So I want to comment on the statement I have highlighted. If the recruiting sites actually use system fit and the coach a player is going to play for as part of their ranking criteria then everyone who thinks they have a bias against ND or any other school that isn't Bama, OU, Clemson, etc. is right. Clemson and Bama are the best all-around programs. Any player that commits to either would get a boost in their rankings because the systems and coaches they will be playing for are the best. Any skill position player that commits to OU will get a similar boost. What that means is, the reason why ND's recruits go down in ranking will essentially boil down to this basic Q&A:
Q: Why did [insert name] ND recruit go down in ranking?
A: Because he won't be playing for Bama (or Clemson, etc.).
If this is the case then people like Chase have been completely wrong this whole time. ND will never be able to recruit a top 5 class because their recruits will never receive the same rankings boost that Bama's, Clemson's, OU's, etc.players will receive.
Now, I hope that's not really how it works. I hope that system fit and the coach a player will play for does not get factored in the rankings. Otherwise, I don't see how anyone can view the rankings as anything but extremely biased toward certain schools.
To be clear, I'm not saying that projecting how good a recruit might be in college shouldn't be part of the ranking criteria, just as long as that projection is limited to his potential physical and skill development. If the evaluators think someone is going to be an elite WR in college because he has certain physical and mental traits, fine. But if the evaluators think someone is going to be elite simply because of the offense they will be playing in or the coach they will be playing for then that's a problem.