Feb. 1: Annual N.S.D. recruiting myth buster

I've done this every year for the past few years and the tradition lives on. Here's the annual N.S.D. recruiting myth buster.

We're a few days away from national signing day which means we're a few days away from  once again hearing naive, uneducated college football "fans" call recruiting databases overrated, without a doubt the dumbest thing said by fans each year. No system (or database) is perfect and there are definitely flaws and exceptions. These databases aren't the word of God, but saying these databases are overrated is moronic...

Below is data showing the recruiting classes and rankings of the last seven national champions three years prior to winning the title along with the BS TCU myth buster that puts them and their head coach on an undeserved pedestal.

Bottom line: The teams that recruit at a high level for an extended period of time are the ones that win championships.

By no means am I calling recruiting databases the college football bible. Recruiting databases are accurate, not perfect. 

Blue-chips can still flop, players who aren't recruited highly can emerge as stars and teams can still over and underachieve.

However, the team holding the championship trophy at the end of the season will always be a team that recruited near the top of the recruiting rankings. 

Here's a look at the last seven college football national champions and their recruiting class rankings the three years prior to their championship victories (Auburn has four included because Cam Newton was part of their class right away).

Note:

• Six of the seven had a top-two ranked class within the three years of their championship.

• With the exception of Auburn, the only time a team had a class ranked outside the top-10 was when they had limited scholarships to offer.

• Six of the seven teams averaged a top-10 class the three years prior to their championship.

2005 Champions: Texas Longhorns

Recruiting Class Rankings (All rankings according to rivals100.com)

2002: No. 1 ranked class (Including Vince Young and nine other starters in the national championship game)

2003: No. 18 ranked class, but only gave 18 scholarships (However seven of the 18 recruits started in the national championship game)

2004: No. 10 ranked class

Avg. Recruiting ranking three years prior to championship: Nine (w/limited scholarships in 2003)

2006 Champions: Florida Gators

Recruiting Class Rankings (according to rivals100.com)

2003: No. 2 ranked class (Including Chris Leak, the starting quarterback for the Gators in the national championship game)

2004: No. 7 ranked class (Including Derrick Harvey)

2005: No. 15 ranked class, but only gave 18 scholarships (Reggie Nelson, a huge contributor on defense in the championship)

Avg. Recruiting ranking three years prior to championship: Eight (w/limited scholarships in 2005)

2007 Champions: LSU Tigers

Recruiting Class Rankings (according to rivals100.com)

2004: No. 2 ranked class (Including Glenn Dorsey, Jacob Hester, Craig Steltz, Early Doucet)

2005: No. 22 ranked class, but only gave 13 scholarships

2006: No. 7 ranked class

Avg. Recruiting ranking three years prior to championship: 10 (w/limited scholarships in 2005)

2008 Champions: Florida Gators

Recruiting Class Rankings (according to rivals100.com)

2005: No. 15 ranked class, but only gave 18 scholarships

2006: No. 2 ranked class (Including Tim Tebow)

2007 No. 1 ranked class

Avg. Recruiting ranking three years prior to championship: Six (w/limited scholarships in 2005)

2009 Champions: Alabama Crimson Tide

Recruiting Class Rankings (according to rivals100.com)

2006: No. 11 ranked class (Including Javier Arenas and Greg McElroy)

2007: No. 10 ranked class (Including Rolando McClain)

2008: No. 1 ranked class (Including Mark Ingram, Julio Jones and Terrance Cody)

Avg. Recruiting ranking three years prior to championship: Seven

2010 Champions: Auburn Tigers

Recruiting Class Rankings (according to rivals100.com)

2007: No. 7 ranked class (Including Nick Fairley and majority of line)

2008: No. 20 ranked class

2009: No. 19 ranked class

2010: No. 4 (CAM NEWTON)

Avg. Recruiting ranking three years prior to championship: 14

2011 Champions: Alabama Crimson Tide

Recruiting Class Rankings (according to rivals100.com)

2008: No. 1 ranked class (Don’ta Hightower, Courtney Upshaw)

2009: No. 1 ranked class (McCarron, Richardson, tons more)

2010: No. 5 ranked class (Many contributors)

Avg. Recruiting ranking three years prior to championship: 2

Answering obvious questions that will emerge

 1.) The TCU example. I can already hear the TCU example being brought 

TCU is the most popular example fans use when discussing recruiting databases, citing the fact the Frogs don't land top recruits, but are able to compete at such a "high level."

TCU is a very good program and you cant say enough about the job Gary Patterson has done in Fort Worth. The win over Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl was very impressive and you can't take anything away from Patterson. Well, actually you can…

It's true TCU doesn't get top recruits, but the reality is most of the time they don't compete against teams that get top recruits either. In fact, more times than not TCU is more talented than the teams they play against. 

TCU was favored against Wisconsin for a reason, Texas is a pipeline for great college football players for a reason and Texas recruiting scraps are better than most states blue-chippers. 

A three-star in the state of Texas would be a four-star in most states.

 2.) The blue-chip flop and the lowly-recruited star. 

Again, no database is perfect. A hidden gem like Wes Welker can emerge as a star and a highly-recruited prospect can be exposed as a bust.

There are countless examples of both.

3.) Why some recruits don't pan out and some overachieve. There are many variables that go into this including:

- Intangibles that can't be measured

- Athleticism being overvalued (See: The NFL Combine)

- Coaching and a staff's ability to develop players

- Different levels of high school competition and supporting casts

- A player's inability to adapt to the speed of the college game

- Early bloomers that don't continue to develop in college

- Difficulty understanding the playbook and preparation that goes into the college game

- Off-field temptation that comes with going to college

- Academics 

- Injuries

- The list could go on forever