3 Star Ranked Players Who Developed To Be 1st, 2nd 3rd Rounders?

[LittleVol]

If a team consistently gets (and keeps) the 4/5 star recruits (Alabama, Ohio State, C!emson, Georgia) they will consistently be better than the team that signs 2/3 star talent.

Unless, every 2 and 3 star they got were those NFL level guys...

This the problem with modern psychology.
We always need to identify and "judge" something as "something ".

5 stars are all the same.

All 3 stars are the same.

Yet, mostly 3 stars are drafted??
That doesn't make SENSE!

Every year there is literally enough kids rated 4 star or higher to fill out an NFL draft. But people haven't caught on to that for some reason...

This isn't directed at you in particular btw.
But MAYBE...a kid is talented regardless of what a silly analyst ranks him as.
Maybe the analyst also uses college offers to rank players: IOW Bama doesn't get 5 stars. You GET a 5 star because you're wanted by Bama, OSU, Clemson....

 

[matrosscbc]

This is a very July Thread....we inchin' closer boys!

 

[LittleVol]

Something the recruiting gurus will never be able to measure...dedication, work ethic, heart and want to.
I mean is there really that big of a difference in a WR that runs a 4.4 and 4.7? Or one that can bench 225 15 times versus one who can do it 16 times?
I think once you get to the D1 level, you can throw the measurements out the window for the most part because they are all gifted athletically. IMO(which doesn’t mean much) the traits I listed earlier and what’s between the ears, separates the great from the good from the average.
GBO!!

No.
YES, there is a huge difference between 4.4 and 4.7.
Peerless Price doesn't take a KR to the house against Bama running a 4.7.
He doesn't beat Mario Edwards for a 79 yard TD in the National Championship if he runs 4.7
Devonta Smith smith doesn't catch the game winning TD against UGA as a freshman if he runs 4.7
Michael Vick doesn't break for a game winning 70 yard TD run against Minnesota if he runs 4.7...

All that other stuff you said matters, yes, but they don't time kids in the 40 at the NFL combine just for $hits and giggles.

 

[reaperkyle]

Just a wild stab in the dark.............but I'd be willing to place a decent wager that % wise, more 3* pan out than 5*

Per the NFL draft, that's not the case at all. A few years ago, I checked for myself out of curiosity. I went back 4 years and this is what I found:

***24/7 Sports composite ranking used***

NFL Draft
4 year total
***** 84/126 Drafted (67%)
**** 269/1096 Drafted (25%)
*** 409/5461 Drafted (7%)
** or Unrated 115/5600 Drafted (2%)

Pretty telling. It's consistently true that the higher rated players get drafted at a higher % and it ain't even close.

 

[VolFanNC09]

The thing about stars is that a 5* is someone that can start at most P5 schools as a freshman. 3* can develop into a starter with some work. By the time they are juniors, 5* or 3* doesn’t matter. It’s all in their development.

 

[a vol n tears]

Below are stats from SBNation for 2019:
Estimated 300,000 HS seniors playing football. There are 30 players rated 5 star, 380 4 star, 1328 are 3 stars, and 1859 2 star. There are 65 D1 Power 5 schools.
Do some math. If Ala, Ga, Ohio State, and Clemson get 3 each of 5 stars (Ga recently signed 4 or 5 in one year) that only leaves 18 of those for 61 other schools. Some are definitely staying out West so to get even 1 of the 5* kids is impressive right now. At this time, for Tenn to get a third (8) of their signing class from 4* and a 5* guy is doing pretty well. Have patience and let the 3* guys mature physically and mentally. Then win some games and then recruiting battles. Nobody starts 22 five star guys.

 

[tdawgs]

Question I have is what year did the star ratings begin? Was it in the mid 2000's?

 

[1vol8]

Aaron Rodgers QB 3*
Dak Prescott QB 3*
Matt Ryan QB3*
Le'Veon Bell RB 3*
Aaron Donald DT 3*
Khalil Mack 2*

Big Ben wasn't even ranked

Aquib Talib DB 3*
Drew Brees QB 3*
Patrick Mahommes QB 3*
Randy Moss (unranked)

We can go on. Every one of those players possible future HOFers and dominated the league at their positions. The real question is how many dominant players were NOT 3* or lower. I bet it’s a much shorter list and not nearly as “star studded”.


