GUNTERSVOL
VOL FROM BIRTH
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2017
- Messages
- 5,791
- Likes
- 7,200
Out of 8000. Those odds aren't nearly as good as 4 and 5 stars. Not even close. Y'all are crazy
You don't put odds on the field. The teams winning are NOT doing so by adding a lot of 4 stars, they are doing it by adding PRIMARILY from the pool of 21% of 4 stars that prove to be better than those pesky 3 stars in the draft. 450 2 and 3 star guys got drafted over the 3 year period when 1000 4 stars did not and only 264 did . If you pick out of the right pools by star rating it will evidence on the field. It is evaluations that count, by the services and the staffs. The staff's jobs are on the line, so if our staff is confident, that they have selected the cream of the 3 stars over the less productive 4 stars then I am good to go. This time of year that seems to be the case, post signing day REACHES are a different story.
I am OF THE BELIEF, that we took some shots on some NO_BRAINERS with long odds, but are not diving into the global 4 star pool where they may be in that 80% group that get passed by lower star guys AFTER both groups max their evaluated DEVELOPMENT potential. Risk/reward is what it is and star hunting by some of our previous staff's did not work out. ONLY time will tell if these guys game plan is better. What they know about projected portal opportunities MAY well be a factor in deciding how to fill our 85 going into next (23) season. Mobil overachievers at lower level schools due to ONE TIME may be the newest source of supply with some small NIL enticement. Bad fits and depth chart challenged guys at bigger schools too. Our APPARENT more conservative use of NIL lately makes me lean this way too. When you are not at the top of the big dog group this secondary market may well be your best shot to win enough to get in that group. Sign the HS players that best pass your eye test regardless of stars and pass on the rest. If you look sexy enough, you get looks like our baseball team did this year.
