Colleges and coaches these days spend ample time to secure the best athletes. Fans generally are interested to see how good is a particular college doing in securing diverse and best students. This trend has surfaced a new trend of recruitment websites that rate potential recruiters and provides information on recruitment policies. The increasing popularity of sports in colleges has increased the proportion of sportsmen, both male, and female while recruiting.
However, stark differences are seen in rankings among male and female sports. Men’s sports being more profitable naturally has a higher resource and budget allocation than that of women’s sports. Therefore, more resources are allocated in the recruitment of men as compared to women. Popular websites such as ESPN, 247, Rivals are devoted to men rankings for recruitment, and the fewer websites that rank recruiters for women are considered incredible due to fewer resources. It is believed that rankings on the women’s sites are improving, however, they are still not as good as men’s rankings websites.
For you to evaluate these websites, make sure they meet the basic criteria:
They are knowledgeable about the sports they are evaluating. They will then have well-informed rankings for prospects.
They watch many prospects multiple times so that the good players are not missed and their talent is consistent with different games
The evaluators need to consider competition and difficulty level of each game that the player and their teams play to evaluate how well does a player play at different difficulty level. Often a player losing can be seen as lower rankings however their competition also needs to be ranked. Nike’s EYBL and Under Armour have been important circuits for improving rankings for both male and female sports.
The evaluator needs to be able to predict future rankings and give an informed prediction of how certain athletes are expected to develop in terms of their bodies as well as skills both in the best-case as well as worst-case scenarios.
The evaluations for women athletes are different and since not many resources are available; they are not credible. There is not much information available on women athletes out therefore, these rankings need to be only a small part of considerations for recruitment.