5* recruiting (debunked)

[Behr]

He knows. Hes reaching

He's one of those guys that hangs out here running his mouth after they beat us until they lose to us. Then **crickets*** until they win again. Then it's back to running their mouth and terrible reading comprehension and just being wrong.

We have several of those.

 

[TDawg]

When did anyone say anything about it indicating WHERE they will be drafted? I said it gives rankings based on the LIKELIHOOD of being drafted by an NFL franchise and not possible college success. My point in a whole that YOU are arguing is that stars are given based on that alone despite them mentioning the impact they may have at the collegiate level.

And isn't 247 the #1 recruiting website and therefore the "go to" overall for stargazers? I think we can all agree on that.

Yep, because of the composite .. that's what made them famous which is why it's the default when you click on Player Rankings People got tired of the horrendous job Luginbill and the clowns at ESPN were doing and the complete inconsistency at Rivals, sometimes they seemed spot on and other times they made you wonder and then the guys at Scout from a few years back were putting some odd names in the mix of the rest of the norm. So the composite comes out and it just takes the complete group and, well, I'll let them explain it ..

247Sports Composite Rating
The 247Sports Composite Rating is a proprietary algorithm that compiles prospect "rankings" and "ratings" listed in the public domain by the major media recruiting services. It converts average industry ranks and ratings into a linear composite index capping at 1.0000, which indicates a consensus No. 1 prospect across all services.
The 247Sports Composite Rating is the industry's most comprehensive and unbiased prospect ranking and is also used to generate 247Sports Team Recruiting Rankings.[/QUOTE]


Ok man, it's going to have to be an agree to disagree thing. I know some of the guys at 247 are basing their rankings on impact to a college team and they mention their colleagues doing the same. They don't give "stars" either just a number ranking and the compiled numbers determine where they fall but that's another debate altogether. The initial premise of this thread was that the stars were not real indicators of NFL success based on a handful of players you pointed out. But percentage wise, the 4 and 5 stars are more likely to be NFL players with the others being more of the exception than the rule ... anyway, we could probably debate this for about another 100 posts and not agree so let's move on.

 

[TDawg]

He's one of those guys that hangs out here running his mouth after they beat us until they lose to us. Then **crickets*** until they win again. Then it's back to running their mouth and terrible reading comprehension and just being wrong.

We have several of those.

Wrong again but hey, you're one of those guys who assumes things and doesn't really have anything to go off of. If you should so dare, please look back to 2015 post UT/UGA game when Dobbs ran the UGA defense off the field and how I came on here to be gracious and admit defeat but heaped praise on the young Dobbs as a gamer.

 

[MWAVolfan]

I believe last year UT had offers out to over 100 kids knowing they could only take 20-30. That means some of those offers carry a lot more weight than others

I've been saying this for years. You cant just look at the schools that offer a kid as an indication. A school has to offer their "plan A" player but also their "plan B" and "plan C" players just in case the plan A player goes somewhere else.

But kids know this too. They market and hype themselves by showing that they have been offered by schools X,Y and Z even though they don't have a very good chance of actually landing at those schools.

It's all a numbers game and people (schools and players) are angling to get the best set of cards in their hand. they may be sitting on a full house, but if the right card comes along and they can turn it into a royal flush then they are gonna discard fast.

 

[Behr]

Wrong again but hey, you're one of those guys who assumes things and doesn't really have anything to go off of. If you should so dare, please look back to 2015 post UT/UGA game when Dobbs ran the UGA defense off the field and how I came on here to be gracious and admit defeat but heaped praise on the young Dobbs as a gamer.

I did look back, before I posted that.

 

[TDawg]

He's one of those guys that hangs out here running his mouth after they beat us until they lose to us. Then **crickets*** until they win again. Then it's back to running their mouth and terrible reading comprehension and just being wrong.

We have several of those.

From a Dawg Fan ..

