Skip to main content

Penn State climbs in On3 Industry Team Football Rankings with latest commitment

nate-mug-10.12.14by:Nate Bauer07/22/23

NateBauerBWI

penn-state-climbs-in-on3-industry-team-football-rankings
Penn State owns the the No. 6-ranked Class of 2024. (Ryan Snyder/BWI)

Penn State football has jumped another two spots in the On3 Industry Team Football Recruiting Rankings for the Class of 2024 with its latest verbal commitment. Landing the pledge of defensive lineman T.A. Cunningham, the Nittany Lions are now at No. 6 nationally.

T.A. Cunningham picked Penn State over more than 50 other scholarship offers and 20 visits since his freshman year at Miami Central, where he has emerged as a four-star with the No. 90 overall ranking nationally for the Class of 2024. 

Bringing an end to his recruitment, the commitment is one Cunningham was thrilled to make official. 

“I’m just happy to be done with the process,” Cunningham told BWI. “It’s been a rollercoaster of emotions and different things. I’m happy to have the relief of having it over. My path was a little less traditional than some others. You have juniors and seniors still receiving offers. Most of my offers came early from all the visits and camps that I went to early on. I’m pretty familiar with the process.

“It’s all been a blessing, but everything has to come to an end, and I’m just ready for the next chapter of my life, where I can just get down to business, get ready to work, and just have a stable environment.”

Penn State moves up in On3 Rankings

In the process, his commitment – Penn State football’s second in as many days – the Nittany Lions’ recruiting Class of 2024 climbed again. Rising to No. 7 with the pledge of defensive tackle Liam Andrews on Friday, up from No. 10, the class fell back to No. 8 by the start of the day on Saturday. But, with Cunningham on board, the class is scratching at a place among the country’s very best recruiting hauls. 

Top 10

  1. 1

    Zach Arnett

    UNLV hiring former MSU HC

    Breaking
  2. 2

    SEC and Netflix

    2024 season getting docuseries

    Trending
  3. 3

    Kirk Herbstreit

    ESPN star talks son to Michigan

  4. 4

    Jake Dickert

    Wazzu HC hired by Wake Forest

    New
  5. 5

    Coach Michael Vick

    Former NFL star is college HC

View All

Get the On3 Top 10 to your inbox every morning

Penn State now sits ahead of Southern Cal, Tennessee, Texas A&M, and Clemson, who round out the top 10 nationally. Still above the Nittany Lions in the On3 Industry Team Recruiting Rankings are No. 1 Georgia, followed by Ohio State, Florida, Alabama, and Michigan.

Penn State has a team score of 91.280 with a per-recruit average of 89.86. 

The commitment is the Nittany Lions’ 24th of the Class of 2024 cycle.

Explaining the On3 Industry Team Rankings

The team score gives Penn State an ever-so-slight edge over the Trojans, who check in at 91.225 for their team score. Lincoln Riley’s outfit is currently comprised of 17 total commitments, 12 of which are four stars. 

Penn State now has 15 four-star prospects and nine three-star prospects. 

Given the different class sizes throughout the game, with Georgia having as many as 25 pledges and Alabama just 15 within even the top five in the rankings, the On3 Industry Team Football Recruiting Rankings attempts to take those varied class sizes into play. Penn State football’s 24 commitments are sixth overall in total size, but some of those players are not considered when formulating the team score and subsequent rankings.

Along with the combined rankings for individual players and teams of the major recruiting sites, those being weighted between On3, 247Sports, Rivals, and ESPN, the On3 Consensus Team Ranking also compiles the highest-rated commitments by each school to create a rolling average among Power Five programs. At this stage in the process, that is 15 commitments nationally. 

Additionally, the On3 Consensus Team Rankings eliminate bonus points for having more commitments than other programs. It thereby whittles away at the built-in advantages of significantly larger class sizes. The model doesn’t disproportionately put weight on a program’s handful of top commitments. Instead, it more appropriately represents the overall talent and depth of the class.

You may also like