I've Come to Realize that Stars Mean Everything

[OrangeinBoston]

It's just the way it is.

 

[orangeinjersey]

The star system is a numbers game. some 3 stars become NFL hall of famers, some 5 stars are college busts. But it is a numbers game. Lets say 1 in 10 3 stars is a 1st round pick. Lets say 3 in 10 4 stars is a first round pick, lets say 5 in 10 5 stars is a first round pick. What that means is that the more players with higher stars you get, the better chances those kids become studs.

 

[longtimefan]

It's just the way it is.

Except when Duke throttles Miami.

 

[orlandoorange]

Or Vandy beats UF

 

[Millhouse]

Eh. Everyone knows FSU is always loaded. Even if you know nothing and never watch players, just give their recruits five stars and you'll be right. Doesn't mean they're right for most teams and players


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[richard levy]

Or Vandy beats UF

Vandy's last two recruiting classes were in Scout's top 25, and the current class is right there. A lot of RF/So on the two-deep. Last two Qb's were/are JC's. Now, their star WR, Jordan Matthews didn't get any D1 offers until Vandy offered Xmas day when someone committed elsewhere. So that and guys like Bromley give hope to the non-star believers

 

[Rocco]

I'd say it's more about recruiting the best kids that fit your system than it is about what some desk jockey "handing out" a star ranking. A lot of politics in star rankings, which are skewed by subscribers to these sites from the various schools. It is what it is.

 

[Stern]

I'd say it's more about recruiting the best kids that fit your system than it is about what some desk jockey "handing out" a star ranking. A lot of politics in star rankings, which are skewed by subscribers to these sites from the various schools. It is what it is.

4 star and 5 star players fit in EVERY system!

 

[Rocco]

4 star and 5 star players fit in EVERY system!

Lavar Lobdell and Averin Collier, please stand up!

 

[Stern]

Lavar Lobdell and Averin Collier, please stand up!

exception not the rule. For every Lobdell there are countless other top flight recruits that are home runs. Yes there will always be a bust or two but once again they are the exceptions not the norm

 

[kcsu]

other offers are key and yes they lead to stars but i like the fact that we are winning kids who have legit offers from solid programs. The days of loading up on MAC talent seem to be closing to an end

 

[Stern]

It's easier when you have a roster filled with 4 and 5 star recruits and if a couple turn out to be busts so be it. Easier to win that way then having a roster of 1,2, and 3 star recruits and you hope one or two are diamonds in the rough and end up being 5 star type level players.

While the "STAR" system isn't 100% accurate its a pretty damn good judge of talent at the end of the day.

 

[CuseOnly]

exception not the rule. For every Lobdell there are countless other top flight recruits that are home runs. Yes there will always be a bust or two but once again they are the exceptions not the norm

Disagree, for every Lobdell there are 100 David Oku's too.

 

[richard levy]

Disagree, for every Lobdell there are 100 David Oku's too.

If you take the teams currently ranked in the top 25, and you average their end of the year Scout recruiting rank over the past five years, you would find a very high correlation between rankings. I'm no SWC, but I've done it. If you recruit a class 3,4,5* every year, out of 85 schollies, you only need about 1/2 to hit so get the 35-40 guys you play every Sat.

 

[All4SU]

exception not the rule. For every Lobdell there are countless other top flight recruits that are home runs. Yes there will always be a bust or two but once again they are the exceptions not the norm

We seem to have had more than our share of 4 star busts.

 

[Cheriehoop]

The ability to stockpile and have even 4 and 5 star players in one's 3 deep because of the competition for playing time seems to be pretty effective.

 

[Oakland]

We seem to have had more than our share of 4 star busts.

Maybe it is related to the reason why we got them

 

[bnoro]

It's just the way it is.

Was wondering where you ran off to the last few weeks when we were winning...

 

[OrangeinBoston]

Was wondering where you ran off to the last few weeks when we were winning...

I've been here all along, happily celebrating SU's move toward bowl exigibility. And, my comment was not in any way a criticism of SU, just an observation. In fact, I think GO said the same thing a different way. For SU to keep moving up, they will have to get some difference makers (read 4 or 5 star players or the far-less-likely completely-unrecognized diamonds in the rough - I know, Bromley). I think Pitt is a win and on to a bowl. Unlike many, I'm worried about BC and how they put up a sizeable number of points on FSU.

 

[storange]

exception not the rule. For every Lobdell there are countless other top flight recruits that are home runs. Yes there will always be a bust or two but once again they are the exceptions not the norm

They mean something for sure, they certainly dont mean everything.

 

[anomander]

Obviously you will have your 4 and 5 star busts, and you will have your 2 stars become future NFL pro's, but over the long haul the more higher rated kids you bring in the better off you will be. It is proven every single year. I thought the Clemson and FSU game would wake everyone up, but it still doesn't look like its hit home yet. This isn't about 2 of our 4 star recruits being busts, it's about a roster full of 4 and 5 star recruits being able to absorb those busts. Sure we will never bring in a roster full of those kids, but the more 4 stars, and high 3 stars we can bring in the better we will be. Sure there are some politics that go into it, but if you look at the top 300 kids it's kids with size and speed. The college coaching staffs just need to be able to develop that talent. The difference is even if you have a great coaching staff and are able to maximize talents, the difference of hitting the ceiling of a 2 star recruit, and a 4 star recruit is a major difference in talent.

 

[Crusty]

Obviously you will have your 4 and 5 star busts, and you will have your 2 stars become future NFL pro's, but over the long haul the more higher rated kids you bring in the better off you will be. It is proven every single year. I thought the Clemson and FSU game would wake everyone up, but it still doesn't look like it hasn't hit home yet. This isn't about 2 of our 4 star recruits being busts, it's about a roster full of 4 and 5 star recruits being able to absorb those busts. Sure we will never bring in a roster full of those kids, but the more 4 stars, and high 3 stars we can bring in the better we will be. Sure there are some politics that go into it, but if you look at the top 300 kids it's kids with size and speed. The college coaching staffs just need to be able to develop that talent. The difference is even if you have a great coaching staff and are able to maximize talents, the difference of hitting the ceiling of a 2 star recruit, and a 4 star recruit is a major difference in talent.

Exactly.

 

[PhatOrange]

If you take the teams currently ranked in the top 25, and you average their end of the year Scout recruiting rank over the past five years, you would find a very high correlation between rankings. I'm no SWC, but I've done it. If you recruit a class 3,4,5* every year, out of 85 schollies, you only need about 1/2 to hit so get the 35-40 guys you play every Sat.

I ran some numbers recently and it's about 50%. Half the teams not ranked right now had top 25 classes over the past 3/4 years.

 

[Crusty]

I ran some numbers recently and it's about 50%. Half the teams not ranked right now had top 25 classes over the past 3/4 years.

I am not sure that is the metric to use. What I think is important is the number of 4 and 5 stars on ranked teams not the overall recruiting rank.

 

[Scooch]

Individually the star system is highly flawed. But in the aggregate it tends to be somewhat predictive.