Makes you wonder what “service” the services provide. JS

 

[J C Higgins]

Can you think of any Vols who accomplished that??

Players who came in, worked their butts off.

These are my fave players.

The star system system limits the response. The first guy to rate high school talent was Joe Terranova in the 1970's. ( Terranova's report) His system ranked players one to four stars. I don't know when or who changed the rating system to five stars but don't think it has been around more than 25 yers.

Somebody above mentioned that Aaron Rogers was a 3 star recruit. That's probably correct but he received no D1 scholarships coming out of high school so I assume he was zero stars. (He went to a community college in or near Chico CA before attending UC Berkeley.)

 

[TC 83]

E Moseley—probably the best development of any player in the CBJ era. Maybe the only...

 

[lifeisdeep]

Just a wild stab in the dark.............but I'd be willing to place a decent wager that % wise, more 3* pan out than 5*

I don't have the time to find the post but this has been very explicitly debunked, IIRC on this very forum. Some five-stars do not pan out, but the percentage that gets drafted is not just mildly but exponentially higher than for three-stars.

 

[peaygolf]

I don't have the time to find the post but this has been very explicitly debunked, IIRC on this very forum. Some five-stars do not pan out, but the percentage that gets drafted is not just mildly but exponentially higher than for three-stars.

 

[sanefan]

I don't have the time to find the post but this has been very explicitly debunked, IIRC on this very forum. Some five-stars do not pan out, but the percentage that gets drafted is not just mildly but exponentially higher than for three-stars.

I bet if you just read this thread you can find where it has been debunked. Even the guy that posted it has acknowledged it was not correct.

 

[Mccage]

Eddie Moore 2* drafted 2nd round. Eric Westmorland 2* drafted 3rd round

Both played at small schools and probably would have been ranked higher if they had played at larger schools. Same could be said about alot of players across the nation.

 

[VolForLife83]

Per the NFL draft, that's not the case at all. A few years ago, I checked for myself out of curiosity. I went back 4 years and this is what I found:

***24/7 Sports composite ranking used***

NFL Draft
4 year total
***** 84/126 Drafted (67%)
**** 269/1096 Drafted (25%)
*** 409/5461 Drafted (7%)
** or Unrated 115/5600 Drafted (2%)

Pretty telling. It's consistently true that the higher rated players get drafted at a higher % and it ain't even close.

But, but, but there is more


My question to the NFL 3* crowd. Are you trying to win championships or put guys in the NFL? Jesus look around. No one is winning championships with our type of classes. If we were recruiting like Bama, no one would be defending the 3* theory. It's a sheer numbers thing

 

[TheGrove68]

Mizzou done well with 3 star guys getting drafted in first/second rounds....

2021 Bolton 3star 2nd round
2017 Harris 2 star 1st round
2015 Ray 3 star 1st round Morse 3 star 2nd round Golden 3 star 2nd round
2014 Brit 3 star 2nd round
2011 Smith 3 star 1st round
2010 Weatherspoon 2star 1st round
2009 Maclin 3star 1st round Hood 3star 1st round Moore 3star 2nd round
2001 Smith No star first round

 

[TheGrove68]

If a team consistently gets (and keeps) the 4/5 star recruits (Alabama, Ohio State, C!emson, Georgia) they will consistently be better than the team that signs 2/3 star talent.

In general yes.....Sometimes there are outliers like A&M and Texas who seem to under perform their talent. Heck even Notre Dame to a degree seems to be a bust per their elite recruiting as far as winning titles go.

I think recruiting isn't that hard to understand. On a individual level stars can be irrelevant because a lot of times 3 stars turn out to be as talented or have better work ethic/Drive/Character than 4/5 stars and perform as well or better. So yes plenty of 3 stars are dang good college players and dang good Pro's.

But with that said on a Macro level teams who load up with a depth chart full of 4/5 star are going to be better on average and if coached well they will compete for National titles. Those teams Ohio st., Clemson,Bama are in the Hunt for the Big Prize. They can weather the storm of a 4/5 star getting injured or being a bust because next up is as talented or almost as talented. They have no weak spots because all the players are physically gifted. Those teams don't have to Red shirt players and develop them, their cycle is reload not rebuild. Those teams do to the Physically gifted players rarely if well coached have glaring Holes on either side of the ball.

