We have a higher star average with these recruits than UConn and only slightly behind Boise State. Not bad for a program that hasn't seen the top 25 since 1968.

...and that was after losing a 3 star and 4 star on the last day.

I personally put more much more stock in Rivals rankings than scout.com rankings, and I put ESPN's rankings in between. I suspect scout's rating at the high end (4-5 stars) are fine, but there are just so many 2-star rankings that they don't even look at, that none of their rankings can mean much. At least rivals tries to make some distinction in the 2-3 star groups (2 star can be 5.2, 5.3, or 5.4, 3-star can be 5.5, 5.6, or 5.7). Thus, at Rivals, a team with generally good 2-star athletes (all 5.4) would rate higher than one with generally weaker ones (all 5.2). At Scout they'd all look the same, just a big heap of 2-stars.

I would add that rivals no longer gives team rankings below 50 because they recognize that such rankings aren't going to be very accurate. Scout, meanwhile blunders on ranking all the way to 120. The higher you get in either ranking, though, the more accuracy there will be.

I also have a really good feeling about this class watching their highlights. I think this is the best class I have seen come to Ohio since I began following our recruiting about 15 years ago.