5* recruiting (debunked)

[sjt18]

Key word TALENT. I’ll go with this staff’s evaluation of such over mama’s boys number crunchers who are simply reading offers and taking orders from their service masters.

Hopefully.... the staff knows what they're doing. If they prove they do... in a few years the recruiting sites will follow Pruitt around to know who needs a 5th star.

 

[Smokeyone]

Key word TALENT. I’ll go with this staff’s evaluation of such over mama’s boys number crunchers who are simply reading offers and taking orders from their service masters.

Because the services never hold or attend camps or watch film right? All they do is look for a handful of key offers. Is that what you really feel happens? Because that's not how it works.

The folks at the services watch as much film as they can, go to camps, read reports, go to games. They scout thousands of kids every year. They are not infallible by any means but they are usually more right than wrong.

 

[butchna]

Because the services never hold or attend camps or watch film right? All they do is look for a handful of key offers. Is that what you really feel happens? Because that's not how it works.

The folks at the services watch as much film as they can, go to camps, read reports, go to games. They scout thousands of kids every year. They are not infallible by any means but they are usually more right than wrong.

Once again...WHO is doing the “evaluating”? If you think they’re better than our coaches...who live by their evaluations...then we’re just not going to agree.

 

[bamawriter]

The star rating is how the recruiting services measure the likelihood of a player going pro. That being said if they were even 50% accurate there would be many more 4-5* players active in the NFL vs 3*s given the ratio of around 1 in 100,000 making to the league to begin with.

That is not at all how math works.

 

[njvols]

For it to be a rule... those who pull those highly rated classes would always have rosters with elite talent.

Jones' star-gazing proved that incorrect. But I don't remember Jones winning a lot of head to head recruiting match ups with the best coaches. A few. Mostly UT homers like Hurd. But mostly he won 4* player that no one but the recruiting sites were all that impressed with.

It is closer to the truth that getting players that Saban and a few others pursue is more indicative of getting championship talent than signing 5* guys. Knowing this... the recruiting sites follow a few guys like Saban around like puppies to figure out who should get 5*.

Yeah, that's why I get more excited about a 3* w/ BIG 6 SEC offers than a 3* that has offers from Louisiana Tech, UAB, Illinois and Iowa State

 

[1vol8]

Because the services never hold or attend camps or watch film right? All they do is look for a handful of key offers. Is that what you really feel happens? Because that's not how it works.

The folks at the services watch as much film as they can, go to camps, read reports, go to games. They scout thousands of kids every year. They are not infallible by any means but they are usually more right than wrong.

#1 they watch highlights. You do realize that a kids highlights are built by the kid himself of only his best plays correct? They have 0 knowledge of how the kid plays throughout the game. A 4-5* rb can show highlights of a game where it looks like hes averaging over 7 yds if all you seen were highlights. If you were there you may know he got stuffed behind the line all night. Shows no vision, runs to darkness.
#2 yes they create camps and attend others. Those camps are simply about measurables and testing. Unless you're a qb in which it's that plus routes on air and possible 7 on 7. They do NOT however go to games. Not once have I EVER seen a rep from a recruiting service at a hs football game. IF that ever happens it'll only be for who THEY consider a 5* can't miss prospect.

 

[PMC2726]

I wish all 5*s could be Eric Berry. Every. Single. One.

Byrce Brown
James Banks
Kenny O'Neal
Walter Fisher
Brandon Jefferies
Chris Donald
Drew Richmond
Da'Rick Rogers
Nu'Keese
Cam Clear
LaMarcus Coker
Maurice Couch
Janzen Jackson
Demetrice Morley
Brent Vinson

 

[VolDaddy61]

I believe coaching and player development mean more at this level. Of course you would like to have an entire class of elite prospects, with that being said I'm excited that this staff has a good track record of evaluating and developing talent. Brighter days ahead guys. GB

 

[1vol8]

May

That is not at all how math works.

