I hope the star gazers are watching SF

#52
#52
I don't give a **** what anybody says, 99.9% of vol fans would be extatic with top 10 recruiting classes. To think CBJ is gonna win in the SEC with cinncinatti talent is moronic, what happened when he played a crappy UT team with said talent? Exactly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#54
#54
Boca Vol said:
Sure! But UT isn't, ever, going to have the #1 ranked recruiting class. Look at UM's mighty class of '08 resulted in...NOTHING!

Players gel or they don't. Hell, Bruce Pearl tool a crappy basketball team and turned them into a #2 seed.

No, football isn't hoops, but coaching is a large part of a team's success. Look at the Bama/ ND game. The Center & QB got into it when the game was in the bag. That's COACHING to PERFECTION.
Click to expand...

They have had them in the past. Were you around in the 90's at all?
 
#55
#55
99gator said:
so stop pretending you don't get it and stop pretending that tennessee or whoever else you want to mention is going to be able to do the exact opposite of what we know to be true in the real world.
Click to expand...

It's their way of convincing themselves that UT is on the way back to Atlanta when we are recruiting 3-star players.

:loco:
 
#57
#57
99gator said:
this list is for people who insist on pointing out every exception to the rule. i have now decided to post the rule. guess who these guys are

laron harris
antwan stewart
david ligon
jason hall
john henry
chris hannon
reuben mays
roshawn fellows
jared hostetter
brad cottam
tony mcdaniel
steven jones
brandon johson
darnell fitch
jarod parrish
antonio gaines
bill grimes
bo hardegree
sinclair cannon
ellix wilson
david holbert
ell ash
cameron mayo
ryan karl
james turner
adam myers-white
antonio wardlow
richard kemp
malcolm rawls
darrius myers
dorian davis
dustin lindsey
quentin hancock
blake garretson
jarred shaw
stephaun raines
rufus williams
donald langley
darryl vereen
william brimfield
art evans
todd campbell
cj fleming
anthony anderson
tyler maples
kevin cooper
josh hawkins
cory hall
Click to expand...

5 star #1 LB in the nation, Chris Daniels, that never saw the field, endorses this post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#60
#60
Boca Vol said:
And he will be watching next week. Nothing is exact in this world.

My point to the all the star gazers,,,STOP! What matters is what happens when they get on campus and the coaches get a hold of them.

I don't care where UT's recruiting class ranks, I care about where they end up.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but doesn't work that way. There's a reason Alabama has had the #1 recruiting class on Rivals like 4 out of 5 years, and has 3 of 4 national championships.

Guys like Kaepernik are the exception, the rarity. Like it or not, *s and offer lists matter. There's a reason Saban goes after the guys with the *s.

UT recruits in the 20s and 30s, they'll spend year after year at the bottom of the SEC.
 
#61
#61
IMHO: I think most would agree with the rule 'the more players with higher * ratings, the higher the potential of your team'. It's silly not to; also, if UT was top 5 in recruiting this year, would we even have this debate, or simply gaze hapily at our ranking?

However, we all can admit there are many variables that add to winning besides stars - motivation, chemistry and coaching being chief among them. A bonded team with great coaching full of fired-up 3* players can beat a loaded 5* team with poor coaching, etc. a lot of times. Virginia Tech is a perenial 3* king and (usually) wins via good coaching/motivation. (and I am aware they are not in the SEC, but that didn't seem to matter when Kiffin coached the Vols against them; Vols had a higher "starred" roster and got handled). Classic Southern Miss, Louisville, and Boise St teams have done it in the past with lower-ranked players - in regular season games, not just bowls where other factors can add to sub-par showings for major programs.

It is interesting to note the info from the NFL draft review previously posted:

Below is a year-by-year breakdown of the first round of the NFL draft:

2012
5-star — 4
4-star — 13
3-star — 10
2-star — 4

2011
5-star — 7
4-star — 11
3-star — 11
2-star — 3

2010
5-star — 6
4-star — 15
3-star — 6
2-star — 5

2009
5-star — 6
4-star — 12
3-star — 6
2-star — 7
Click to expand...

