the star system

[TheCusian]

I think of stars as a % chance that they’ll be starters in college. 5* are very close to can’t miss like 95% - as 3* are a pretty big range like 40%-75%.

 

[NKR1978]

I definitely feel like some here discount the impact of 4 & 5 Stars, because we don’t get many (or any 5*).

I’ll take those guys any day and you all should too.

Miami has been a QB away from doing damage. Rosier has really killed that team.

That being said, I trust Dino and I really trust our S&C program. 3* recruits can be Andre Cisco’s or never see the field. I’d put my money on this staff taking these guys closer to the level of a Cisco than a recruit that doesn’t pan out.

I care more about the camp offers and competing offer list than I do about stars, but most 4 and virtually all 5 seem to pan out. Having said that, I trust this staff. They clearly can coach up kids and know how to spot talent. Cisco being a 3* is ridiculous in hindsight.

And with Dawson we got the biggest story from signing day. And beat Clemson out for him.So things are going in a great direction.

 

[SkyTopBus44]

Personally, I think it is regionally biased. If a player is from Texas, California, or Florida they are given a higher ranking than if they lived in the Northeast.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I care more about the camp offers and competing offer list than I do about stars, but most 4 and virtually all 5 seem to pan out. Having said that, I trust this staff. They clearly can coach up kids and know how to spot talent. Cisco being a 3* is ridiculous in hindsight.

At least we're getting to the point where our fans have stopped looking at our history with 4 stars and saying the 4 stars we get aren't any good anyway.

 

[HOFCeluck]

How did that work out for FSU this year...

Florida State has three national championships and almost twenty conference titles. So while there may be extenuating circumstances (coughcough coaching) in a given year on a long enough timeline yes I feel pretty good about my chances with teams of highly regarded recruits.

 

[PAcuse]

Florida State has three national championships and almost twenty conference titles. So while there may be extenuating circumstances (coughcough coaching) in a given year on a long enough timeline yes I feel pretty good about my chances with teams of highly regarded recruits.

Sure you will get a great team
Look a Louisville this year
Texas unperformed for 5ish years under Mack being in the middle of great recruiting
USC has been terrible with 4/5 star recruits for awhile
ND has done it as well
My point is sure you can get 4 and 5 stars and stop everyone like Alabama but for ever bama you see a handful of teams that are terrible with 4 and 5 star kids
The system is flawed

 

[HOFCeluck]

Sure you will get a great team
Look a Louisville this year
Texas unperformed for 5ish years under Mack being in the middle of great recruiting
USC has been terrible with 4/5 star recruits for awhile
ND has done it as well
My point is sure you can get 4 and 5 stars and stop everyone like Alabama but for ever bama you see a handful of teams that are terrible with 4 and 5 star kids
The system is flawed

And my point is that if you keep stacking classes of four and five star kids you’re probably going to be good. Outliers aside.

How many titles does USC have? You think they’re going to stay down forever? They’ve been terrible for so long you have to go all the way back to 2017 to find their last ten win season.

Texas is 9-4 and in the Sugar Bowl. They’re ten years removed from a title and about twelve years revived from playing another one.

LOL ND is undefeated and in the playoffs.

Louisville hires a solid coach so they’re going to be back. But that’s kind of a moot point as they’ve never really recruited at a Bama/Texas level.

 

[TheCusian]

Here's what's clear. Dino:

- Has a system/philosophy that he can recruit to.
- Wants the best kids that fit into what we want to do.
- Can develop kids into contributors no matter their ranking. But sometimes it takes longer with kids who are lower.
- Can and will find high caliber players who transfer to bolster roster

This combination of things is not ideal. Ideal is growing to where Clemson and FSU are. But it's the next best. And this class is filled with kids who might be able to contribute right away and kids who fit into a system/philosophy that will win.

EDIT: The above seems obvious - but we see all around CFB teams who can't do that. We've had coaches who couldn't do that.

 

[reedny]

And my point is that if you keep stacking classes of four and five star kids you’re probably going to be good. Outliers aside.

How many titles does USC have? You think they’re going to stay down forever? They’ve been terrible for so long you have to go all the way back to 2017 to find their last ten win season.

Texas is 9-4 and in the Sugar Bowl. They’re ten years removed from a title and about twelve years revived from playing another one.

LOL ND is undefeated and in the playoffs.

Louisville hires a solid coach so they’re going to be back. But that’s kind of a moot point as they’ve never really recruited at a Bama/Texas level.

