My point was it's not fair to compare the smallest amount of inaccuracy with NFL GMs going off college film and recruiting rankings going off high school film. Obviously, the recruiting rankings are not going to be as accurate. I don't have the numbers or anything right in front of me but most players that get drafted in the first 4 rounds, IMO the rounds where you are expecting those picks to contribute in a role in some way, are usually 4/5 stars or high 3 stars with great coaching. Obviously there will be exceptions as there are to anything. He's using those exceptions to say the whole rankings system is off completely. The rankings system are nowhere near perfect but they are generally pretty solid by the end of each cycle. Note it is still up to the coaching staffs of each respective school and the player himself to develop the potential out of those recruits
That's not what he said. He said:
Just demonstrating the inaccuracy of the recruiting sites. The supposed best 30 players according to them are NEVER the 30 best according to GMs when the draft comes around. There are occasions when a 3* has an unrecognized high ceiling and a 5* doesn't. But that is STILL inaccuracy in the ratings.
He said that the inaccuracy is demonstrated. Not that it's completely "off". His argument for months/years has been that the recruiting sites do a pretty good job with the most high profile kids, but that the accuracy falls off after that. That's not a "completely off" argument. It's probably pretty close to what you've agreed to.
I think the greater problem here is calling high school recruits "wildcard", as in harder to scout and predict while also saying that you *have to* "stack up" rankings that correspond with the recruiting sites.
So having inferred that the only way to build talent is to stack up wildcard high rankings, now answer my question. Just say that a school filled its roster, tear after year, with all of the 2-3 star recruits that end up as draft picks (i.e. NFL level players), would they be talented enough to compete for titles?
That's a hard spot to answer, no? You can either say that a roster full of NFL level talent isn't talented enough to compete, or you can admit that stacking up recruiting stars isn't what you "have to" do.