It would be educational to beak out the stats on whether the percentages balance on services missing on under-rating and over-rating players - i.e., does the percentage of misses on 5* (that should not have been) equal the percentage of 4* or 3* that were ranked too low?
 
Last edited:
#62
#62
Boca Vol said:
My point was there are "players" out there beyond the "*" ratings.

Coaching and desire have a lot to do with it.
Click to expand...
You are never going to convince star gazers. That's all that matters to them. Yes you do need those four and five stars but there's alot of talent under the radar. But trying to convince couch potatoes is like trying to convince the Klan to be more diverse.
 
#63
#63
Blah Blah Blah Patrick Willis was a 2 star.

Always a few that slip through, always judge for yourself, but on average the star rankings actually do have some merit.
 
#65
#65
Boca Vol said:
Colin Kaepernick:

Kaepernick achieved most of his accolades in high school as a baseball pitcher and received several scholarship offers in that sport,[1] yet he desperately wanted to play football in college. He was almost 6' 5" as a senior, but he only weighed 170 pounds (77 kg) and his coaches generally kept him from running the ball to limit his risk of injury.[2] Additionally, he had poor throwing mechanics, despite his strong arm.[1] During his junior year, Pitman's head coach at the time, Larry Nigro, made a highlight tape which Colin's brother Kyle copied to DVD and then sent to about one hundred Division I-A (now FBS) programs, receiving some interest but no offers for scholarship.[1] Even as a senior, he received little attention from FBS schools. Although the Wolf Pack coaching staff frequently watched video of his high school team, no one from Nevada's staff came to Turlock to see him play during his senior football season.[2] Wolf Pack head coach Chris Ault decided to offer him a scholarship after one of his assistants, Barry Sacks, saw Kaepernick dominate a high school basketball game on an evening he was suffering from a fever of 102 °F (39 °C). Nevada was the only school that offered him a football scholarship, but was concerned that he would opt for baseball until he signed in February 2006.[2]
Click to expand...

dumb
 
#66
#66
Its all about coaching not recruiting rankings. I would take a team that were all 3 star players coached by Nick Saban over a team with all 5 stars coached by Derek Dooley.
 
#67
#67
BJWeeks said:
Its all about coaching not recruiting rankings. I would take a team that were all 3 star players coached by Nick Saban over a team with all 5 stars coached by Derek Dooley.
Click to expand...

The problem is, in this conference you must have both to compete. It's not an either, or situation.
 
#69
#69
Snakebrown13 said:
IMHO: I think most would agree with the rule 'the more players with higher * ratings, the higher the potential of your team'. It's silly not to; also, if UT was top 5 in recruiting this year, would we even have this debate, or simply gaze hapily at our ranking?

However, we all can admit there are many variables that add to winning besides stars - motivation, chemistry and coaching being chief among them. A bonded team with great coaching full of fired-up 3* players can beat a loaded 5* team with poor coaching, etc. a lot of times. Virginia Tech is a perenial 3* king and (usually) wins via good coaching/motivation. (and I am aware they are not in the SEC, but that didn't seem to matter when Kiffin coached the Vols against them; Vols had a higher "starred" roster and got handled). Classic Southern Miss, Louisville, and Boise St teams have done it in the past with lower-ranked players - in regular season games, not just bowls where other factors can add to sub-par showings for major programs.

It is interesting to note the info from the NFL draft review previously posted:



It would be educational to beak out the stats on whether the percentages balance on services missing on under-rating and over-rating players - i.e., does the percentage of misses on 5* (that should not have been) equal the percentage of 4* or 3* that were ranked too low?
Click to expand...