CRICKETS I TELL YA .. Just messing with you Behr .. being honest, I like the people on this board better than ANY other rival board because the convos are by far the most lively with the most varying opinions. Most never take anything personal and realize that, in cases for UT like Eric Berry and Trey Smith (man, hoping that kid can get back on the field but not at the expense of his health), life is just much bigger than any game. Anyway, I have never been shy about coming on and taking the beating of a defeat and giving respect where it's due.

 

[TDawg]

I did look back, before I posted that.

Sooooo, I guess you missed it? lol

Link provided above

 

[TDawg]

I've been saying this for years. You cant just look at the schools that offer a kid as an indication. A school has to offer their "plan A" player but also their "plan B" and "plan C" players just in case the plan A player goes somewhere else.

But kids know this too. They market and hype themselves by showing that they have been offered by schools X,Y and Z even though they don't have a very good chance of actually landing at those schools.

It's all a numbers game and people (schools and players) are angling to get the best set of cards in their hand. they may be sitting on a full house, but if the right card comes along and they can turn it into a royal flush then they are gonna discard fast.

This is true too but we see it so often when some recruiting analyst uses the phrase "the kid's recruiting is blowing up" and it just came down to (but not always) the kid had not been getting any big P5 offers then a Bama or whoever offers and everyone else falls in line with offers and then the ratings get bumped. Again, not always the case but it happens quite a bit.

 

[1vol8]

Yep, because of the composite .. that's what made them famous which is why it's the default when you click on Player Rankings People got tired of the horrendous job Luginbill and the clowns at ESPN were doing and the complete inconsistency at Rivals, sometimes they seemed spot on and other times they made you wonder and then the guys at Scout from a few years back were putting some odd names in the mix of the rest of the norm. So the composite comes out and it just takes the complete group and, well, I'll let them explain it ..

247Sports Composite Rating
The 247Sports Composite Rating is a proprietary algorithm that compiles prospect "rankings" and "ratings" listed in the public domain by the major media recruiting services. It converts average industry ranks and ratings into a linear composite index capping at 1.0000, which indicates a consensus No. 1 prospect across all services.
The 247Sports Composite Rating is the industry's most comprehensive and unbiased prospect ranking and is also used to generate 247Sports Team Recruiting Rankings.

Ok man, it's going to have to be an agree to disagree thing. I know some of the guys at 247 are basing their rankings on impact to a college team and they mention their colleagues doing the same. They don't give "stars" either just a number ranking and the compiled numbers determine where they fall but that's another debate altogether. The initial premise of this thread was that the stars were not real indicators of NFL success based on a handful of players you pointed out. But percentage wise, the 4 and 5 stars are more likely to be NFL players with the others being more of the exception than the rule ... anyway, we could probably debate this for about another 100 posts and not agree so let's move on.[/QUOTE]
You're correct. And no one ever debated that they are not the exception. The overall point of the OP was to show that the recruiting services are not nearly as accurate as some think. In fact I posted results showing them to be around 30% accurate. Which explains such players as originally posted. Those are not just NFL players but some are among the very best we've seen in decades.

 

[MWAVolfan]

Bryce Brown, Khalil McKenzie, Slick Shelley, James Banks....I could make a list a mile long of 4 and 5 star players that were garbage either on the field or off the field.

Two very important things that the ratings systems can't take into account are:

1. Is the player gonna be an @sshole once he gets that scholarship? He may well have all the physical skills and attributes to be a superstar player but they cant predict how a kid will respond to college and being a blue chip player. Is a player not going to handle competition well when the school recruits another player at their position that is just as good? This is why coaches get paid big bucks, to try and weed out the bad guys.

2. Is the coach that recruited them a dumb@ss? Is the coach going to fail to develop a player to full potential? Is the coach going to use the player incorrectly or not play to their strengths? Is the coach going to tell the player lies and not deliver on them?

