Here's one for you recruiting guru's

[Orangeyes]

Name the #1 QB the year Tom Brady was a senior in high school.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/...cruiting-projections-20120130,0,2291985.story

How many got the right answer?

Remember the hype around David Oku? Is that even the right spelling? Aku, no Oku

Just goes to show it's a crap shoot. Some kids develop latter.

 

[BORZAK]

thanks

 

[CusefanATL]

That being said, statistically a 5 star ends up better then a 4, 3, and 2 star most of the time.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

That being said, statistically a 5 star ends up better then a 4, 3, and 2 star most of the time.

Agreed, percentages speak differently and when you are bringing in 20-25 kids a year that is usually what you are dealing with. I do think Marrone has done a good job bringing in depth just needs the upside/ wow factor. 3-5 kids a year, couple 4 stars

 

[OrangeMojo]

Name the #1 QB the year Tom Brady was a senior in high school.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/...cruiting-projections-20120130,0,2291985.story

How many got the right answer?

Remember the hype around David Oku? Is that even the right spelling? Aku, no Oku

Just goes to show it's a crap shoot. Some kids develop latter.

while you make a valid point that highly ranked kids don't always pan out - it would be MUCH easier to list 2-star & 3-star kids that don't pan out than it is for 5-star kids. All things being equal, I'll take a class full of 4-star and 5-star kids over 2-star & 3-star kids even though one of the 2 or 3s might just be a sleeper that ends up being the best of the bunch.

 

[CIL]

Spurrier ruined that kid -- tried to completely change the way he threw the ball.

 

[SmilinBob]

Marrone and his staff seem to be pretty good evaluators and I would put my trust in them over some guy in his basement that takes money from rapid fanbases to keep their interest and steal their money.

 

[mscanlo]

this happens in every sport. you can name plenty of draft picks who don't pan out, but there are more higher round draft picks that succeed than lower round.

happens in the business world all the time too. out of college, interviewers discriminate based on where you went to school. the better the school (stanford, harvard, penn, etc, the easier it is to get an interview than some podunk school. doesn't necessarily mean none of the stanford kids will fail and all of the podunk kids won't succeed.

there are plenty of kids at top schools who aren't that impressive, or have what it takes, but labeled as great because of their school. the majority of time they pan out more than the podunk kids though

 

[cuseincincy]

Marrone and his staff seem to be pretty good evaluators and I would put my trust in them over some guy in his basement that takes money from rapid fanbases to keep their interest and steal their money.

Not really sure what you mean by this but I think the jury is definitely out on Marrone's talent evaluating prowess. Just because Marrone signs some 2 star kid and not a 4 star kid doesn't mean he thinks the 2 star is better. He might've just realized he couldn't sign the 4 star kid. When he starts turning away players others thought were better than the ones he signed then we'll be able to say if he is a better evaluator of talent. Of course if he starts winning 8+ games every year with the kids he's signing that will say it too!

 

[SmilinBob]

Not really sure what you mean by this but I think the jury is definitely out on Marrone's talent evaluating prowess. Just because Marrone signs some 2 star kid and not a 4 star kid doesn't mean he thinks the 2 star is better. He might've just realized he couldn't sign the 4 star kid. When he starts turning away players others thought were better than the ones he signed then we'll be able to say if he is a better evaluator of talent. Of course if he starts winning 8+ games every year with the kids he's signing that will say it too!

Just saying that he seems to identify and evaluate kids pretty well early and a lot of other "football" schools seem to recognize that, not saying he gets them all to sign the dotted line.

 

[billsin01]

this happens in every sport. you can name plenty of draft picks who don't pan out, but there are more higher round draft picks that succeed than lower round.

happens in the business world all the time too. out of college, interviewers discriminate based on where you went to school. the better the school (stanford, harvard, penn, etc, the easier it is to get an interview than some podunk school. doesn't necessarily mean none of the stanford kids will fail and all of the podunk kids won't succeed.

there are plenty of kids at top schools who aren't that impressive, or have what it takes, but labeled as great because of their school. the majority of time they pan out more than the podunk kids though

I don't know. Yes, this may be true but if I were an NFL GM I'd be trading out of the first round every year -- simply not worth the investment unless you are absolutely in love with a guy.

 

[billsin01]

All things being equal, I'll take a class full of 4-star and 5-star kids over 2-star & 3-star kids even though one of the 2 or 3s might just be a sleeper that ends up being the best of the bunch.

This is true but what does it mean? I don't think many here are saying they wouldn't be excited about 4-star kids with a who's who offer list. The point is merely that we don't have to have a class full of them to still build a talent base and experience success on the field. But yes, it's fair to say that kids ranked in the top 150-ish (4 and 5 stars) are generally really good prospects.

 

[billsin01]

Agreed, percentages speak differently and when you are bringing in 20-25 kids a year that is usually what you are dealing with. I do think Marrone has done a good job bringing in depth just needs the upside/ wow factor. 3-5 kids a year, couple 4 stars

Yup, I don't disagree. I think the greater point is that there are about 150 4 or 5 stars every year. We're not really talking about, IMO, would you rather have 5 stars vs. 3 stars -- we're talking about 3 stars with offers from solid schools vs. 2 stars without great offer lists. The percentages are much closer on these guys: a 2-star guy without a lot of offers can still be a good recruit and there are a ton of 3 stars signed every year that do next to nothing in their college careers.