5* recruiting (debunked)

#252
#252
bamawriter said:
If it means "drafted in any round" then those numbers are simply wrong.
Click to expand...
Ok. I just read it a little more in depth. It just means lived up to the hype. It's an old article (4yrs) so I'm sure the numbers have fluctuated one way or the other but the movement can't be much better or worse overall.
 
#253
#253
1vol8 said:
Ok. I just read it a little more in depth. It just means lived up to the hype. It's an old article (4yrs) so I'm sure the numbers have fluctuated one way or the other but the movement can't be much better or worse overall.
Click to expand...

Over the years, about 25% of 5 star recruits get drafted in the first round. Some programs are better at developing their talent (Nick Saban's 5 stars go in the 1st round at a 50% clip while more than 50% of Gus Malzahn's go undrafted).

A 5 star is more than twice as likely to go in the 1st than a 4 star. A 4 star is five times more likely to go in the first than a 3 star.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol and lifeisdeep
#254
#254
bamawriter said:
Over the years, about 25% of 5 star recruits get drafted in the first round. Some programs are better at developing their talent (Nick Saban's 5 stars go in the 1st round at a 50% clip while more than 50% of Gus Malzahn's go undrafted).

A 5 star is more than twice as likely to go in the 1st than a 4 star. A 4 star is five times more likely to go in the first than a 3 star.
Click to expand...
I get that. But it wasn't about who went in the 1st rd. It was an overall accuracy of 247 of 5 star recruits that lived up to the hype in College (I'm assuming because Tim Tebow was great in college but well below average in the NFL). That has to mean that the recruiting services get it wrong 70% of the time of players coming out of HS overall.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna
#256
#256
1vol8 said:
I get that. But it wasn't about who went in the 1st rd. It was an overall accuracy of 247 of 5 star recruits that lived up to the hype in College (I'm assuming because Tim Tebow was great in college but well below average in the NFL). That has to mean that the recruiting services get it wrong 70% of the time of players coming out of HS overall.
Click to expand...

Again, it depends on what your standard is. Typically, a first round pick will have produced in college.

But, there are so many factors that play into it. Coaching and development can ruin a prospect. Does that mean the recruiting services were wrong, or that the coach sucks, or a healthy mix of both? Butch Jones got a lot of players that other programs also wanted. Does the fact that they didn't wind up producing reflect poorly on 247 or on Butch? Note the fact that Butch's best NFL product was a transfer who spent his first year getting developed by Nick Saban.

It's absurd to suggest that a 5 star player ought to put up X, Y, and Z numbers or he must not have been that good. There are countless factors that play into production. What if a 5 star receiver has a mediocre QB tasked with getting him the ball? What if a 5 star RB has a lousy O-line?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol
#257
#257
"What if a 5 star receiver has a mediocre QB tasked with getting him the ball? What if a 5 star RB has a lousy O-line?"

What if a 5* qb has the mediocre wrs and no o line or rbs? That's the excuse 247 used to keep our 2019 qb a 3*.
Then they wanted to see what he did in his senior season before they bumped him up after a strong performance at the opening where he beats out most of the 4* qbs.

He completes 65% , passes for nearly 3500 yrds and 34 tds while adding 6 more scores on the ground in 10 games yet they do nothing but drop his rank?

That's the "politics" that I have a real problem with.

To your point why is any wr or rb rated a 5* if he doesn't have the supporting cast if it obviously doesn't work that way for qbs unless he's being recruited by the likes of Clemson, Alabama or Ga?
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna
#258
#258
1vol8 said:
"What if a 5 star receiver has a mediocre QB tasked with getting him the ball? What if a 5 star RB has a lousy O-line?"

What if a 5* qb has the mediocre wrs and no o line or rbs? That's the excuse 247 used to keep our 2019 qb a 3*.
Then they wanted to see what he did in his senior season before they bumped him up after a strong performance at the opening where he beats out most of the 4* qbs.

He completes 65% , passes for nearly 3500 yrds and 34 tds while adding 6 more scores on the ground in 10 games yet they do nothing but drop his rank?

That's the "politics" that I have a real problem with.

To your point why is any wr or rb rated a 5* if he doesn't have the supporting cast if it obviously doesn't work that way for qbs unless he's being recruited by the likes of Clemson, Alabama or Ga?
Click to expand...

Like I said before, you seem to take this stuff personally. What difference does it make where your HS QB is ranked if he's being recruited by the right programs, none of whom are looking to the rankings for guidance? If he's being flooded with offers while 247 is dropping him, then they are probably wrong. If he's not, then where's the issue? Either he will get to college and prove the rankings wrong or he will prove them right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol
#259
#259
VolForLife83 said:
There is more lower stars than that of 4 and 5* guys. Alabama, Clemson, Georgia etc have proven blue chips win championships.



Are some higher rated plays overrated? Yes. Are some lower guys overlooked, for whatever reason? Yes

But don't kid yourself, we need highly rated players
Click to expand...

