Fake recruit

I once signed up my dog as a potential recruit for UNC to prove to a parent an invite to a camp after filling out a profile doesn’t mean you’re being recruited. My dog got invited to the camp. 

Fake players have made Parade All American teams in the last. 

True story. Over 10 years ago, I used to get credit card applications for my dog.  If he could get his hands on one now, Amazon would be shipping treats and bones all day.

RJM posted:

I once signed up my dog as a potential recruit for UNC to prove to a parent an invite to a camp after filling out thenfor, doesn’t mean you’re being recruited. My dog got invited to the camp. 

Fake players have made Parade All American teams in

More academic money that athletic. Study up!

Go44dad posted:

RJM posted:

I once signed up my dog as a potential recruit for UNC to prove to a parent an invite to a camp after filling out thenfor, doesn’t mean you’re being recruited. My dog got invited to the camp. 

Fake players have made Parade All American teams in

More academic money that athletic. Study up!

Why would I need to study up? I know this. Both kids have grad degrees. Both kids received twice as much academic as athletic money. If an athlete wants both they better do real well in the classroom. 

RJM posted:

Go44dad posted:

RJM posted:

I once signed up my dog as a potential recruit for UNC to prove to a parent an invite to a camp after filling out thenfor, doesn’t mean you’re being recruited. My dog got invited to the camp. 

Fake players have made Parade All American teams in

More academic money that athletic. Study up!

Why would I need to study up? I know this. Both kids have grad degrees. Both kids received twice as much academic as athletic money. If an athlete wants both they better do real well in the classroom. 

I think he means your dog.

I think he was talking to his dog and hoped that his dog would let your dog know, through Weimaraner wireless. But I could be wrong. 

Beat me! Go’s dog is clearly going to be studying wildlife sustainability. 

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

Simply not true.

Please don’t use “pretty sure” as a synonym for “I’m guessing with a complete absence of information or evidence.”

Between its showcases, tournaments, and other scouting, PG sees nearly all relevant players and sees the most relevant players multiple times over multiple years. 

It gets wearying year after year to see the same tired and unwarranted whines about PG from people who think its ratings and rankings can be bought or are handed out based on random factors or favoritism. 

These allegations have been amply refuted many times on this site. Please consult the archives if you’re curious. 

Swampboy posted:

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

Simply not true.

Please don’t use “pretty sure” as a synonym for “I’m guessing with a complete absence of information or evidence.”

Between its showcases, tournaments, and other scouting, PG sees nearly all relevant players and sees the most relevant players multiple times over multiple years. 

It gets wearying year after year to see the same tired and unwarranted whines about PG from people who think it’s ratings and rankings can be bought or are handed out based on random factors or favoritism. 

These allegations have been amply refuted many times on this site. Please consult the archives if you’re curious. 

So you are telling me that a kid who only plays High School and American Legion in the middle of nowhere gets seen by PG? 

d-mac posted:

Swampboy posted:

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

Simply not true.

Please don’t use “pretty sure” as a synonym for “I’m guessing with a complete absence of information or evidence.”

Between its showcases, tournaments, and other scouting, PG sees nearly all relevant players and sees the most relevant players multiple times over multiple years. 

It gets wearying year after year to see the same tired and unwarranted whines about PG from people who think it’s ratings and rankings can be bought or are handed out based on random factors or favoritism. 

These allegations have been amply refuted many times on this site. Please consult the archives if you’re curious. 

So you are telling me that a kid who only plays High School and American Legion in the middle of nowhere gets seen by PG? 

That's not what he's saying.

He was replying to the earlier, unfounded speculation that PG would assign a rating just because a player had committed to a P5 program.

Swampboy refers to "nearly all" players; acknowledging that a few might slip through the cracks. If a player decides to play only high school and Legion, he runs the risk of not being seen and rated by PG; regardless of how good he might be.

It is annoying when people say, “So you’re telling me . . .” before launching off on a conjecture bearing no resemblance to anything I said.

