So why is that article about football more valid than the article I posted from Dave Telep that specifically talks about college basketball recruiting post conference realignment and how top recruits don't really care about conference?
In this thread we have seen several articles being used as evidence in favor of the poster's argument. These articles include:
An article about college football, where recruiting is entirely different as G5 schools don't have the same postseason opportunities
An article where a recruit claims he wants to play in the ACC, but ends up in the Big East
An article from 5 years ago before the American was even a conference!
All these articles are irrelevant! I don't even see how this is an ongoing argument. Can we please put it to rest. It is so obvious. Conference affiliation does matter, but it is not the most important factor. Recruiting would be easier for KO in a better conference. The ceiling is higher but we wouldn't immediately become Duke/UK. Some schools in P5's still suck at recruiting (like BC) because conference is not the only important factor. Other schools with no real advantages land a 4* every year or so and are largely benefited by their conference (Rutgers).
I would rather see BU,7774, BigErn and Stainmaster on each other than see a continuation of this tired argument.