|
Replies: 25
| visibility 4,294
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [58415]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46323
Joined: 4/23/00
|
What star ratings are:
May 5, 2015, 12:08 PM
|
|
Composite star rankings are a good general, overall indicator of a teams recruiting success (or lack thereof).
Star rankings usually reflect the opinions of the most successful coaches and recruiters in college football.
Star rating services are the only real source of information we have on high school football players all in one place, and give us a look forward regarding their potential.
What star rankings are not:
Star rankings are not perfect; they miss on a lot of players. A lot of guys go under the radar for various reasons, and 1 and 2 stars wind up as All-Americans and play in the NFL. On the other hand, many 4 and 5 star players never pan out.
Star rankings are not a substitute for coaches' evaluations.
Star rankings are not total BS, and are not totally worthless.
I enjoy the star rating services, and I'm glad we have them. I understand what they are and what they are not. I know that it's great to have highly ranked classes, but it doesn't mean squat if you don't win. I also know that you're in trouble when you can't bring in highly rated recruits, and saying "trust your coaches" when that happens is almost always an excuse for recruiting failures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
Very well put***
May 5, 2015, 12:09 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24777]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42510
Joined: 7/31/10
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1639]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 2314
Joined: 10/6/11
|
Re: What star ratings are:
May 6, 2015, 8:07 AM
[ in reply to What star ratings are: ] |
|
In my four years as an equipment manager, I saw several "can't miss" recuits who never even sniffed the playing field. Also saw a couple of walk-ons that ended up as starters. The top raited recuits usually come from bigger schools with programs that are very successful. Vic Beasley played for a 2-A school. It all gets down to you cannot measure heart and desire with a star rating. Granted 4-5 stars are there for a reason, but Russel Wilson and JJ Watts were 2-stars out of high school.
Does give fans something to talk about. Doesn't bother me at all to take some ex-players sons as perferred walk-ons or even grey shirts. Coaches have a lot more experience than any of us in evaluating players. Plus, it says something to other recuits about the Clemson family. If they then earn a schollarship with hard work, good for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58415]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46323
Joined: 4/23/00
|
I agree completely with everything you said. That's
May 6, 2015, 12:57 PM
|
|
the way I see it too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trainer [39]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 102
Joined: 3/2/15
|
Re: For those of you that think star ratings are BS
May 5, 2015, 12:10 PM
|
|
An interesting study would be production once in they are in the league. What got me thinking about that are the Seahawks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [96857]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 29214
Joined: 9/14/05
|
Stars most definitely mean something to these guys
May 5, 2015, 12:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Varsity [205]
TigerPulse: 89%
Posts: 209
Joined: 1/30/11
|
I partially disagree
May 5, 2015, 12:53 PM
|
|
I definitely don't think that star ratings are BS. I just think they are very subjective. Obviously in today's era of college football, it's much easier to research all these high school recruits. While the scouts from recruiting services produce very well informed opinions, they are just opinions and they can't predict the future.
I also partially disagree with the assessment in sbnation's article. I don't disagree with any of the facts they produced, just the conclusions they draw. I don't necessarily think that more 4/5 stars get drafted because of their star rating's accuracy. I think their star rating got them better offers, therefore (in most cases) they got better offers, better coaching, better facilities, better everything if they chose to go to one of the big name schools. So these 4/5 stars are getting an advantage starting out in college that makes them already more likely to get drafted than the 2/3 stars that went to small schools. i guess what i'm saying is i think a lot more 2/3 stars would get drafted if they got more of the advantages that 4/5 stars get at bigger schools and that recruiting service rankings should still be taken subjectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58415]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46323
Joined: 4/23/00
|
I don't believe a kid's star rating gets him better
May 5, 2015, 2:46 PM
|
|
offers; I think it's the other way around. I think he gets a better star rating because, at least in part, of the interest or offers he receives from big-time programs. I think most successful, big-time coaches and their staffs do their own scouting and their own evaluations completely separate from the rating services, and make their decisions accordingly. I don't think any of them offer a player based on their star rating (Dabo has already scoffed at that notion). 5-star players are always the obvious ones, the ones that break records and stand well above the crowd; when a rating service gives them 5-stars, they are more or less just acknowledging what everybody else already knows any way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2702]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1452
Joined: 1/20/12
|
Like Joe Linardi bragging about his bracket accuracy
May 5, 2015, 8:13 PM
|
|
Of the 64/68 teams that make the dance only a handful are "on the bubble". Ain't so bad to get all but a couple right.
Same goes for sites ranking 4/5 star high school footballers. Take all players with a lot of big time offers, rank them however you wish, and you have a pretty comprehensive list of top tier talent. The guys they miss on are the less heralded guys in high school. It's actually pretty easy when you think about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55423]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58428
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: I don't believe a kid's star rating gets him better
May 6, 2015, 10:13 PM
[ in reply to I don't believe a kid's star rating gets him better ] |
|
When you see a lot of the better FB programs offering a two or 3 start players, that means that the know it Alls didn't do their job of evaluating the 2-3 stars with big time offers. That is the players we want!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2519]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3327
Joined: 8/23/02
|
How many stars did EJ Manuel have?
May 5, 2015, 1:21 PM
|
|
b/c he got a ton of chances to play due to his physique and measurables, both in college and the NFL.