These two things can be independent variables but can also be affected by one another and I believe that the majority of the cause for a 4 or 5* player not panning out can be brought back to one of these two issues.


* Also, a wild card that has to be mentioned would be is the player going to be injury prone once he graduates from his tiny high school program to big time competition. Lots of great players are busts because they cant stay healthy.

 

[TDawg]

Ok man, it's going to have to be an agree to disagree thing. I know some of the guys at 247 are basing their rankings on impact to a college team and they mention their colleagues doing the same. They don't give "stars" either just a number ranking and the compiled numbers determine where they fall but that's another debate altogether. The initial premise of this thread was that the stars were not real indicators of NFL success based on a handful of players you pointed out. But percentage wise, the 4 and 5 stars are more likely to be NFL players with the others being more of the exception than the rule ... anyway, we could probably debate this for about another 100 posts and not agree so let's move on.

You're correct. And no one ever debated that they are not the exception. The overall point of the OP was to show that the recruiting services are not nearly as accurate as some think. In fact I posted results showing them to be around 30% accurate. Which explains such players as originally posted. Those are not just NFL players but some are among the very best we've seen in decades.[/QUOTE]

LOL .. like I said, and this is where we agree, if you just look at the 247 internal rankings on the 2015 class, it almost has to be embarrassing to them. It's like UGA fans when we look at our 2013 class that because of the sheer numbers looked great but like half of that class didn't even finish their college career in a UGA uni .. I guess what we all hope for is a staff to come in and have that Saban like affect of being able to both recruit at a high level and develop players (although some would debate that with Saban when you look at the amount of players they put in the league versus the amount that are actually successful but hey, there are probably 100 factors in the mix there). I think one thing we tend to forget (some do at least) is just how many HS players there are throughout the country and to be even listed in the top 250 or so would make you among top maybe 5% or so. 5*? You are among the top <1%

 

[1vol8]

This is true too but we see it so often when some recruiting analyst uses the phrase "the kid's recruiting is blowing up" and it just came down to (but not always) the kid had not been getting any big P5 offers then a Bama or whoever offers and everyone else falls in line with offers and then the ratings get bumped. Again, not always the case but it happens quite a bit.

That's the point though. A kid shouldn't move up or down depending on who offers. These are supposed to be recruiting SERVICES. Which would indicate that they have done THOROUGH and PROFESSIONAL evaluations on each prospect they've attached a rating to. The school that offers holding any weight on that is just simply lazy evaluation and (in the mind of many) admits they understand that even they are not convinced they got it right.

 

[TDawg]

Two very important things that the ratings systems can't take into account are:

1. Is the player gonna be an @sshole once he gets that scholarship? He may well have all the physical skills and attributes to be a superstar player but they cant predict how a kid will respond to college and being a blue chip player. Is a player not going to handle competition well when the school recruits another player at their position that is just as good? This is why coaches get paid big bucks, to try and weed out the bad guys.

2. Is the coach that recruited them a dumb@ss? Is the coach going to fail to develop a player to full potential? Is the coach going to use the player incorrectly or not play to their strengths? Is the coach going to tell the player lies and not deliver on them?

These two things can be independent variables but can also be affected by one another and I believe that the majority of the cause for a 4 or 5* player not panning out can be brought back to one of these two issues.


* Also, a wild card that has to be mentioned would be is the player going to be injury prone once he graduates from his tiny high school program to big time competition. Lots of great players are busts because they cant stay healthy.

This post is so spot on and the services even miss on some of the first point you made. Take Reuben Foster for instance. When he was being recruited along with Kamara and I believe Shaq Wiggins and Tray Matthews (boy UGA got the worst end of that deal) all the talk was about the "group package deal" when for starters, there never was a package deal with those guys, they were just really good friends. But they glossed over Reuben's character which, despite being a STUD at LB, he was just a jerk and was constantly sleeping in class (pics kept popping up of him being passed out at his desk even to the point where they would let him sleep and once, another class had changed and he woke up in the wrong class and late for the next period). Some of the kids are coddled so much, even in quality families that they have to get what they want or they throw a tantrum. Those are a little tougher to predict for the services.

