Can average Content Rank better than Good Content with Good Backlinks?

[paul1129]

Recently, I have been hearing a lot lately in this forum. That people can rank and compete with their rival sites only with unique and good content, there is no need of good backlinks.

So, I decided to start a thread about this.

My opinion is that people can't rank better than their competitors if their backlinks are not good with respect to their rival sites even if their content is better.
Some people will question me that why I think like this. The reason is because I have seen sites which rank better even with their average and bad content.

Site 1:
Content is superb. When the site owner gives updates in the social channels a ton social traffic comes. But it ranks at the 8th position in google's first page for a particular keyword. Its link profile says. It has 16 links from forums & almost 50 links from different social channels.

Site 2:
In this case content is average and a bit outdated too. It doesn't get social outreach much as the owner does not give effort. It ranks on the 2nd position of google. Its link profile says. It has only 6 links but these links are gained from guest posting from high relevant pages.

This is what I have observed.

What's do you guys think? Please share with reasons.

 

[CyberAlchemist]

Some people will question me that why I think like this. The reason is because I have seen sites which rank better even with their average and bad content.

Yeah because they have many quality backlinks pointing to their bad content and that's why they still can rank with average and bad content.

Site 1:
Content is superb. When the site owner gives updates in the social channels a ton social traffic comes. But it ranks at the 8th position in google's first page for a particular keyword. Its link profile says. It has 16 links from forums & almost 50 links from different social channels.

Site 2:
In this case content is average and a bit outdated too. It doesn't get social outreach much as the owner does not give effort. It ranks on the 2nd position of google. Its link profile says. It has only 6 links but these links are gained from guest posting from high relevant pages.

This is what I have observed.

What's do you guys think? Please share with reasons.

Site 2 can rank better for now but it will not be ranked better than site 1 for a long term because users will leave their site and not consider it as quality, Google is too.
It is reason why site with low quality with good backlinks but could not maintain their position on top search result for a long term.

 

[SEOPub]

Links are the #1 ranking factor in Google's algorithm.

Quality content is just BS. What is quality content anyhow? An image could be content. A video could be. How is Google going to judge which are quality and which are not?

The whole if you build quality content you will rank higher thing is total BS.

 

[paul1129]

paul1129

That's what I have watched.

But people keep telling that only on behalf of quality content they can get ranked. Yeah, obviously content sometimes gets an advantage and also a factor but in general quality links always gets the upper hand.