conference, #16 in the country by that rating.)