That's exactly how it works from the research I did. Now granted it was yrs ago but the ratio of a peewee fb player making it to the league is around 100,000-1. Hs fb player 10,000-1. College 1060-1. Not my math but that's the results of what I read. I have no reason not to believe it.

 

[sjt18]

I wish all 5*s could be Eric Berry. Every. Single. One.

Byrce Brown
James Banks
Kenny O'Neal
Walter Fisher
Brandon Jefferies
Chris Donald
Drew Richmond
Da'Rick Rogers
Nu'Keese
Cam Clear
LaMarcus Coker
Maurice Couch
Janzen Jackson
Demetrice Morley
Brent Vinson

Wow. Great list. I would say a few of those guys actually had 5* talent and 1* heads... but UT sure does seem to find the 5* busts. I remember the panic here when folks thought Chris Donald was going to go to ND.

 

[The Crimson Cried]

Saying five stars don't matter is pure folly. It's like saying you don't need to hire the employees with the most potential for your company. It doesn't make any sense. There will be others who will be successful but a five star athlete is the MOST LIKELY to be successful. Will they be the only ones who will be successful? No. Are they the most likely to be successful? Yes. End of story. These facts don't change because our program has been in shambles and has not been able to attract as many ultra talents as in the past.

 

[Pride85]

Star children unite! We don't need no stinkin' 3 stars.

 

[Bash]

For it to be a rule... those who pull those highly rated classes would always have rosters with elite talent.

Jones' star-gazing proved that incorrect. But I don't remember Jones winning a lot of head to head recruiting match ups with the best coaches. A few. Mostly UT homers like Hurd. But mostly he won 4* player that no one but the recruiting sites were all that impressed with.

It is closer to the truth that getting players that Saban and a few others pursue is more indicative of getting championship talent than signing 5* guys. Knowing this... the recruiting sites follow a few guys like Saban around like puppies to figure out who should get 5*.

Has anyone said it's a rule? It's a strong correlation.

 

[bamawriter]

May
That's exactly how it works from the research I did. Now granted it was yrs ago but the ratio of a peewee fb player making it to the league is around 100,000-1. Hs fb player 10,000-1. College 1060-1. Not my math but that's the results of what I read. I have no reason not to believe it.

Except that there aren't enough 5 star players to fill out the 1st round every year, let alone a decent percentage of the league.

 

[1vol8]

I wish all 5*s could be Eric Berry. Every. Single. One.

Byrce Brown
James Banks
Kenny O'Neal
Walter Fisher
Brandon Jefferies
Chris Donald
Drew Richmond
Da'Rick Rogers
Nu'Keese
Cam Clear
LaMarcus Coker
Maurice Couch
Janzen Jackson
Demetrice Morley
Brent Vinson

I actually looked at that list the other night but wasn't going to bring it up. But since YOU did I feel the need to point out how much longer that list looks in comparison to just the probowl 2/3*. Coincidence? I think not for the sake if this thread.

 

[99gator]

• 30 five-stars, or 0.01 percent of the class
• 380 four-stars, or 0.13 percent of the class
• 1,328 three-stars, or 0.44 percent of the class
• 1,859 two-stars, or 0.62 percent of the class
• 296,403 unrated, or 98.88 percent of the class

In quantity, there is quality. I don't know how many times this has to be explained to people.

Recruiting is not everything. Recruiting just ensures a fair fight. You are not going to be the only one with talent in the SEC.

But, put together mediocre recruiting class after mediocre recruiting class and see how that pans out.

Woudln't be pretty

 

[1vol8]

Except that there aren't enough 5 star players to fill out the 1st round every year, let alone a decent percentage of the league.

Ask yourself why not considering there are 32 every yr coming out of HS. Im not counting injury but off the field issues and 5* busts are a huge reason why. I bet if someone decided to look at the 1st rd picks alone from this yrs draft they may find that maybe (just a guess)5 of those guys were 5*. 15 or so 4* and 12 3*. May even be a 2* in there. Would that suprise you if that guess were true? I would also bet that half of the 32 5* players don't get drafted at all.

