It can't just be me who thinks this...right?

[Hacksaw]

Okay, it's long. And I'm going to make it a little longer by starting off with an apology in advance, because I know that none of this is new. Still, I just wanted to say it all at once, for whatever it's worth. And I would hope it can stay in the football forum, because it's aimed more at the conventional fan than the geeks (no offense) in the recruiting forum.

Recruiting is an inexact "science" -- really not a science at all. Not all high school players play against the same level of competition. Not all of them receive the same degree of exposure. Even competing recruiting services don't always agree. And we've all seen a 3-star player magically become a 4-star overnight after signing with Alabama. So there's that.

All of the qualities that make a blue chip player a 4 or 5-star don't amount to a guarantee that he will make a positive impact in college. How many of these kids have disappointed us over the years? I would guess many more than have lived-up to the hype. I could name names, but I won't. Many come to mind immediately and I know they do for a lot of us here.

We're talking about kids here. No matter how we may view them now, it's just a snapshot taken at this particular stage in their ongoing development as players and humans. There is no way for us to see what they may one day become. They are all still in the early stages of realizing whatever potential they may (or may not) have. Many of the 4 or 5-stars are highly ranked because they are further up the curve now than the 2 and 3-stars. That does NOT mean that lower ranked players won't eventually be better than many of the higher ranked ones. We see it all the time. It's almost a cliche, the guy nobody wanted who ended-up being the best running back, tackle or defensive end in football.

Athletic ability is obviously very important. But by itself it is not enough to ensure that a player will be successful in making the jump from high school to college. I would much rather have a kid who is marginally less-athletic, but has the high character, work ethic, great attitude, willingness to push himself and his teammates, capable of taking coaching, smart enough to be successful in the classroom and more likely to keep himself eligible to play. These are the qualities that give your team a solid foundation and a chance to win. I would rather have 100% of what he has to offer than <50% of what the "can't miss" kid might give you -- or zero, if we can't keep him on the team for reasons that very often have nothing to do with football. Think Tom Osborne's great Nebraska teams that never had high recruiting rankings.

Everything else being equal, of course we would prefer to have a player that the recruiting services agree has the best athleticism and intangibles. But there's more to consider than just the stars.

 

[volfannbama]

Okay, it's long. And I'm going to make it a little longer by starting off with an apology in advance, because I know that none of this is new. Still, I just wanted to say it all at once, for whatever it's worth. And I would hope it can stay in the football forum, because it's aimed more at the conventional fan than the geeks (no offense) in the recruiting forum.

Recruiting is an inexact "science" -- really not a science at all. Not all high school players play against the same level of competition. Not all of them receive the same degree of exposure. Even competing recruiting services don't always agree. And we've all seen a 3-star player magically become a 4-star overnight after signing with Alabama. So there's that.

All of the qualities that make a blue chip player a 4 or 5-star don't amount to a guarantee that he will make a positive impact in college. How many of these kids have disappointed us over the years? I would guess many more than have lived-up to the hype. I could name names, but I won't. Many come to mind immediately and I know they do for a lot of us here.

We're talking about kids here. No matter how we may view them now, it's just a snapshot taken at this particular stage in their ongoing development as players and humans. There is no way for us to see what they may one day become. They are all still in the early stages of realizing whatever potential they may (or may not) have. Many of the 4 or 5-stars are highly ranked because they are further up the curve now than the 2 and 3-stars. That does NOT mean that lower ranked players won't eventually be better than many of the higher ranked ones. We see it all the time. It's almost a cliche, the guy nobody wanted who ended-up being the best running back, tackle or defensive end in football.

Athletic ability is obviously very important. But by itself it is not enough to ensure that a player will be successful in making the jump from high school to college. I would much rather have a kid who is marginally less-athletic, but has the high character, work ethic, great attitude, willingness to push himself and his teammates, capable of taking coaching, smart enough to be successful in the classroom and more likely to keep himself eligible to play. These are the qualities that give your team a solid foundation and a chance to win. I would rather have 100% of what he has to offer than <50% of what the "can't miss" kid might give you -- or zero, if we can't keep him on the team for reasons that very often have nothing to do with football. Think Tom Osborne's great Nebraska teams that never had high recruiting rankings.

Everything else being equal, of course we would prefer to have a player that the recruiting services agree has the best athleticism and intangibles. But there's more to consider than just the stars.

The statistics of the star ranking are heavily against you as it relates to class ranking and contending for national championships. Heather actually did a pretty good job this morning in talking about Cam being a 3 star and working out but naming the others that didn't. What they said was that about 1 in 18 3 stars turns out to be a really good player. I don't follow recruiting much because I cheer for Tennessee, don't realty care who is out there playing.
A lot can be said about player development on those 3-4 star guys, but it cant make up for pure God given ability. Sadly, for us, CBJ and staff have yet to prove they can teach fundamental skills throughout a season as the team has constantly struggled in that area. To me, you mix that with lacking recruiting stars and its just not a good mix.
But I don't see bad mouthing the guys that commit to play here. I sucked at football but if Tennessee would have been dumb enough to give me a scholarship, I would have taken it in a heartbeat.

