How to interpret recruiting charts and how to use the data to make better decisions?
Well, this post is designed to help.
I’m going to be looking at three different ways of interpreting recruiting charts.
The first is the simplest one, which is just looking at the overall trends.
It may not be the most obvious, but it’s the one that we all want to use.
For example, when you look at the charts for Georgia, the average national ranking is higher than when you are looking at just the state rankings.
This is because Georgia is a bigger state.
It’s a bigger market, so there are more players, so the overall ranking will rise more.
The same is true for Alabama, where the state ranking is actually lower than when we are looking only at the state-level rankings.
These charts will tell you the relative strength of each state.
The difference between the state average and the state’s rankings are not that big, but they do matter.
A lot of times, recruiting is the biggest reason a school makes it to the top of its class, and there is a good reason for that.
Another example is the difference between Georgia and South Carolina.
In the last decade, Georgia has made an influx of high-quality talent.
Georgia’s recruiting has also improved.
South Carolina, on the other hand, has made some major strides, but its overall rankings are still higher than the national average.
That’s a trend that is important to keep in mind, and I think the charts will help explain it.
If you are not already familiar with recruiting charts in recruiting, they are an aggregation of data from a few different sources.
Each source uses a different set of criteria for ranking schools, and some of these criteria can be adjusted or ignored depending on the data that you’re looking at.
This is why recruiting charts are so important.
You can’t just look at each state’s average, or average state ranking, and think that it tells you which schools are more successful or more likely to get recruited.
You have to be aware of how these rankings relate to one another, and you have to adjust accordingly.
So, how do you interpret recruiting data?
There are three main ways to interpret these charts: The traditional recruiting method, or the new recruiting method.
First, if you are in a hurry, there is no need to read this post.
If you are still reading the same old recruiting posts, it’s likely you already know how to interpret them.
I’m not going to talk much about the old recruiting method here, as it has already been covered in a few other posts.
To summarize the old-school recruiting method: It is based on the state of the state in which you are recruiting, the number of players you are interested in recruiting and the amount of recruiting you are doing.
There are different types of recruiting data, and the chart that you use will help you determine which one you should use.
The new recruiting model is based on recruiting data for each of the schools in the state.
This means that you have more data to choose from, but the chart itself is based only on recruiting activity.
Both of these charts work in conjunction with the current recruiting rankings, and are also very similar.
They are often used by schools looking to recruit under-the-radar players, but are also used by school looking to get recruits more heavily involved in their recruitment process.
While both methods are a good way to read the recruiting data going into the college basketball season, the way that I’m using these charts is different.
What I’m looking for is: A better understanding of the relative rankings of each school, and a better understanding for what a school should look for in an under-recruiting prospect.
Why I’m not using the old school recruiting chart is because it’s too old to be of use in today’s recruiting climate.
New recruiting charts are more up-to-date and are much easier to interpret.
At the end of the day, this is all about making better decisions.
And if you think about it, I could probably use the old charts a lot better than the new ones, and it doesn’t hurt that I already know a lot about recruiting.
Let’s get started.