 

[UTChicagoV]

There are a few misunderstandings regarding recruiting rankings in this post that make it pointless to discuss.

1) Stars are not indicative of professional careers. They are indicative of readiness to contribute as a starter and impact in a college program. 247Sports Rating Explanation

2) The Blue Chip ratio has proven that you need to recruit more 4 & 5 star players to have *regular* success as a college program. Blue-Chip Ratio 2018: 13 teams have title-worthy recruiting

3) Basic math shows that HS players have a better shot at the NFL if they are 4 or 5 star players versus a 3 star or lower (ie., a higher proportion of 4 and 5 star players are drafted versus 3 star or lower). The NFL draft proves that recruiting rankings matter.

 

[1vol8]

In quantity, there is quality. I don't know how many times this has to be explained to people.

Recruiting is not everything. Recruiting just ensures a fair fight. You are not going to be the only one with talent in the SEC.

But, put together mediocre recruiting class after mediocre recruiting class and see how that pans out.

Woudln't be pretty

No one in this board is suggesting that 5*players are not needed. The argument is weather or not a top 10 class is needed. The answer is no because the recruiting services don't fully evaluate anyone to give them a ranking over one or the other.
That being said I'll take the roster of 2/3* that I posted on the thread and tell you Bama wouldn't stand a chance and neither would Clemson.

 

[99gator]

Ask yourself why not considering there are 32 every yr coming out of HS. Im not counting injury but off the field issues and 5* busts are a huge reason why. I bet if someone decided to look at the 1st rd picks alone from this yrs draft they may find that maybe (just a guess)5 of those guys were 5*. 15 or so 4* and 12 3*. May even be a 2* in there. Would that suprise you if that guess were true? I would also bet that half of the 32 5* players don't get drafted at all.

ok, let's assume your numbers are correct. That would mean that 16.6% of 5 star recruits are 1st round draft picks. That's way, way higher than 4 or 3 star players

 

[99gator]

No one in this board is suggesting that 5*players are not needed. The argument is weather or not a top 10 class is needed. The answer is no because the recruiting services don't fully evaluate anyone to give them a ranking over one or the other.
That being said I'll take the roster of 2/3* that I posted on the thread and tell you Bama wouldn't stand a chance and neither would Clemson.

Great. What are the odds your evaluation of all of those 2 and 3 stars are that good that you identify those guys instead of a bunch of scrubs?

My experience is the following.....

Florida's best seasons were when.....

Florida had strong recruiting classes with usually a #1 class thrown in there every three years or so.
Florida had the target on its back and didn't sneak up on anyone.
Everyone on Florida's schedule was jacked up to play Florida and the opponent consistently spoke of tearing down the goal posts.
Florida had 5 stars that were busts, but the 5 stars that panned out were All-SEC, All-American, won individual awards, were high draft picks and provided the difference between being a good team and being a champion.

Now, My guess is the same could be said of Tennessee

 

[munsterlander]

The thread was posted a few days ago suggesting we don't have a chance without 5* recruits. So I took to google to find out how right he could be and decided, instead of debating a percentage of what I learned based on a comment here and there, why not put it all on here? So here we go.

Let's see how we would feel about this hypothetical roster at UT back in the day.

Qb1 Arron Rodgers
Qb2 Matt Ryan
Rb1 Levion Bell
Wr. Mike Evans
OL Travis Frederick
OL. Trent Williams
TE. Travis Kelsey

C. Richard Sherman
DL Von Miller
DL Arron Donald
DL Cliff Avril
All 3* recruits and that's just the probowl.

According to 247 we shouldnt be talking about 2* talent such as Aquib Talib or Kalil Mack because they are less likely to go pro.

Even less talk is deserved for the bottom feeders (unranked) such as Tony Romo and Tom Brady.

Ive never been a believer in the recruiting services for reasons unimportant (although one reason should already be clear). But if you choose to believe a panel full of guys that went to school to learn how to do this from a book, be my guest. I'll trust my own eyes and experience along with the coaching staff that trust the same things over what some pencil pusher says they are.