But he can't play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55423]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58428
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: For those of you that think star ratings are BS
May 5, 2015, 2:29 PM
|
|
I don't think that most relate it as BS. I think that its more to that its not always the case. We have had 2* recruits that were late bloomers that were coached up to do as well a 5* and have long NFL careers!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [139]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 364
Joined: 2/14/14
|
Re: For those of you that think star ratings are BS
May 5, 2015, 4:02 PM
|
|
There are only 25 5 star players every year.If i'm not mistaken the next 75 or so
are 4 star players.There could be literally hundreds if not thousands of 3 and 2 star players every year.This is what is called percentage.This is the reason the NFL has so many 2 and 3 star players in it...duh
|
|
|
|
|
|
Walk-On [139]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 364
Joined: 2/14/14
|
Re: For those of you that think star ratings are BS
May 5, 2015, 4:25 PM
|
|
There was 8 five star players chosen in the 1st round.8 out of 25 is a a pretty good percentage.And I bet the rest of the 1st round is probaly littered with 4 star guys.So say their is 500 3 star guys that were seniors(number would be 1000 if you count jr eligible) where were they in the first round? I know about Vic and a few others, but 5 or so out of a potential 1000 is not a high percentage. I know there are hidden gems, but do you guys really want Clemson to start recruiting like the old Tommy West days? I'll take my chances with the Spillers,Watsons,Watkins,etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23112]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19812
Joined: 1/15/11
|
True, but I'll also believe in our coaches evaluations.
May 5, 2015, 4:48 PM
|
|
5 Stars are nice, so are 4 stars,hope our staff keeps em rolling in. Most teams backbone is the 3 star player that comes in ,redshirts, maybe does little his RS freshman year ,then contributes his last 3 years on campus.
Plus as you stated above, every year before they start rating players, they've already made up their minds how many 5 there will be, they've also decided before evaluations how many 4 stars there will be.While I love ratings, love to follow recruiting, the system is flawed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55423]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58428
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: True, but I'll also believe in our coaches evaluations.
May 6, 2015, 10:17 PM
|
|
Louisville is loaded with 3 stars!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
This guy deems 3-star recruits as "Blue Chipper's" just to
May 5, 2015, 4:09 PM
|
|
make his point.
I don't think any fans who religiously follow recruiting service rankings consider 3-star guys "Blue Chippers", but by taking that latitude, the writer was able to say that 31 out of 32 first rounder's were "Blue Chipper's" ...
Bunk!
Most fans only regard 4 and 5-star recruits as "Blue Chipper's" and when that criteria is used, only about 50% of the NFL first round draftees qualify.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
I didn't take that away from the post at all
May 5, 2015, 6:16 PM
|
|
He said that 15 of the 32 were 4 or 5 star, those are the blue chips.
He was showing that the higher rated you are, the more likely you are to get drafted. 5 star guys generally go higher than 3 and 4 star guys, who generally go higher than guys who are 2 stars or unrated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Here's a direct quote clearly implying that 3-star guys are
May 5, 2015, 7:48 PM
|
|
considered "blue chip" ...
In the 2015 draft, 31 of 32 picks were rated three-stars or higher in the 247 Sports Composite as recruits (UCF receiver Breshad Perriman was the exception). And 15 of those 32 were four- or five-stars, which might not be that impressive, until you remember how many thousands more non-blue chips there are than blue chips.
To me it comes as no surprise at all that half the 1st round was composed of former 4-5-star guys. That makes perfect sense. 4-5 star guys are expected to be stars in college and to have a great shot at the NFL.
Where the writer misses the mark is in ignoring the fact that the other half the 1st round was made up entirely of former 3-star guys ... those who were expected to be contributors in college with a chance to start, but were certainly not projected to become NFL players, let alone 1st round draft picks.
In stretching his definition of "blue chip" to include 3-star guys, he forces his point, but in the process, he loses credibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
Re: Here's a direct quote clearly implying that 3-star guys are
May 5, 2015, 10:50 PM
|
|
I completely disagree with your comprehension of that quote. He's saying that the 15 of 32 are the blue chips, and that might not seem impressive until you consider that there were about 50-75 blue chip guys, and hundreds or even thousands of guys rated 3 stars and below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [11934]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16363
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I can see your point, but he should have simply said ...
May 6, 2015, 12:17 PM
|
|
"In the 2015 draft, 15 of the 32 1st round picks were four- or five-stars, which might not be that impressive, until you remember how many thousands more non-blue chips there are than blue chips."
IMHO, by leading the paragraph with the following sentence, he confuses the issue:
"In the 2015 draft, 31 of 32 picks were rated three-stars or higher ..."
He doesn't need that statement to make his point, but by including it he implies that 3-star recruits are "blue chip" and the 1st round was almost entirely composed of "blue chip's" ... whether that was his intention or not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
I agree it was somewhat fuzzy***
May 6, 2015, 12:58 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55423]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58428
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: I agree it was somewhat fuzzy***
May 6, 2015, 10:23 PM
|
|
So are Peaches somewhat fuzzy, and they go to the Peach bowl!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3677]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9417
Joined: 5/31/06
|
I still think they are BS .
May 6, 2015, 7:16 PM
|
|
A commercial/business grab much like the "Hallmark" enginereed dates on the calendar that require us to spend money on trinkets.
I suppose they are entertaining and provide some commerce, but that is it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 25
| visibility 4,294
|
|
|
50
