I don't trust 247s ratings regardless. But that seems to be what everyone cites when deciding whether a prospect is up to their standard. ...or maybe they're just making it up as they go along But (much like recruits) there isn't a good way to rate transfers. People transfer for many different reasons, and a blue chipper who couldn't get playing time at his first school isn't always going to be better (or worse) than a kid who was unranked and killed it at a lower level. So people might say Justyn Mutts wasn't a good add at the time because he had just above average stats at a Big South school and CAA school. But, he turned out to be pretty special. So who determines who is and isn't a good recruit? Wins and losses are what it's about and since VT has joined the ACC every coach not named James Johnson has won at pretty much the same level with around the same level recruits. The "Mike Young can't recruit" narrative was allowed to gain traction and now people just accept it for no reason. Everyone has Google. 247 doesn't restrict their rankings to subscriptions...there's no excuse people should be that ignorant of basic facts