....it's Christmas morning 1955 and I'm 7 years old.

This is my favorite recruiting class.....so far.

Indeed.

The conference and national rankings that Rivals puts out are often head-scratchers, and Kent's ranking this year might be the strangest yet.  I'm not talking about the star ratings being suspect (though those do need to be taken with a hefty grain of salt), but actually the consistency between the star ratings and the team rankings.  

According to Rivals, Kent's 2011 class is second-to-last in the league in average stars per player, and third-to-last in total number of players signed.  And yet their class is rated third best overall?  What factors is Rivals considering besides quantity and quality of players?

LOL - the numbers never add up. There is never much correlation between the "team ratings" and the individual players, and sometimes a team with relatively low rated players is rated higher than expected as a team? Why? Who knows. In theory it may have something to do with Rivals assigning higher values to some positions than others, such as, which team best recruited to need? In the end it isn't something to worry much about - as colorado says, it doesn't mean anything.

Ohio, with 6 three-star and a 2.25 rating hasn't caught the bottom of the Big Teneleventwelve yet, Purdue, with 11 three-stars and a 2.75 average, but they can see them from there.

" It is a mistake, plain and simple.  There is no way that the numbers add up.  Don't know if they will ever correct it, but maybe it's Ok, since by all accounts on this board, ranknngs don't mean much anyway."

Scout has Kent State at the bottom of the conference ratings.