What recruiting service do you use for the Player Rankings? For the most part have no problems with how you rank the teams based on the player rankings your using. However, IMHO the number of ranked players signed has to much impact on how Classes are ranked. For example, a team with only two players signed may be a stronger class then one with four players signed.
Also don't know how it can be evaluated, but if a highly ranked player is going to start in their Freshmen year while another has no chance of starting should be taken into consideration. How the ranked players fit the needs of the school has an impact on how strong the recruiting class is.
I used the consensus rankings that can also be found on my blog. There has been some movement in the lower half of the rankings, but they are pretty much the same. I can post the full top 200, if anyone is interested.
The only two player class that is very strong is Cal's and they made it in the top 10 right above a five-player class at Vandy and four-player classes at USC and UGA. I revamped my formula to weigh heavily on top-tier recruits and the first couple of players for each team.
I don't think there's any way to quantify the level of immediate impact each class will have at a particular school, and I wanted to use a formula that was objective and I could use with every class. Obviously UCLA and Ohio State's classes will be relied upon sooner than say Uconn or Duke's, but that doesn't weaken the classes the latter signed or lessen the impact they could have later in their careers.
