Your Source For Recruiting Information

If there's one recruiting class that our readers have complained is too low, it has to be UCLA. The Bruins checked in at No. 21 in our list of fall signing classes, yet elsewhere their class has been ranked in the top 10.

Why the difference?

Well, most notably, the big difference is CA WF Tyler Honeycutt. Our talent evaluator Brick Oettinger ranks slender wing No. 102 in the Class of 2009. That's obviously a solid ranking for anyone when you take into account the number of players who populate the high school ranks, but other scouts consider him to be potentially an elite talent.

Honeycutt didn't get as much national exposure as some other players, and he certainly didn't play a role on the national circuit for as many years as the elites in the senior class. As much as talent and performance play a role in rankings, so does pure and simple exposure. There's a comfort level that makes it safer -- and generally more accurate -- to list a player more highly if he has received ample exposure.

By the same token, it's riskier to do the same for a player you haven't observed in action as frequently.

Fortunately, there's the high school season available to help fill the void. To that end, his performances this season have ranged from excellent to almost invisible, and thus his status within the class isn't solidified heading into the second half of the season.

Others also place CA BF Brendan Lane somewhat higher than we do (at No. 117), but the big difference here is Honeycutt. If the slender wing flourishes in Ben Howland's system and becomes the top-30 prospect some others bill him to be, then clearly UCLA's class would make a huge jump up the national rankings at the only place those rankings truly count -- on the college court.