A team full of mostly 2/3 stars that is well coached and maxed out in development can be successful and pull off upsets and win a lot of games and have a strong bowl record. But it's almost near impossible for them to over come the talent gulf of a equally coached more talented Elite program and win a National title or in this day and age even make the playoffs.

Stars matter for Winning titles because teams who Win load up on them.......Stars matter less if you Randomly compare this 4/5 star to the slew of 3 stars.

 

[FïreBall]

The thing about stars is that a 5* is someone that can start at most P5 schools as a freshman. 3* can develop into a starter with some work. By the time they are juniors, 5* or 3* doesn’t matter. It’s all in their development.

This

 

[LWSVOL]

Yes. The general rule of thumb I've seen is 5*s are about 2.5x more likely to be drafted than 4*s and 7x that of 3*s. Huuuge gap. The issue is people don't always respect the fact that 40-50% of 5*s still won't make it...they think it's a surefire thing. And as UT fans...that's probably closer to what we've seen unfortunately...

I need to work on getting this sheet up to date.. doesn't include this year's draft yet.

 

[lifeisdeep]

I bet if you just read this thread you can find where it has been debunked. Even the guy that posted it has acknowledged it was not correct.

Yes, I saw after I had posted that others had beaten me to it. Good to know you're policing posters who post correct information but only after others already have posted it. We certainly wouldn't want too much truth.

 

[lifeisdeep]

Yes, I saw after I had posted that others had beaten me to it. Good to know you're policing people like me who post correct information but only after someone else already has. We certainly wouldn't want too much truth.

 

[sanefan]

Yes, I saw after I had posted that others had beaten me to it. Good to know you're policing posters who post correct information but only after others already have posted it. We certainly wouldn't want too much truth.

Sorry man. I was just trying to help you find the correct information since you did not have time to find where you saw it before or read the post you were replying to.

I am a big fan of the truth but repeating something on page 3 that has already been said multiple times in the same thread is not adding to the truth.

You keep doing what you do though. Post what you want and I will comment when I choose.

 

[cbvolsfan]

Jason Witten was a 3 star I believe

 

[norrislakevol]

Unless, every 2 and 3 star they got were those NFL level guys...

This the problem with modern psychology.
We always need to identify and "judge" something as "something ".

5 stars are all the same.

All 3 stars are the same.

Yet, mostly 3 stars are drafted??
That doesn't make SENSE!

Every year there is literally enough kids rated 4 star or higher to fill out an NFL draft. But people haven't caught on to that for some reason...

This isn't directed at you in particular btw.
But MAYBE...a kid is talented regardless of what a silly analyst ranks him as.
Maybe the analyst also uses college offers to rank players: IOW Bama doesn't get 5 stars. You GET a 5 star because you're wanted by Bama, OSU, Clemson....

If you ask the recruiting services how the stars come to fruition, they will tell you it is a mixture of things. Generally though a high 4 and 5 stars have the talent to make an immediate impact on a power 5 team. High 3 stars and low 4 stars may need a year or two of development to make a big impact on a power 5 team. 2 stars and low 3 stars are generally considered mid major players, or back ups on power 5 teams. If you are signing a lot of these players to a power 5 school then you are almost 100 percent of the time getting your azz beat or breaking even on a consistent basis. See Vandy and Northwestern as great examples of this. On the other hand look to Oklahoma, LSU, Bama, Clemson, Georgia, and Ohio State of you want to see what recruiting 4 and 5 stars can do. The higher ranked players can contribute earlier and generally have better measurables. This leads to much better quality depth, which pays dividends in the second half of games.

Recruiting services also look at players and try to determine if they could ever be drafted in the NFL if properly developed. 5 stars and high 4 stars are generally though to have the talent to be drafted in the first 3 rounds. Low 4 stars and high 3 stars are generally thought to have the talent to be drafted in the later rounds or sign a free agent deal.

 

[norrislakevol]

Jason Witten was a 3 star I believe

I think he was a 4 star on at least one service, but can't be completely sure. I know Arian Foster was a 3 star. Randy Sanders went to his high school in California to watch his QB play. While watching the game he noticed how good Foster was and offered him a scholarship right then and there.