The point of the post was not to belittle Bama's 2008 or 2009 classes. I just find it amazing that the recruiting services give such high evaluations to players from Alabama. It seems like every kid that Bama gets and alot of the ones we get are 4* and 5* from this state. I find it hard to believe that our little state has such a high number of outstanding players.
Well, in that case...
Ahem -
According to the Rivals database, the following players from the state of Alabama have been in their top 100:
2002 - Ben Obumanu, Jason Allen, Montae Pitts (3)
2003 - Chad Jackson, Jayson Swain, Jamarcus Russell, Tim Castille (4)
2004 - Nikita Stover (1)
2005 - Chris Keys (1)
2006 - Andre Smith, Tim Hawthorne, Deantwan Whitehead, Earl Alexander (4)
Nick Saban arrives.
2007 - Rolando McClain, Kerry Murphy, Sidell Corley, Michael McNeil, Brandon Gibson* (5)
2008 - Julio Jones, Burton Scott, Tyler Love, Jerrell Harris, Mark Barron, William Green (6)
2009 - DJ Fluker, Dre Kirkpatrick, Nico Johnson, Tana Patrick (4)
*If I remember correctly, we were excited at Auburn when Gibson got moved into the Rivals100 towards the end of recruiting, but we didn't realize he had already committed to Bama.
It's also interesting that besides Andre Smith, Chad Jackson was the highest rated player from Alabama from 2002-2006 at #17. In 2008, Jones, Scott, Harris, and Tyler Love were all top 50 players. In 2009, Fluker, Kirkpatrick were both top 12 players with Johnson a top 35 player.
So, yes. According to Rivals, Alabama's talent level in the Rivals top 100 has definitely improved since Nick Saban's arrival.
More research: Rivals' ratings of players in the state of Alabama since 2003. 2002 was unavailable.
2003 - 1 five star, 8 four stars
2004 - Unavailable
2005 - 6 four stars
2006 - 1 five star, 13 four stars
Saban arrives.
2007 - 9 four stars
2008 - 3 five stars, 11 four stars
2009 - 3 five stars, 9 four stars
Once again, the state of Alabama's talent level appears to have increased since Saban's arrival.
My conclusion? Subscriptions.
Just like when Ron Zook was at Florida, it doesn't matter if you recruit the top rated players on recruiting websites. If you can't coach em up, it doesn't matter. The reality is that these players are rated based on stats, measurables, film, and performances at camps. Since most top (3 star 5.7-5 star 6.1) recruits have similar stats, measurables, and film, one of the biggest way to rate a player is their performance at camps where they compete against other top recruits. If they can still dominate at camp, then they must be better the players they compete against. My counterargument to that is Tim Tebow being outplayed by Chad Henne in the 2007 season's Capital One Bowl. If that bowl game was a camp, do you rate Henne over Tebow? And if you do, does it REALLY matter?
Recruiting rankings don't matter. Sometimes, and usually the top ten in the Rivals 100, the prospects are THAT good. Julio Jones is THAT good. But the rest are guys that really need to be coached up just like the high end 3 star guys.
So why do recruiting rankings anyway? Alabama fans have the most (if not, it's top three) subscribers on Rivals. There's also a lot of turnover on Rivals with subscribers, as a mod once said on a thread on the Rivals Recruiting board. Therefore, I have to believe that with Alabama's recent boost in fan-excitement over the hiring of Nick Saban, Rivals saw the opportunity to sell more subscriptions to one of the most rabid fanbases in the country. What's the difference in saying DJ Fluker is better than Morgan Moses? What's the big deal saying DJ Fluker is a top 3 prospect? He's a big time prospect and has the ability to be a big time player, but if they're going to have to put him somewhere, might as well put him in a position for Alabama fans to be excited and want to come read about it.