 

[UT Hill Man]

I think star ratings are a good indicator of future success, and we have gotten enough highly rated recruits in the past 4 years to be better than we have been.

I'll say it again, attrition is killing us. We have signed 110 prospects the last 4 cycles - 25 players have just went poof!

People say Alabama has attrition - yes they do - but not as much as Butch has - and Alabama recruits at such a higher level that they can overcome this.

And take national champion Clemson - they only signed 83 players over that same 4 year span - very little attrition - and it showed as their upperclassmen out performed Bama in the title game.

If we want better recruiting classes, then Butch needs to keep them here 4 years or until they enter the draft.

 

[Special Ed]

No matter the star rating, the recruit has to be well-coached to reach his potential as a college football player.

If the staff doesn't put enough effort into developing the player, more than likely, he won't play up to his star rating.

 

[m1al]

OP, your thought was to long...

 

[Lurkerin]

The difference between "Raw athleticism" and "developed skill" is why they re-grade after the all-star games. When they go up against other highly skilled competition, you can tell how quick kids are picking up new schemes and if they can be developed. There are definitely guys that slip through the cracks. But generally with the 5 stars it is feast or famine. You are getting 1st-3rd round draft talent or undrafted washes like we seem to get.

 

[Coachmike17]

I think star ratings are a good indicator of future success, and we have gotten enough highly rated recruits in the past 4 years to be better than we have been.

I'll say it again, attrition is killing us. We have signed 110 prospects the last 4 cycles - 25 players have just went poof!

People say Alabama has attrition - yes they do - but not as much as Butch has - and Alabama recruits at such a higher level that they can overcome this.

And take national champion Clemson - they only signed 83 players over that same 4 year span - very little attrition - and it showed as their upperclassmen out performed Bama in the title game.

If we want better recruiting classes, then Butch needs to keep them here 4 years or until they enter the draft.

I think attrition is in the hands of the player not the coach. CBJ first 3 classes had more attrition because he recruited better players each year and some saw the handwriting on the wall and left. Grades, run ins with the law are the next highest situations to run players off. It's the growing trend in college football, if your not happy move on. The NFL has the same issue it's just not called attrition.

 

[Hacksaw]

OP, your thought was to long...

I know. Sorry.

 

[Hacksaw]

No matter the star rating, the recruit has to be well-coached to reach his potential as a college football player. If the staff doesn't put enough effort into developing the player, more than likely, he won't play up to his star rating.

You make a good point. I mentioned the Nebraska juggernaut teams of Tom Osborne. Look at what Petersen did at Boise, which wasn't even a blip on the national recruiting radar. Is Bama good because they get the best recruits? Or do they get the best recruits because they're good? Either way, they have the best coach in the country, which probably factors in a lot more than whether they are 1st or 15th in the recruiting rankings.

Dabo Swinney appears to have the winning formula. Clemson just won the national title with only one consensus top 10 recruiting class in the past 4 years (2015). They somehow beat a team comprised of three #1 and one #2 nationally-ranked recruiting classes.

...just sayin'.

 

[VolinMC]

Personally, I look at the star ratings as a "guide line" type of thing. 5*=can be outstanding,4*=can be good,3*=might be good in a couple of years,2* and lower are pretty much long shots or roster filler with hopes of excelling. I know it's probably not right but that's just my opinion.
Until they come up with a fool proof way of measuring heart,drive and concetration, the current rating system will continue to be hit and miss.

 

[volberry]

No matter the star rating, the recruit has to be well-coached to reach his potential as a college football player.

If the staff doesn't put enough effort into developing the player, more than likely, he won't play up to his star rating.

Good point.So my question is how does a top recruit get developed?

 

[VolsSportsFan]

Translation: If we had brought mostly 4 and 5 stars and had a Top 5 class, this post wouldn't have been made.

 

[UT Hill Man]

I think attrition is in the hands of the player not the coach. CBJ first 3 classes had more attrition because he recruited better players each year and some saw the handwriting on the wall and left.

The problem with this statement is the 5th ranked 2014 class is the one with the most attrition, 8 or 9 four star guys from that class were gone by this year - and in most cases replaced by lesser ranked or younger guys. That's where the glaring lack of depth comes into play.

