Where Are The Stars Don't Matter Threads?

#1
Volru

Volru

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
1,241
Likes
0
#1
Has anyone else noticed, now that we are near signing a top ranked recruiting class, how the threads dismissing star ratings have disappeared?

I would say stars matter whenever we can sign them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 people
#2
#2
Stars matter a lot more when you have coaches that can coach. We could have given Dooley a roster of five stars and he would find a way to lose. Now we have coaches that appear plenty capable of developing talent, and so landing those four and five stars means a lot more. However, I still believe that it isn't solely about stars from Rivals or 247; it's about what you do with the talent you're given. If you maximize the talent of that three star, it can mean more than getting subpar effort from a four.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#3
#3
UTGhostHunter said:
Stars matter a lot more when you have coaches that can coach. We could have given Dooley a roster of five stars and he would find a way to lose. Now we have coaches that appear plenty capable of developing talent, and so landing those four and five stars means a lot more. However, I still believe that it isn't solely about stars from Rivals or 247; it's about what you do with the talent you're given. If you maximize the talent of that three star, it can mean more than getting subpar effort from a four.
Click to expand...

Spot on. It's not black and white. They matter, but they aren't everything--like every other rating system that exists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4
#4
Stars always mattered. We were in denial.

"The coaches know better than Rivals" chant was silly. The issue was always acquiring talent, not evaluating it. Me and your grandmomma could get our stopwatches, measuring devices, and higlight reels and pick out a team of 5-stars. But would they wanna play for us?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#5
#5
WesternKyVol said:
Stars always mattered. We were in denial.

"The coaches know better than Rivals" chant was silly. The issue was always acquiring talent, not evaluating it. Me and your grandmomma could get our stopwatches, measuring devices, and higlight reels and pick out a team of 5-stars. But would they wanna play for us?
Click to expand...

Stars matter but they aren't everything.
 
#7
#7
WesternKyVol said:
Stars always mattered. We were in denial.

"The coaches know better than Rivals" chant was silly. The issue was always acquiring talent, not evaluating it. Me and your grandmomma could get our stopwatches, measuring devices, and higlight reels and pick out a team of 5-stars. But would they wanna play for us?
Click to expand...

I don't entirely disagree, but look at what ended up happening with every five star guy we've landed since Fulmer left. They've either wound up somewhere else to finish their college career or left early. If you think the coaches don't matter, than why can Bama/LSU/Clemson/almost anyone else with a semi-competent coach keep their talent and we couldn't?

Coaches matter. Does that mean that stars don't matter? Not at all, but it does mean that Bryce Brown's five stars didn't mean crap when he packed his bags and left town. If your coaches can't develop and retain talent, the stars stop mattering.
 
#8
#8
I agree that coaching matters more than stars which is why I am more than a little worried about our performance in the last two games. The deabte around here though was whether Rivals knew more than the coaches in talent evaluation. That was a false debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#9
#9
Just like very large corporations saying they love a free market......of course what they mean is we believe in a free market as long as we can control the market
 
#10
#10
What matters is having coaches that can recruit and evaluate talent. More likely than not the better players will have a higher star rating, that is the only reason stars matter.
 
#13
#13
dschult2 said:
What matters is having coaches that can recruit and evaluate talent. More likely than not the better players will have a higher star rating, that is the only reason stars matter.
Click to expand...

Right, it's more like potential, and this is nothing that hasn't been said a million times. The higher that rating, the more likely the player is to succeed. Bigger and faster is going to get you a long way in the college game.

Heck, even the NFL teams with all their resources, experience, and a pool of players with longer resumes against better talent don't get it right much of the time.

I wish rating classes five years down the road was a bigger thing.
 
#14
#14
WriterVol said:
Right, it's more like potential, and this is nothing that hasn't been said a million times. The higher that rating, the more likely the player is to succeed. Bigger and faster is going to get you a long way in the college game.

Heck, even the NFL teams with all their resources, experience, and a pool of players with longer resumes against better talent don't get it right much of the time.

I wish rating classes five years down the road was a bigger thing.
Click to expand...

We live in a predictive society. Ranking teams before the season is absolutely useless, yet we still do it. No way any team should be ranked before they've played at least 3 games.
 
#15
#15
dschult2 said:
We live in a predictive society. Ranking teams before the season is absolutely useless, yet we still do it. No way any team should be ranked before they've played at least 3 games.
Click to expand...

I agree completely, but like you said, football is a 365-day-a-year sport now, and people want predictions.
 
#16
#16
Stars do matter to a degree, especially in the SEC. However, staff stability, talent evaluation, player development, player retention, game-day coaching, etc. can certainly make the difference.

Missouri's 2009 - 2013 classes have had an average ranking of over 36. During that period, they've signed 2 5* and 11 4* recruits.

UT, on the other hand, has average around a 14 ranking for the same classes. And the Vols signed 3 5* and 48 4* recruits.

I'd gladly take the Tigers results this year vs. having more higher ranked recruits the last five years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#17
#17
UTGhostHunter said:
I don't entirely disagree, but look at what ended up happening with every five star guy we've landed since Fulmer left. They've either wound up somewhere else to finish their college career or left early. If you think the coaches don't matter, than why can Bama/LSU/Clemson/almost anyone else with a semi-competent coach keep their talent and we couldn't?

Coaches matter. Does that mean that stars don't matter? Not at all, but it does mean that Bryce Brown's five stars didn't mean crap when he packed his bags and left town. If your coaches can't develop and retain talent, the stars stop mattering.
Click to expand...

Agree, coaching is critical, for example the bammers have had two OCs in four years and haven't missed a beat. :shakehead:
 
#19
#19
Filling your needs also has A LOT to do with it, but development is about or as important as the # of stars. We have the coaches & are getting the stars & needs so I'm looking forward to the future!
 
#20
#20
Volru said:
Has anyone else noticed, now that we are near signing a top ranked recruiting class, how the threads dismissing star ratings have disappeared?

I would say stars matter whenever we can sign them.
Click to expand...

That philosophy left with The Dools.
 
#21
#21
Volru said:
Has anyone else noticed, now that we are near signing a top ranked recruiting class, how the threads dismissing star ratings have disappeared?

I would say stars matter whenever we can sign them.
Click to expand...

I do not know where the star threads are but the silly threads are still here.
 
#25
#25
Recruiting rankings matter if you want to compete for SEC and NC.

There are rare exceptions for stable programs with a upperclassman laden rosters like Mizzou to have a good season from time to time (but let's face it, they aren't making the NC game and could still blow the SECCG berth.)

There are underachievers like Texas and UGA (if you consider 10-11 win seasons with no title underachieving) but all-in-all, those that consistently recruit in the top 5 for 3-4 years will be in the mix.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top