No, I wasn’t telling you that. But since you brought it up . . .  

A player who plays only high school and legion ball “in the middle of nowhere” is by definition not a relevant player because he is not playing against competition that will reveal and improve his skills. Go to the legion baseball website and read the purpose of the program. It’s all about community and character. Developing players for higher competition is simply not part of its purpose. 

And since you mentioned this particular hypothetical, you might be interested to know that PG was founded to give kids in the middle of nowhere (specifically Iowa) a chance to face better competition and get scouted. They do identify a lot of talented players  in the middle of nowhere and help them find competitive venues appropriate for their talent. 

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

2020ofdad- I don’t see anything negatvie about PG in your post.  Swamp boy, “pretty sure” is synomous with “I am guessing.”  As an educated guess, scouting and ranking services such as PG have multiple sources of information they can draw from.  It’s a small community.  If a kid gets committed to a P5 without being seen by PG, by default wouldn’t that put the player in the top 500?  Again, I am just guessing...

real green posted:

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

2020ofdad- I don’t see anything negatvie about PG in your post.  Swamp boy, “pretty sure” is synomous with “I am guessing.”  As an educated guess, scouting and ranking services such as PG have multiple sources of information they can draw from.  It’s a small community.  If a kid gets committed to a P5 without being seen by PG, by default wouldn’t that put the player in the top 500?  Again, I am just guessing...

Plenty of P5 commits not in the top 500.

i have seen multiple examples of players being ranked by PG only after they commit, especially in the northeast where i have experience. I am not saying that the kids don't deserve the rankings... frankly, i think they do.  But it does happen.  and yes, not all in the top 500.  

real green posted:

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

Swamp boy, “pretty sure” is synomous with “I am guessing.”  

They mean almost entirely opposite things. 

Swampboy posted:

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

Simply not true.

Please don’t use “pretty sure” as a synonym for “I’m guessing with a complete absence of information or evidence.”

Between its showcases, tournaments, and other scouting, PG sees nearly all relevant players and sees the most relevant players multiple times over multiple years. 

It gets wearying year after year to see the same tired and unwarranted whines about PG from people who think its ratings and rankings can be bought or are handed out based on random factors or favoritism. 

These allegations have been amply refuted many times on this site. Please consult the archives if you’re curious. 

So you are saying that they definitively don’t do it? You have knowledge of this? I’m not saying that it is wrong, if they do it (which I really believe they do), because it is a pretty good assumption of where those players stand in the spectrum. It’s not an allegation...it’s an opinion and I stand by it. Stop soap boxing for PG, please. 

real green posted:

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

2020ofdad- I don’t see anything negatvie about PG in your post.  Swamp boy, “pretty sure” is synomous with “I am guessing.”  As an educated guess, scouting and ranking services such as PG have multiple sources of information they can draw from.  It’s a small community.  If a kid gets committed to a P5 without being seen by PG, by default wouldn’t that put the player in the top 500?  Again, I am just guessing...

Thanks, the PG propaganda machine is alive and well on HSBBW IT APPEARS

And for what it’s worth, I’LL agree that they do rank uncommitted players that they have seen. So like I said, I’m not saying they are doing anything wrong or nefarious, they are basically projecting based on available data, which IS synonomous with scouting.

there are certainly players in the PG database that are ranked who are seen very few times, some never. So how do they get that ranking? Do I think PG has feelers out for every “good but not great” baseball player who commits to a low D1? Not a chance. That would be an incredible waste of resources. They have to make assumptions, it’s called scouting. It doesn’t really matter if they are accurate at that level, what really matters is the top 300-400 guys who are draft prospects. Other than that, the rankings are basically a marketing tool, and an effective one.