/End thread
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johncarter53
#260
#260
bamawriter said:
Like I said before, you seem to take this stuff personally. What difference does it make where your HS QB is ranked if he's being recruited by the right programs, none of whom are looking to the rankings for guidance? If he's being flooded with offers while 247 is dropping him, then they are probably wrong. If he's not, then where's the issue? Either he will get to college and prove the rankings wrong or he will prove them right.
Click to expand...
Im not taking it personal but for the sake of this thread and your quote its relevant. My point being it shouldn't matter what position you play, school you play for, who is recruiting you or politics. It should only be about a kids skill level at his position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna
#261
#261
1vol8 said:
Im not taking it personal but for the sake of this thread and your quote its relevant. My point being it shouldn't matter what position you play, school you play for, who is recruiting you or politics. It should only be about a kids skill level at his position.
Click to expand...

Agreed but for "who is recruiting you." That is literally the only thing that should matter to the player.

Do you think the college coaches are concerned with "politics?"
 
#262
#262
bamawriter said:
Agreed but for "who is recruiting you." That is literally the only thing that should matter to the player.

Do you think the college coaches are concerned with "politics?"
Click to expand...
Not at all. That being said a couple of us have been arguing all along that a coaches (At least the good ones) evaluation of a player means much more than a pencil pushers. And given the fact that the recruiting services are wrong as often as they are, a lack of a top 10 class doesn't mean you can't compete as long as you have the right coach that truly knows what hes looking at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Al Orange and butchna
#263
#263
1vol8 said:
Not at all. That being said a couple of us have been arguing all along that a coaches (At least the good ones) evaluation of a player means much more than a pencil pushers. And given the fact that the recruiting services are wrong as often as they are, a lack of a top 10 class doesn't mean you can't compete as long as you have the right coach that truly knows what hes looking at.
Click to expand...

But they aren't wrong very often. You went back 16 years and found 3 examples of teams that won a national title without averaging a Top 10 class, and the lowest of those averaged 16th. No one is arguing that a stellar coach couldn't pull it off. But the results speak for themselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol
#264
#264
bamawriter said:
But they aren't wrong very often. You went back 16 years and found 3 examples of teams that won a national title without averaging a Top 10 class, and the lowest of those averaged 16th. No one is arguing that a stellar coach couldn't pull it off. But the results speak for themselves.
Click to expand...
I was referring more to overall 5* success result. But you're right about the history of top 10 classes.
But it could be argued that if the result of what I posted is correct then every class in the history of recruiting could be better or worse than where it ranked if it had been evaluated more thoroughly.
 
#265
#265
1vol8 said:
I was referring more to overall 5* success result. But you're right about the history of top 10 classes.
But it could be argued that if the result of what I posted is correct then every class in the history of recruiting could be better or worse than where it ranked if it had been evaluated more thoroughly.
Click to expand...

But that would requiring ignoring all other factors like coaching, development, and competition. It would also assume that players don't improve after high school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol
#266
#266
bamawriter said:
But that would requiring ignoring all other factors like coaching and development. It would also assume that players don't improve after high school.
Click to expand...
No. Why would it or could it when a players rank coming out of HS is final the moment he signs?
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna
#269
#269
1vol8 said:
Im saying coaching and development have nothing to do with the rank of a class because once they sign their individual rank doesn't move up or down from that point. They are what they are.
Click to expand...

There is no amount of evaluation that is possible that could completely negate human error.

Let me ask this, has your QB prospect received the kinds of offers he was hoping for or expecting? I don't expect you to provide specifics.
 
#270
#270
bamawriter said:
There is no amount of evaluation that is possible that could completely negate human error.

Let me ask this, has your QB prospect received the kinds of offers he was hoping for or expecting? I don't expect you to provide specifics.
Click to expand...
AFTER "The Opening" yes. Although he had several P5 offers before hand, after committing to UT he didn't advertise later offers no matter the school.
 
#271
#271
1vol8 said:
AFTER "The Opening" yes. Although he had several P5 offers before hand, after committing to UT he didn't advertise later offers no matter the school.
Click to expand...

Wait, you're critical of The Opening, and yet it seems to have boosted his stock.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 08Vol
#272
#272
bamawriter said:
Wait, you're critical of The Opening, and yet it seems to have boosted his stock.
Click to expand...
It got him recognized. One of the scouts referred to him coming in as "a relatively unknown". And Im not critical of The Opening itself. Im criticizing the politics surrounding it. If it were open to the public many more people would've seen what I already know. All I feel comfortable saying about it is not all of what they published or said is 100% true in regards to what really happened. But that's behind us now. Why did you ask if he got the offers he was expecting?
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna
#273
#273
1vol8 said:
It got him recognized. One of the scouts referred to him coming in as "a relatively unknown". And Im not critical of The Opening itself. Im criticizing the politics surrounding it. If it were open to the public many more people would've seen what I already know. All I feel comfortable saying about it is not all of what they published or said is 100% true in regards to what really happened. But that's behind us now. Why did you ask if he got the offers he was expecting?
Click to expand...

I was curious if his own expectations jived with both the rankings and the schools' evaluations. That would appear to be the case.
 
#274
#274
bamawriter said:
I was curious if his own expectations jived with both the rankings and the schools' evaluations. That would appear to be the case.
Click to expand...
I couldn't answer that. Idk what he felt. Although it seems obvious that the schools evaluations along with the Elite 11 were completely different then that of 247.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna
#275
#275
I wonder if any star ranking service (experts, panels, whatever) adjust those ratings throughout the kids college career?

It’d be neat to see how our longest developed players turned out over each coaches tenure. Then we can compare Pruitt in a few years to them.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top