|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1
|
Legend [19913]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11191
Joined: 9/23/07
|
|
|
|
 |
Commissioner [961]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1932
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: 43% of Super Bowl 53 starters were 4 or 5 star recruits
Jan 22, 2019, 6:56 PM
|
|
What were the other 57%?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19913]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11191
Joined: 9/23/07
|
3 star recruits or lower, of course***
Jan 22, 2019, 6:58 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24877]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 32252
Joined: 2/15/09
|
i don't know if that's supposed to be considered low or high***
Jan 22, 2019, 7:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [19913]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11191
Joined: 9/23/07
|
0.1% of high school football players are 4 or 5 star recruits***
Jan 22, 2019, 7:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2217]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3280
Joined: 3/7/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2723]
TigerPulse: 77%
Posts: 2915
Joined: 9/16/18
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10833]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7927
Joined: 10/18/16
|
Re: 43% of Super Bowl 53 starters were 4 or 5 star recruits
Jan 22, 2019, 7:21 PM
|
|
What was interesting to me is that of the 10 starting Offensive lineman that 2 were 5*, 2 were 4*, 4 were 3* and 2 were 2*. Either the system doesn't have a good handle on how to consistently rate O Lineman or most develop much later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2217]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3280
Joined: 3/7/12
|
It’s a little of both
Jan 22, 2019, 7:24 PM
|
|
OL bodies take the most development and its harder to evaluate OL play compared to other positions. That’s also why there tends to be far fewer 5* OL year in year out than most of your other field positions that get to display a little more athleticism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10833]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7927
Joined: 10/18/16
|
Re: It’s a little of both
Jan 22, 2019, 8:08 PM
|
|
I agree and guess that's why I haven't been too concerned with our O Line recruiting getting good quality 3* and 4* recruits. Power Hours and good coaching get them where they need to be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6223]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4310
Joined: 6/23/17
|
Re: It’s a little of both
Jan 22, 2019, 8:09 PM
[ in reply to It’s a little of both ] |
|
Agree. Also why the posts criticizing our OL recruiting drive me crazy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2217]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3280
Joined: 3/7/12
|
Re: It’s a little of both
Jan 22, 2019, 8:58 PM
|
|
Going to combine the replies to you and saddis into 1 since it’s similar message. If there’s one position group where you don’t need to have the 5* talent to be an elite unit, it’s OL. I’m aware I don’t speak for all Tnet, but my main concerns with OL recruiting wasn’t (keyword that it’s in the past tense) that we weren’t signing elite players there, it’s that we weren’t bringing in enough to maintain quality depth. That has been addressed and a shift in our OL recruiting strategy seems to be playing out in the 2020 class where we’re accepting commitments from the 4* guys early in the process. I believe that will bear a lot of fruit for us as Caldwell is a really strong developer of talent. Should’ve trusted that the staff is made up of smart people that might know more football than me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1852]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1876
Joined: 2/1/18
|
Re: It’s a little of both
Jan 23, 2019, 6:28 AM
|
|
Couldn’t agree more. Of course every fan, coach, etc... wants the 5* guys but on OL it’s by far the hardest to scout. Our problem has always been the numbers. Because OL is hardest to scout, you have the most busts in recruiting. Only taking 2-3 OL in back to back classes is quite scary. Of course, things always seem to work out for Dabo and co but we can’t afford injuries on the line. The issue isn’t we didn’t want to bring in more but we lost out on our top targets and the fall back guys already moved on. I will also agree that 2020 looks like it will go a long way to fix this problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7459]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 15395
Joined: 2/2/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [278]
TigerPulse: 93%
Posts: 320
Joined: 1/7/19
|
Re: 43% of Super Bowl 53 starters were 4 or 5 star recruits
Jan 23, 2019, 4:24 AM
|
|
This doesn't surprise me.
Most people who go on to be high performing athletes/musicians/artists etc, begin to show true potential early in life.
Therefore, it follows, that by the time they're teenagers, a large percentage of future NFLers are outstanding compared to their peers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2533]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 4161
Joined: 10/10/08
|
Wow...
Jan 23, 2019, 6:08 AM
|
|
never would've thought 57% were 3 star or lower. interesting
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [13036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22353
Joined: 4/24/04
|
Well i believe out of all rated recruits 5*s make up about
Jan 23, 2019, 8:14 AM
|
|
1% and 4* somewhere around 10%. Out of all HS football players it's like .1% or .01% or something get 4 or 5 star ratings. This is very, very small % of guys making up a very, very large % of SB rosters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5512]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4986
Joined: 10/21/15
|
Re: Well i believe out of all rated recruits 5*s make up about
Jan 23, 2019, 10:40 AM
|
|
You are also taking 10s of thousands of high school teams, scaling down to a few hundred college teams, and then scaling down to 32 NFL teams. It's a clearly natural progression.
I think there should be some realization here by many that criticize recruiting when we take a 3* guy. Less than half of the people about to win a Super Bowl ring are 4-5* players. Clemson recruiting in comparison:
2019: 44.4% 4-5*
2018: 71.1%
2017: 64.3%
2016: 59.1%
2015: 48.0%
The ratio of 4-5 star players in Clemson's last 5 recruiting classes is above that of the 2 best NFL teams. It's not all about the stars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2217]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3280
Joined: 3/7/12
|
Re: Well i believe out of all rated recruits 5*s make up about
Jan 23, 2019, 10:56 AM
|
|
I know there are some that scoff at every 3* take, but I think that is a very small minority of TNet. You’re correct stars aren’t everything but they’ve been statistically proven to have a high correlation with elite success at the college level. So if we’re taking a large number of 3*’s and expecting them to be able to contribute quickly, it’s likely not going to work out to our liking. But bringing in those guys and giving them time to develop can pay long term dividends when you have the blue chip guys in front of them. When you have as large of a class as this one, it’s hard to maintain that elite BCR when you’re as selective as we are and it wasn’t a great talent year instate.
Long-winded way of saying stars matter, but so do good evaluation and development and you need all 3 to have elite success.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 18
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