I’d like to congratulate a young man who according to PG just committed to Wichita State. He has no PG ranking or grade, appeared at no PG events. Whenever PG resets their rankings closer to the draft, we will see just how this plays out, because His HS team can best be described as average, he is the only known recruit in his class at the school. So, if they are going to rank him, and scouts aren’t flooding the teams games to see him, how will they achieve that ranking? They will speculate based on what school has taken a chance on him. It’s not wrong, it’s just kinda how it works.

roothog66 posted:

real green posted:

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

2020ofdad- I don’t see anything negatvie about PG in your post.  Swamp boy, “pretty sure” is synomous with “I am guessing.”  As an educated guess, scouting and ranking services such as PG have multiple sources of information they can draw from.  It’s a small community.  If a kid gets committed to a P5 without being seen by PG, by default wouldn’t that put the player in the top 500?  Again, I am just guessing...

Plenty of P5 commits not in the top 500.

Are there any P5 commits in the top 500 that have never been seen directly by PG?  Again, I don't have a problem with ranking kids not seen.  As you know, there are trusted sources with in that very small circle.  

Matt13 posted:

real green posted:

2022OFDad posted:

Pretty sure PG will bump a player to “Top 1000” if they are a D1 commit of any sort, Top 500 if they are going to a P5 program. They have to use that approach because they obviously don’t get eyes on all these kids.

Swamp boy, “pretty sure” is synomous with “I am guessing.”  

They mean almost entirely opposite things. 

Sure by pure definition, but in context they can be synonymous.  

I am pretty sure he was the fastest kid at the tryouts.  

I'm guessing he was the fastest kid at the tryouts.  

There's an assumption it's based on something, not a flat out guess with zero data.  

Also, PG apparently was founded to get kids in Iowa looks. Wonderful. That’s a great and noble purpose. 

The problem with Swampboys argument is that PG won’t necessarily make an effort to see a kid who by Swampboy’s definition is “not a relevant” player. But, isn’t this exactly who you said PG was founded to help? 94% of all high school players are by definition “not relevant players” if they don’t progress to the next level, so perhaps those kids and families are wasting their time attending PG showcases or tournaments because they don’t really matter? That would really help scouts and coaches at the now extremely elite PG events that the “non-relevant” players are no longer attending, right?

swampboy, sorry and I know this will get me banned and I really don’t care. You will probably delete this post too, because it will be deemed critical if PG, the patron saint of HSBBW, where there is now no room for a dissenting opinion . Your arguement is not sound. 

2022OFDad posted:

Also, PG apparently was founded to get kids in Iowa looks. Wonderful. That’s a great and noble purpose. 

The problem with Swampboys argument is that PG won’t necessarily make an effort to see a kid who by Swampboy’s definition is “not a relevant” player. But, isn’t this exactly who you said PG was founded to help? 94% of all high school players are by definition “not relevant players” if they don’t progress to the next level, so perhaps those kids and families are wasting their time attending PG showcases or tournaments because they don’t really matter? That would really help scouts and coaches at the now extremely elite PG events that the “non-relevant” players are no longer attending, right?

swampboy, sorry and I know this will get me banned and I really don’t care. You will probably delete this post too, because it will be deemed critical if PG, the patron saint of HSBBW, where there is now no room for a dissenting opinion . Your arguement is not sound. 

 

I haven't been on the board much lately, but I'm assuming you've had some sort of bad experience with PG?

Nope

My problem is their influence on what used to be a pretty decent HS BB forum website is making it to where you cannot speak freely. They are fine with me, just have a problem when free speech is squashed because a seemingly independent website does not allow for objective, dissenting views. PG I really don’t have a beef with because they have really had no negative (or positive) impact on my non-relevant son

2022OFDad posted:

Also, PG apparently was founded to get kids in Iowa looks. Wonderful. That’s a great and noble purpose. 

The problem with Swampboys argument is that PG won’t necessarily make an effort to see a kid who by Swampboy’s definition is “not a relevant” player. But, isn’t this exactly who you said PG was founded to help? 94% of all high school players are by definition “not relevant players” if they don’t progress to the next level, so perhaps those kids and families are wasting their time attending PG showcases or tournaments because they don’t really matter? That would really help scouts and coaches at the now extremely elite PG events that the “non-relevant” players are no longer attending, right?

swampboy, sorry and I know this will get me banned and I really don’t care. You will probably delete this post too, because it will be deemed critical if PG, the patron saint of HSBBW, where there is now no room for a dissenting opinion . Your arguement is not sound. 