But if Butch is faultless, and in fact it's a case of a bunch of 4 star players getting recruited over, then I say k:

 

[RPAV]

Development stars with Strength Coach. Second position coach. For most kids it matters how hard the drive is to succeed. Pain is what makes us grow do they have that mindset? So when you evaluate kid ability you first start with do they have the Athletic Ability to compete at SEC level then do they have the drive to achieve success. It is hard to know on many kids because you dont get to know them as much as you like and many High School coaches will exaggerate truth so their kid get scholly. In the end it does fall on the kid.

 

[RPAV]

For recruiting services it is easy to recognize true Elite Talent. 30 40 kids at most meet this in High School. So not alot of difference in service ranking. The next 300 kids though is where it is hard. That is why we have at least 12 4 star kids by various services One true 5 star which again is easy to see. Example Solon Page and Bembry are true freak athletes but did not get placed as 4 star because of size. When you know people behind the scenes you understand that many of our kids were gaining momentum in recruiting from SEC schools who wanted them bad. Example Shamburger the CB even GA wanted in on him and Alabama contacted his coach. If he would have been a Junior here in GA playing this past year he would be top 250 player in country for next year.

 

[ImportedVoL]

The statistics of the star ranking are heavily against you as it relates to class ranking and contending for national championships. Heather actually did a pretty good job this morning in talking about Cam being a 3 star and working out but naming the others that didn't. What they said was that about 1 in 18 3 stars turns out to be a really good player. I don't follow recruiting much because I cheer for Tennessee, don't realty care who is out there playing.
A lot can be said about player development on those 3-4 star guys, but it cant make up for pure God given ability. Sadly, for us, CBJ and staff have yet to prove they can teach fundamental skills throughout a season as the team has constantly struggled in that area. To me, you mix that with lacking recruiting stars and its just not a good mix.
But I don't see bad mouthing the guys that commit to play here. I sucked at football but if Tennessee would have been dumb enough to give me a scholarship, I would have taken it in a heartbeat.

Yep..CBJ and staff totally did not take an under weight 3* QB and make him the best QB in the SEC.

 

[TennesseeTarheel]

Well said, OP. When I take the time to watch these higlight reels, I am often unimpressed with the opposing team's skills which make the subject look pretty great. Some of the hype around these four and five stars reminds me of shopping for a new fishing lure. How much of the lure's design works to catch the fisherman and not the fish? I theorize that the star rating is a cheap and easy way for the casual observer to compare. But, in reality, these coaches watch these players for multiple years to gauge their play and development. (Or rely on the reputable opinion of others). But, I am not a recruiting "geek", so, this opinion and four bucks will get you a cup of coffee.

 

[volfannbama]

Yep..CBJ and staff totally did not take an under weight 3* QB and make him the best QB in the SEC.

Reading is difficult, i know. I will be ok.

 

[KBVol]

Personally, I look at the star ratings as a "guide line" type of thing. 5*=can be outstanding,4*=can be good,3*=might be good in a couple of years,2* and lower are pretty much long shots or roster filler with hopes of excelling. I know it's probably not right but that's just my opinion.
Until they come up with a fool proof way of measuring heart,drive and concetration, the current rating system will continue to be hit and miss.

But all in all, especially over time and larger numbers of recruits, the current rating system is way more hit than miss, which is why we see the teams who recruit the best, with the best winning percentages, the most championship appearances and national titles. It's not infallible, and there is some subjectivity, but all in all, it pretty much is a reliable predictor of who the best teams are gonna be.

 

[KBVol]

Yep..CBJ and staff totally did not take an under weight 3* QB and make him the best QB in the SEC.

I agree...they totally took a 4 STAR qb, and made him an inconsistent, hot and cold sec qb with accuracy issues until his senior year.....and even then he wasn't particularly accurate and "the best qb in the SEC" until the last 5 games of the year......recall that through 8 games last year, Josh was completing 57% of his passes with 14 tds and 9 interceptions. Not many, if any were calling him the best SEC QB at that point, before he caught fire throwing the ball vs the likes of Tenn Tech, Kentucky, Missouri and Vandy. He was outstanding those last 4 games plus the bowl game and I certainly thought he was the best SEC qb, although it was Jalen Hurts who was named SEC Offensive Player of the Year, not Josh. That's just the truth.

Much/the majority of Dobbs success here came from his God-given running ability to escape pressure, not from the coaching he received from a part time qb coach/grad assistant who had him reading defenses and throwing dimes all over the field from the pocket.

 

[VolinMC]

But all in all, especially over time and larger numbers of recruits, the current rating system is way more hit than miss, which is why we see the teams who recruit the best, with the best winning percentages, the most championship appearances and national titles. It's not infallible, and there is some subjectivity, but all in all, it pretty much is a reliable predictor of who the best teams are gonna be.