 

[Behr]

Sooooo, I guess you missed it? lol

Link provided above

My fault we're off topic, but it's easy to see what Im talking about if you look.

 

[bamawriter]

That's the point though. A kid shouldn't move up or down depending on who offers. These are supposed to be recruiting SERVICES. Which would indicate that they have done THOROUGH and PROFESSIONAL evaluations on each prospect they've attached a rating to. The school that offers holding any weight on that is just simply lazy evaluation and (in the mind of many) admits they understand that even they are not convinced they got it right.

I'm sorry, but that is nonsense. Human beings only have so many hours in the day. The the 247 composite had 4099 players listed for last year. It is simply impossible to do a thorough evaluation on that many kids. We're talking high school players. It's not like the majority of these guys will have hours upon hours of film. There are certain guys that you simply can't evaluate at all unless you drive out to BFE to watch them in person.

Giving weight to offers is a totally logical step. It's so logical, in fact, that the services would be moronic to not do so. To criticize that practice is to abandon common sense.

 

[TUSKtimes]

This post is so spot on and the services even miss on some of the first point you made. Take Reuben Foster for instance. When he was being recruited along with Kamara and I believe Shaq Wiggins and Tray Matthews (boy UGA got the worst end of that deal) all the talk was about the "group package deal" when for starters, there never was a package deal with those guys, they were just really good friends. But they glossed over Reuben's character which, despite being a STUD at LB, he was just a jerk and was constantly sleeping in class (pics kept popping up of him being passed out at his desk even to the point where they would let him sleep and once, another class had changed and he woke up in the wrong class and late for the next period). Some of the kids are coddled so much, even in quality families that they have to get what they want or they throw a tantrum. Those are a little tougher to predict for the services.

Reuben Foster also had pics and video of what he looked like on the field. Reuben was widely regarded as a great high school LBer and Bama had to fight to the end (mostly the barn) to get him. After completing his career at Alabama as an All-American, Butkus award winner he was taken in the first round of the NFL. How good was Reuben in high school and at Bama? Ask Kirby, he'll tell you.

 

[TDawg]

That's the point though. A kid shouldn't move up or down depending on who offers. These are supposed to be recruiting SERVICES. Which would indicate that they have done THOROUGH and PROFESSIONAL evaluations on each prospect they've attached a rating to. The school that offers holding any weight on that is just simply lazy evaluation and (in the mind of many) admits they understand that even they are not convinced they got it right.

That's a fact .. if a school staff offers based on one of these services, they need to be replaced. But the services know they are in the business of providing content, not evaluating players so sometimes all they really have to go off of are the real professionals who are recruiting and coaching. Take UTs very own CJP for instance. Deandre Baker wasn't pegged very high by any service but that didn't matter to Pruitt when he brought him to UGA.

 

[TDawg]

My fault we're off topic, but it's easy to see what Im talking about if you look.

All good, but again, I have no issue taking the loss when it happens. Lord knows, took our share from 2013-2016 and watching that hail mary was painful considering UGA was leading for the majority of that game. Dobbs had a different element to him though and I told my wife after Eason's huge throw to take the lead back that it wasn't over .. I regret those words to this day.

 

[TDawg]

Reuben Foster also had pics and video of what he looked like on the field. Reuben was widely regarded as a great high school LBer and Bama had to fight to the end (mostly the barn) to get him. After completing his career at Alabama as an All-American, Butkus award winner he was taken in the first round of the NFL. How good was Reuben in high school and at Bama? Ask Kirby, he'll tell you.

No argument about how good of a player he was, just noting that character was a huge concern there .. after he decommited from AU, it became a UGA/Bama battle actually (he decommited after getting that God awful AU tat on his forearm .. lol) and he along with Kamara went to Bama.
. the kid can play and even now, if he can keep his head out of his ass, he will have a long NFL career.