 

You need to calm down and take a chill.  

Completely calm, not sure where that random bit of advice came from. I’ve also been polite.

Been here a long time.  PG has been bashed for years but all of the complaints are the same.  Cost too much.  Have too much power in the recruiting process.  No competition.  Prices keep going up.  Not always reliable because kids slip through.  But they are still the best out there with no competition.  They still do their original role.  My son was in no where Missouri and through many areas, but especially PG got a scholarship at a P5 SEC school.  Was it all accredited to PG, No.  But they were a major part of the process.  I don't always agree with their evaluations but I do know they were a great resource to my family for 12 years through three sons.  Is it costly?  Yes but I determine whether I will pay it.  Could my kid have gotten there without it?  IDK. 

If you have a new personal problem with PG then state it or move on. 

Why is everyone so defensive about PG here? Nobody bashed them, simply commenting on how recruits are ranked. Nobody even said they do a bad job, we are talking about how they get rankings on the “non-relevant” players.

lighten up...or move on

Time for a truce.

"If we all had the same view, then one (or more) of us is unnecessary." 

Why, nobody is doing anything wrong, Mom. Trying to have an intelligent discussion about how the scouting services, not just PG, evaluate kids, when the volume of players is simply too large for them to really form an informed opinion. The OP regarded football, but the discussion may as well be about badminton...

the fact that some people has determined this is anti PG just is silly.

Here’s the thing. All these old time posters aren’t really coming on here to share the same old advice they have given for years on here to new people, who could easily do a search on the website and find the answer to their question - except Francis who comes up with cRazy questions. People come here to discuss things too. Granted, a lot of the old timers do share valuable info, but really there is very little new being shared. So what’s wrong with a little friendly chat? 

I'm not a PG protector or basher.  I think they charge too much but I also kept going so no biggie.  The problem with most of the recruiting organizations is that once you go you have to continue to go to keep increasing your numbers if you think those matter to any college RC or HC. 

I don't see the problem with PG because they are a demand business.  There is a demand and they do the best job of filling it.  There are flaws with them and PBR which are the only big boys in the business.  The "non-relevant" kids are just that non-relevant.  The answer for them is to find the schools that are non-relevant.  BTW, I don't like using that term for any player or school but I will go with it.  The job of every player/parent is to find the school that best fits.  Doing that is the hardest part.  Every player is not D1 and some are not any.  They are just not college players but there is still a place for them through HS. 

If I thought I had a better plan or could compete with PG/PBR, I would start it tomorrow.  The only way to compete is to build it slowly or invest a lot of money and host the tournaments.  Maybe someone needs to start a NRRS (Non-Relevant Recruiting Service).  If your kid is not a great player but may get better, we are the recruiting service for you.

I'll share my experience - for what it is worth. A few years after my son graduated high school and was off playing college ball, I went to see a game at his old high school which was in a rural part of California.

There was a kid there playing shortstop who was, in my eyes, a college prospect - good range, very strong arm, fast, and hit with authority. I talked with his dad and he mentioned that his son had not played any summer ball nor had he attended any showcase type events, nor played any travel ball. He went from HS baseball straight into football workouts. He was the starting QB on the football team and the starting point guard on the basketball team and was in the spring of his Junior year.

So I was pretty sure that this kid had not been seen - and I checked the PG lists. Nope, not there. I sent Jerry Ford an email as he and I had traded a few messages over the years. I suggested that he have someone check this kid out. Jerry said he would call a friend who lived nearby and have him call me. I got a call a few hours later. We agreed to go watch a game together and did so a week or two later.

Two weeks after that, the kid was in the top 1000. He signed with a Pac-12 team, played 4 years and is now working in baseball as a scout. 