Yes, it does does get a lot right but it's not the only thing to measure a team by. I am a supporter of whoever is coaching our Vols u ntill they are not but this staff is nowhere near developing players for the college game like those staffs at the top each year. Once you get over that hump,players that are not misses or questionable will start coming here more and more.(which is a whole other topic,lol)
I just think self motivation,heart,drive are as important as ability and athleticism but are a lot harder to judge or see.
It's just my opinion like I said. It's not worthy of debating who is right or wrong.

 

[KBVol]

Yes, it does does get a lot right but it's not the only thing to measure a team by. I am a supporter of whoever is coaching our Vols u ntill they are not but this staff is nowhere near developing players for the college game like those staffs at the top each year. Once you get over that hump,players that are not misses or questionable will start coming here more and more.(which is a whole other topic,lol)
I just think self motivation,heart,drive are as important as ability and athleticism but are a lot harder to judge or see.
It's just my opinion like I said. It's not worthy of debating who is right or wrong.

Fair enough. I'll just throw this out there....no one was saying anything about recruits' "hearts" and motivation back in 2014 and 2015 when our signing classes were full of highly rated 4 and 5 star players....certainly not Butch Jones. That type of talk has only come about now after signing 23 3 star players in an effort to defend the class.

 

[VolinMC]

Fair enough. I'll just throw this out there....no one was saying anything about recruits' "hearts" and motivation back in 2014 and 2015 when our signing classes were full of highly rated 4 and 5 star players....certainly not Butch Jones. That type of talk has only come about now after signing 23 3 star players in an effort to defend the class.

I don't remember everything a coach has said before so I don't know if he has brought it up before,you may be right. I have seen it mentioned on here before this season by myself and others. I have thought this even back when Majors was coaching. I don't pay a lot of attention to coaches speaking because it's pretty much what they think people wanna hear(in my opinion). There are exceptions to the rule but it doesnt bother me either way.
Anyway,good talk. Glad we didn't evolve into name calling and bi#&!ing at each other like most of the time on here.

 

[LittleVol]

Okay, it's long. And I'm going to make it a little longer by starting off with an apology in advance, because I know that none of this is new. Still, I just wanted to say it all at once, for whatever it's worth. And I would hope it can stay in the football forum, because it's aimed more at the conventional fan than the geeks (no offense) in the recruiting forum.

Recruiting is an inexact "science" -- really not a science at all. Not all high school players play against the same level of competition. Not all of them receive the same degree of exposure. Even competing recruiting services don't always agree. And we've all seen a 3-star player magically become a 4-star overnight after signing with Alabama. So there's that.

All of the qualities that make a blue chip player a 4 or 5-star don't amount to a guarantee that he will make a positive impact in college. How many of these kids have disappointed us over the years? I would guess many more than have lived-up to the hype. I could name names, but I won't. Many come to mind immediately and I know they do for a lot of us here.

We're talking about kids here. No matter how we may view them now, it's just a snapshot taken at this particular stage in their ongoing development as players and humans. There is no way for us to see what they may one day become. They are all still in the early stages of realizing whatever potential they may (or may not) have. Many of the 4 or 5-stars are highly ranked because they are further up the curve now than the 2 and 3-stars. That does NOT mean that lower ranked players won't eventually be better than many of the higher ranked ones. We see it all the time. It's almost a cliche, the guy nobody wanted who ended-up being the best running back, tackle or defensive end in football.

Athletic ability is obviously very important. But by itself it is not enough to ensure that a player will be successful in making the jump from high school to college. I would much rather have a kid who is marginally less-athletic, but has the high character, work ethic, great attitude, willingness to push himself and his teammates, capable of taking coaching, smart enough to be successful in the classroom and more likely to keep himself eligible to play. These are the qualities that give your team a solid foundation and a chance to win. I would rather have 100% of what he has to offer than <50% of what the "can't miss" kid might give you -- or zero, if we can't keep him on the team for reasons that very often have nothing to do with football. Think Tom Osborne's great Nebraska teams that never had high recruiting rankings.

Everything else being equal, of course we would prefer to have a player that the recruiting services agree has the best athleticism and intangibles. But there's more to consider than just the stars.

This board and others are comprised of % 80 fans.

The other 20 is former players, coaches, and a variety of other collegiate sports affiliated personnel.

Stars is the only thing most feel justified in accepting.

But.. they are accurate less than %30 0f the time.

That's the percentage of a successful TimeShare salesman. IOW it's not dependable...

We signed a good amount high upside kids this class.

Chandler
Ried
Palmer
Murphy
LaBruzza

Are all kids that will play major minutes.

Trey Smith will be there too despite our experience at OT.

 

[Born a VOL]

CBJ has had to develop, he had no idea what it took to be successful in the SEC. I think and I hope this year has helped him realize the SEC don't mess around, have to be on your game every game. I see changes in the staff and in CBJ , I say that and I hope I'm correct. I'm a vol fan and always will be , lol I have no choice! Not changing my colors. GO VOLS