 

[TDawg]

I'm sorry, but that is nonsense. Human beings only have so many hours in the day. The the 247 composite had 4099 players listed for last year. It is simply impossible to do a thorough evaluation on that many kids. We're talking high school players. It's not like the majority of these guys will have hours upon hours of film. There are certain guys that you simply can't evaluate at all unless you drive out to BFE to watch them in person.

Giving weight to offers is a totally logical step. It's so logical, in fact, that the services would be moronic to not do so. To criticize that practice is to abandon common sense.

Agree that it has to be done .. Each of these teams has their onfield staff as well as a complete team of people just watching hours of HS film to find what the staff is looking for and recruit that accordingly. The services like Rivals and 247 have far less resources and have to cover MUCH more ground. As well, I know for a fact, a lot of them get their info from team recruiting staff members in regards to who looks good on various HS teams. The team isn't giving away anything because they, like the prospects themselves, tell these guys this in confidence but they gather great info on it.

 

[1vol8]

I'm sorry, but that is nonsense. Human beings only have so many hours in the day. The the 247 composite had 4099 players listed for last year. It is simply impossible to do a thorough evaluation on that many kids. We're talking high school players. It's not like the majority of these guys will have hours upon hours of film. There are certain guys that you simply can't evaluate at all unless you drive out to BFE to watch them in person.

Giving weight to offers is a totally logical step. It's so logical, in fact, that the services would be moronic to not do so. To criticize that practice is to abandon common sense.

Haven't you stated at some point throughout this debate that 247 guys are making millions? (If it wasn't you then it was someone) So if that's true, which I don't doubt, that would mean there's more than enough money to hire more talent evaluaters if they decided to choose quality over money.
There is a different method they could use to boost accuracy of their rankings. They just have to think outside the box.

 

[Mike Moffett]

Just saw where the dawgs are having to take a chance on 5star RBs Kendall Milton and Zackary Evans; the 3star recruits that were there first choice have committed elsewhere. I will provide more updates as info becomes available.

 

[bamawriter]

Haven't you stated at some point throughout this debate that 247 guys are making millions? (If it wasn't you then it was someone)

I'm not sure what their revenue looks like. I would guess it's well over a million per year.

So if that's true, which I don't doubt, that would mean there's more than enough money to hire more talent evaluaters if they decided to choose quality over money.

A hiring push might increase quantity, but it might not necessarily increase quality. They already employ a lot of people. I doubt that the pool of qualified and available high school football scouts is terribly deep.

But it's neither here nor there on this particular issue. Hire 50 guys or 50,000 and the fact would remain that giving weight to school offers must be part of the formula. There are coaches that have proven their skills at finding talent. To ignore their assessments would be moronic.

 

[butchna]

So you can take a team to task but not win? I guess there is a different definition for that phrase between the two of us .. moral victories I suppose

Look it up when you get home from school. Didn’t see a synonym for win. Mostly the context I used was hold accountable for the whole game. Don’t know what else you ******* said.

 

[butchna]

THIS ISN'T EVEN THE SAME DEBATE LITTLE FELLA! You haven't won anything and you're pointing to quotes from people who completely dispute what you're saying .. you're making this laughable. Please, don't give anyone a "little lesson on debating" because you're just not good at it.

And winning a championship is still winning a championship. Georgia gave Bama "all they can handle" two years in a row but you can bet fewer talk about that than they do Bama still winning.

And I don’t know what people’s talking points have to do with mine. I was talking about two programs built two different ways and how the one not built with annual top 10 classes gave the one regularly landing the TOP classes a run through the grinder. Bragging rights don’t mean shizz when you consider that they could easily be 3-1 against the stronger recruiting program. I’m concentrated on Tennessee building their program towards that. Keep mumbling your totally non-relevant counter.