So basically on a tip from someone they knew (me) and one peek from a baseball guy they sent out to follow up on that tip, the kid from nowheresville ended up on the PG list.

If one does as Swampboy suggests and reads posts from the archives, one will find that PGSTAFF says they don’t base their rankings purely on commitments (nor on the number of times a kid goes to a showcase or how much money parents spend or any other of a number of things). Is Swampboy, a hsbaseballweb admin, legit trying to keep people from expressing their opinions, or is s/he trying to stop ill-founded rumors? 

I'm pretty sure I'm guessing on where my kids fit in the PG puzzle, since they're listed but with no rankings, and I don't think they'd get an 8.5 or higher, so we spent our money elsewhere (which, no surprise, cost just as much as PG would have).  It's been said here many times, including by PG Staff himself, that the kids that benefit the most from PG are the draftable ones.  I'm not sure if that's true; I'm only guessing those sources are correct.

PG doesn’t charge too much. They charge what the market will bear. If demand were to decrease they would adjust their prices relative to what they felt they needed to increase demand and return to the same profit level.

As for Swamp in my twelve years I’ve never seen anyone kicked off this site for their opinions. Those kicked off were tossed for their behavior and personal attacks. Even TPM, a long time, very helpful regular was suspended for her response to a poster. 

A lot of people get upset with PG after they realize it was money not well spent. Outside the top shelf studs who can pick their college most kids end up playing within a few hundred miles from home. So why travel a thousand miles to Georgia and Florida? If a kid isn’t a D1 prospect PG is probably a waste of time and money relative to other available resources. Jerry Ford would be the first one to tell people PG isn’t for everyone. But PG doesn’t turn away money. Not many businesses do.

I wonder how many people become upset with how much money they spent traveling to GA and FL to watch their kid play. I spent a lot more on myself than my son.

2022OFDad, 

People sometimes get worked up about players getting or not getting a Top 250 or Top 500 or Top 1000 because they don't understand what PG is all about and what the rankings mean.

Contrary to what many people think, PG's main purpose in life is not to round up as many families as possible to pay for showcases and tournaments. Their mission in life is to identify top pro prospects, and they hope to steer as many of the true MLB prospects as possible into the pro ranks right out of high school. They are, after all, as their website proclaims, the world's largest SCOUTING organization--not the world's largest organizer of tournaments and showcases. 

In that context, it's important to note several things. 

FIrst, there is more difference between players 1 and 50 in the rankings than there is between players 100 and 1000.  PG's focus is on getting the very top of the cream layer sorted right. That's why they work so hard to get the very best players to face each other in their most selective tournaments. That's why after they rank the top players one by one, they throw the rest into general baskets of aggregation. There's no pressing need to decide if someone is 350 or 375--they're basically interchangeable at that point.

Second, a Top 250 or Top 500 ranking is not a prize and no one gets a cookie for earning one. It's actually the opposite of that. Those rankings tell you how far those prospects are from attracting meaningful pro attention in the draft. They convey a judgment that a player won't be drafted in a signing round out of high school.

Third, by implication, since a Top 250 player won't be drafted in a signing round, such a ranking means college coaches know they won't have to compete against the pros to get this prospect on campus. It's an indication that he might not get more than a minimum scholarship unless significant other college interest is apparent.

Because of these factors, there's no need to get excited about who is in the Top 250 or the Top 500 and when they got placed there. It's not that big a deal.

Perspective and patience will help you guide your son along his baseball journey.

Best wishes, 

Swampboy, you need to take another look at what PG is doing and how they are doing it. They would not generate the kind of revenue needed to host those top events at top venues without hosting tournaments and showcases. They wouldn’t get eyes on a fraction of the guys they rank without hosting tournaments and showcases.

To your point about draftable guys, the “PG Grade” indicates they must see a lot of “draft prospect” guys at each and every showcase, because they sure hand out “8’s” pretty frequently. I think you are being a little disingenuous here. 

Look, I digress, it’s not a PG thing.