So, I have seen this claim a number of places, but I have never seen anyone be able to back it up with facts.
But even if it is backed up with facts, it ignores at least two important points.
First, if PSU has had the best recruits for a decade, what has changed to make that no longer the case? Presumably, under the success begets success philosophy, the PSU recruiting classes would get more so, not less. Using "just" makes it seem way more random than it actually is.
Secondly, having the best recruiting class is a purely subjective statement. Who determines the best recruits, and why do we think they are always accurate? There is no definitive way to determine this. It feels like the boogie man people like to use when they want to explain away something they do not truly understand. More likely is that PSU is very good at determining who is likely to succeed at the college level and also very good at landing them as recruits. But to be clear, I also do not understand what is going on, but I am very confident it is not as simple as "just had the best recruits".