You also have to consider the total data population of rated recruits for this to be a valid conclusion. As an example in a given recruiting class if you have the following:

5 star recruits 10%
4 star recruits 30%
3 star recruits 60%

Proportionally you are obviously going to have more 4 and 3 star recruits in the NFL because you have more opportunities for NFL talent to develop and choose from.
 
Last edited:
#72
#72
ric1958 said:
Tell that to Chris Petersen. And no Boise State does not play in the SEC but the last time they played an SEC team they whipped them. Better odds of winning a NC with the higher rated players? Yes. Is it a guarantee? No. All I am saying is that most of the posters on here think that a 3* player is a waste of time. Get tired of the first thing you hear when we get a commit is "he is only a 3 star".
Click to expand...

Not true what people talk about is when we get 3 star skilled players. every team has to take 3 stars but u need play makers n u have a better chance of success with bigger n faster players..

U need some 4 stars to take u from 8 wins to 10 wins...

I hate the Gators but im with 99..

U think cbj is out there recruiting 3 stars u r crazy... only time will tell if he can sign any of them..
 
#73
#73
Boca Vol said:
Colin Kaepernick:

Kaepernick achieved most of his accolades in high school as a baseball pitcher and received several scholarship offers in that sport,[1] yet he desperately wanted to play football in college. He was almost 6' 5" as a senior, but he only weighed 170 pounds (77 kg) and his coaches generally kept him from running the ball to limit his risk of injury.[2] Additionally, he had poor throwing mechanics, despite his strong arm.[1] During his junior year, Pitman's head coach at the time, Larry Nigro, made a highlight tape which Colin's brother Kyle copied to DVD and then sent to about one hundred Division I-A (now FBS) programs, receiving some interest but no offers for scholarship.[1] Even as a senior, he received little attention from FBS schools. Although the Wolf Pack coaching staff frequently watched video of his high school team, no one from Nevada's staff came to Turlock to see him play during his senior football season.[2] Wolf Pack head coach Chris Ault decided to offer him a scholarship after one of his assistants, Barry Sacks, saw Kaepernick dominate a high school basketball game on an evening he was suffering from a fever of 102 °F (39 °C). Nevada was the only school that offered him a football scholarship, but was concerned that he would opt for baseball until he signed in February 2006.[2]
Click to expand...

I think it's been stated on here all to often. Exception, not the rule.

Stats are stats, & in the end, the stats will prevail & the world will be right with itself. Ie, you can't expect every 3* that gets busted on in here to end up being a Redshirt Frosh Heisman trophy winner or Kaepernick. Ask Kentucky how easy it is to compete in the SEC with a stable full of "underrated" 3*, eh?

I rest my case.

If we get some good ones & they pan out, & work hard, & turn out great, then that's gravy, but we have to get a significant # of 4* each year if we plan to hold our own against the top of the SEC. Just how it is.
 
#74
#74
PrattvilleVol said:
You also have to consider the total data population of rated recruits for this to be a valid conclusion. As an example in a given recruiting class if you have the following:

5 star recruits 10%
4 star recruits 30%
3 star recruits 60%

Proportionally you are obviously going to have more 4 and 3 star recruits in the NFL because you have more opportunities for NFL talent to develop and choose from.
Click to expand...

valid point - and while that does have a big impact, it still leaves room to question where the unaccounted for 5* players were drafted (later rounds). I guess THE question is WHY the 4*s and 3*s went before the remaining 5* players in the 1st round drafts referenced, since we know there were more than 5 of them in 2012 and 7 in 2011, etc. Granted, some of that is on a team need basis, but on a 'best player available' model, those numbers show coaches were routinely taking 4* guys over the ramining 5* guys on the board, which leads me back to a mis-calculation in recruit ranking for whatever reason.

Interesting note: ESPN Insider had a plug for a UT LB recruit (Vareen) that said he was a steal - mentioned he was a 4* that deserved another star, however the services stopped grading him since he committed so early (3/12). How often does that happen? also, what other factors may affect star rankings than just projected ability?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top