No antagonism here, just find the "argument" interesting.

Seems like several separate issues are being mixed together. Some random thoughts:

• Recruiting services get it wrong sometimes - agree, but citing a list of superstar misses isn't an effective way to characterize how often they get it wrong. That's cherry picking to make an argument.
• And it would be an inductive fallacy, I think, to conclude that because superstar misses exist that we could successfully identify and assemble a team of them like your list. Who wouldn't like the roster you suggested? No way that ever happens. Maybe you get 1 or 2 like that.
• So because the recruiting service get it wrong sometimes, we shouldn't be hung up on getting 5*s. Well - maybe. Again, it depends on how often they get it wrong. The data for Clemson and Bama suggest they get a bunch of them right.
• But - does it really matter what a recruiting service says? (Beyond recruiting rankings, which, um, does that really matter either?) Are successful programs pursuing/getting 5 stars because of recruiting service assessments? Or do the recruiting services just tend to get a good percentage of the no-brainers correct but the theoretically far more knowledgeable coaches actually pay no attention whatsoever and make their own decisions? I know, I know - kinda conspiratorial - but I have to wonder if recruiting services really exist for any other reason than to keep fan(atic)s thinking about college sports all the time, paying subscriptions and allowing themselves to be targeted for ads.

I guess I'd say I trust some coaches more than recruiting services - the ones that are successful over the long-term. But I think for far more - coaches and services - it's a crap shoot. Numb nutz CBJ had good recruiting classes on paper, but they almost never seemed to pan out. And I hear the argument that it was lack of development, not talent identification. I suspect it was both. During his tenure, maybe 90% of the time I felt like there was a reason a players was "available" for UT to get. Some obvious exceptions. Blind squirrel.

And last comment - I've tried to prioritize technical issues, defects, system enhancements, evaluation criteria etc. for over 35 years. It is very hard to effectively prioritize a list of even 20-30 things. When I see rankings like 684th best player, I just laugh. Subjective assessments on top of subjective assessments, some bazaar scoring and calculation - I'm supposed to take that serious? And way more players don't get "thoroughly assessed" than do? Outta sight, outta mind - can't do the camps, you're screwed. The whole thing is just ridiculous nonsense.

I'd like to believe Pruitt and staff (especially conditioning) are significantly better than what we've had. I hope so. But it won't surprise me if we are still struggling for 7-8 win seasons the next few years.

 

[chargervol]

Good coaches won the National Championship well before the invention of recruiting services.

Anyone that believes those services provide any sort of input on who the decent coaches go after, has the most uninformed take on how it all works, possible.

They ride the coattails of proven programs, adjust rankings wildly based on nothing more than offers and have now introduced 'pay for rankings' (camps).

They're fan folly for the uninformed masses but given several of the posts here, there's no chance for a shortage of that anytime soon.

 

[butchna]

Good coaches won the National Championship well before the invention of recruiting services.

Anyone that believes those services provide any sort of input on who the decent coaches go after, has the most uninformed take on how it all works, possible.

They ride the coattails of proven programs, adjust rankings wildly based on nothing more than offers and have now introduced 'pay for rankings' (camps).

They're fan folly for the uninformed masses but given several of the posts here, there's no chance for a shortage of that anytime soon.

Recruiting services are to football what the Academy is to movies. They’ve somehow managed to hoodwink the masses that their opinion supersedes all. And they have the masses of sheep to baaaa them along.

 

[bamawriter]

Good coaches won the National Championship well before the invention of recruiting services.

Anyone that believes those services provide any sort of input on who the decent coaches go after, has the most uninformed take on how it all works, possible.

They ride the coattails of proven programs, adjust rankings wildly based on nothing more than offers and have now introduced 'pay for rankings' (camps).

They're fan folly for the uninformed masses but given several of the posts here, there's no chance for a shortage of that anytime soon.

Let's say the recruiting services do absolutely no research and simply hand out high ratings to highly-recruited players. Sure seems like it's produced fairly accurate results.