Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="OttoinGrotto, post: 1052997, member: 297"]
I believe, even though by and large the star system is inconsistent and outright farcical at times, that the star system does have value because it aggregates data. It's flawed, but if the flaws occur consistently you can get a rough idea of where a class of kids for a school stands in comparison to another school's class.

So, it's probably really, really bad at evaluating [I]individual[/I] kids outside of the top 200 that don't just jump out as athletic oddities/high potential players, and you want to take the star system's stance on any individual players rating relative to any other individual player with a huge grain of salt like Bambrewer is saying. But a [I]class[/I] ranked in the teens is pretty likely objectively better than a class ranked in the 30s.

Even if it's a perception thing (Notre Dame always has highly rated players and classes because it's Notre Dame) that has value too. As our program's credibility is restored our class rankings have also improved. I have no doubt it's because little by little we're getting better players, but it probably is at least in some part due to the improved perception of our program.

In closing, the star system isn't a precision instrument, but it's generally pretty good at evaluating collections of players.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?