Star System

[anomander]

For those who say the star system doesn't matter this is what a roster full of 4 and 5 star kids vs a roster full of 2 and 3 star kids looks like

 

[Doctor44]

Agreed - theres something to be said for teams like oklahoma state and UVA, who get maybe one or two 4 stars and a bunch of 3 stars.They need to devleop players to compete with the Texas, Oklahoma and Florida states of the world. But in general, there wasnt a position on the field we were competitive at. Their QB better than our D, Their O line better than our D, Their RBs better than our LBs and their WRs better than our DBs. The opposite was true too.

It was disheartening that our line couldnt get any push ever. I guess that relates to no credible passing threat and always facing a run blitz. But you hope that they dont score a TD in less than 10 plays on every drive, and our O can occasionally sustain a drive.

 

[44cuse]

The star system absolutely matters. That's delusional thinking on here for years that it doesn't.

44cuse


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1

 

[anomander]

The star system absolutely matters. That's delusional thinking on here for years that it doesn't.

44cuse


Sent from my iPad using -

So true. I could never begin to understand the justifications of those saying it doesn't. Sure a few 5 stars flame out like Ishaq, and basically any 4 star we have ever got. Plus you will have some Pughs and Nassibs that develop into future pros but when you compare overall rosters full the equal playing field quickly dissipates. I really hope this FSU game and Clemson game earlier ends this discussion once and for all


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1

 

[NineOneSeven]

So true. I could never begin to understand the justifications of those saying it doesn't. Sure a few 5 stars flame out like Ishaq, and basically any 4 star we have ever got. Plus you will have some Pughs and Nassibs that develop into future pros but when you compare overall rosters full the equal playing field quickly dissipates. I really hope this FSU game and Clemson game earlier ends this discussion once and for all


Sent from my iPhone using -

There are always outliers like the ones you mention, but eventually everything regress back to the mean.

 

[44cuse]

So true. I could never begin to understand the justifications of those saying it doesn't. Sure a few 5 stars flame out like Ishaq, and basically any 4 star we have ever got. Plus you will have some Pughs and Nassibs that develop into future pros but when you compare overall rosters full the equal playing field quickly dissipates. I really hope this FSU game and Clemson game earlier ends this discussion once and for all


Sent from my iPhone using -

I've never understood it either. It's been one one of the things that has baffled me about the folks that maintain that position. Just makes no sense at all. That said, I say this year after year, but I still think many here watch SU Football as opposed to the larger world of College Football.

There is and has been a huge talent difference for several years now. There is a reason we have not been ranked in awhile and it's not "West Coast bias." It's talent.

44cuse


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HtownOrange]

Let's not forget Texas, who recruited early, stuck with kids and they have been nothing more than 2 or 3 stars and perform that way. Many agree that because Texas offered these kid early they jumped to 5 stars but were never really that good.

The system has its flaws but it also has its usefulness. I agree with the overall point that more stars are important but let's never forget that many 4 & 5 stars are only there because a football factory gave them an early look or showed interest.

Applied to Syracuse, let's also never forget that our kids are required to attend class, make grades and be STUDENTS as compared to several football factories where the players have the option of attending class, making grades and being real students. That is the real difference. If the NFL had a real minor league system and the NCAA held academics as an important, most of the SEC would not be able to field a team, nor half the Big 12, and a few schools in the other Power 5.

 

[Oakland]

For those who say the star system don't matter this is what a roster full of 4 and 5 star kids vs a roster full of 2 and 3 star kids looks like

Some posters say that because they need to have hope - and to have hope they need to cast aside rationality. Same thing happens on the BB side.

 

[Crousept]

And Florida st has thirteen 4 stars coming in next year.

 

[Crusty]

I don't think the distinction between three star and one star is very important and the chance of finding diamonds in the rough is very good. That is where we usually find our future NFL draftees. However, if a coach is a good talent evaluator and can coach, he will have far better results if he can pick and choose from the four and five stars, even given the bias of offers from some schools.

Had Marrone, who was both, had the ability to recruit 4-5 star guys we would be awesome. Can't really say that about every coach.

To be a top ten team year in and year out, being able to recruit 4-5 stars is a must. However, many teams have proven that it is possible to be a top 25 team with 2 and 3 stars.

So, while the ratings do matter at the top of the scale, I think coaching is more important in a program that is below the top 10.

One rating system uses the following groups:

1. Five-star top 25-30 players
2. Four star is a top 250-300 or so player
3. Three-stars is a top 750 level player
4. Two stars means the player is a mid-major prospect
5. One star means the player is not ranked