Of course. Stars correlate to performance and are inverse to risk. It's not surprising that many selector programs getting 4/5 star kids outperform programs taking more risk. Fortunately for SU, we're one of the remaining non-selector schools good at spotting talent. It's no accident that Babers' staff has been to be able to find - and land - 3-star kids with high measurables that may not be producing now but will in 1-2 years. I like where we are... with a mix of those 3-star/high potential kids, and a few higher profile kids that are likely to contribute right away.

 

[nzm136]

Sure you will get a great team
Look a Louisville this year
Texas unperformed for 5ish years under Mack being in the middle of great recruiting
USC has been terrible with 4/5 star recruits for awhile
ND has done it as well
My point is sure you can get 4 and 5 stars and stop everyone like Alabama but for ever bama you see a handful of teams that are terrible with 4 and 5 star kids
The system is flawed

It’s all probabilities. My money is on any school that you listed having a great season before UConn, and one of the key reasons is UConn’s recruiting vs theirs.

 

[PAcuse]

It’s all probabilities. My money is on any school that you listed having a great season before UConn, and one of the key reasons is UConn’s recruiting vs theirs.

Well yeah when your base is two to zero stars you are going to have terrible seasons
Look at us we out performed a ton of these big time schools
Over the wrong run would I want all 4 and 5 stars oh yeah
I’m saying the system is super flawed

 

[nzm136]

Well yeah when your base is two to zero stars you are going to have terrible seasons
Look at us we out performed a ton of these big time schools
Over the wrong run would I want all 4 and 5 stars oh yeah
I’m saying the system is super flawed

Again, it’s all probabilities.

Picking out singular outliers doesn’t prove a system is “super flawed.” It just proves that there are outliers in statistics.

But go ahead and use us if you want. We’ve had one good season and about 1-2 other decent seasons since the early 2000’s, and I think we’re something like 1-3 for getting players drafted in the last 3 drafts. We’ve also had marginal recruiting rankings. The system sounds like it’s working pretty accurately to me :/

Also, what big name school have we out performed? This is our 4th bowl since 2005, and this is our first time in the rankings since 2001. Who out of Texas, USC, and Notre Dame are we beating?

[EDIT: FWIW, I’d put money that they’ve all sent more kids to the pros than we have, too. We’re also something like 1-5 vs those schools since the GRob era, and 0-1 this year.]

 

[PAcuse]

Again, it’s all probabilities.

Picking out singular outliers doesn’t prove a system is “super flawed.” It just proves that there are outliers in statistics.

But go ahead and use us if you want. We’ve had one good season and about 1-2 other decent seasons since the early 2000’s, and I think we’re something like 1-3 for getting players drafted in the last 3 drafts. We’ve also had marginal recruiting rankings. The system sounds like it’s working pretty accurately to me :/

Also, what big name school have we out performed? This is our 4th bowl since 2005, and this is our first time in the rankings since 2001. Who out of Texas, USC, and Notre Dame are we beating?

[EDIT: FWIW, I’d put money that they’ve all sent more kids to the pros than we have, too. We’re also something like 1-5 vs those schools since the GRob era, and 0-1 this year.]

I was talking about this current season please don't bring up the little engine that could we all know we where terrible and could not out perform the little engine that could.
So the system is also "super flawed" due to the fact that you see teams that large subscription bases to certain websites having fairly good classes and getting no more then 4 wins.
I also clearly stated over the long run I would take the 4 and 5 stars.
We've beaten big name schools FSU, Clemson, and you can kind of throw in VTech. Oh yeah and even the little engine beat ND, since you brought him up.
Baylor for years only got 3 star kids and where beating teams in Texas that where out recruiting them.
Fresno State and Boise State also did for long periods of time.

 

[FreakTalksAboutSU]

I just cant wait till Dino lands a 5 star talent. We havent had a true consensus five star guy in so long it seems

 

[nzm136]

I was talking about this current season please don't bring up the little engine that could we all know we where terrible and could not out perform the little engine that could.
So the system is also "super flawed" due to the fact that you see teams that large subscription bases to certain websites having fairly good classes and getting no more then 4 wins.
I also clearly stated over the long run I would take the 4 and 5 stars.
We've beaten big name schools FSU, Clemson, and you can kind of throw in VTech. Oh yeah and even the little engine beat ND, since you brought him up.
Baylor for years only got 3 star kids and where beating teams in Texas that where out recruiting them.
Fresno State and Boise State also did for long periods of time.

We’re something like 2-5 vs Notre Dame since 2000 (internet recruiting ranking era), and we’ve beaten FSU and Clemson once each. Those schools don’t support your argument.

Baylor and Boise are incredible outliers - so much so that they changed the game.

And saying that the rankings work in the long run, but the system is “super flawed” because they don’t work for a handful of schools in a single year (this year) isn’t internally consistent. Winning and losing comes down to probabilities, and it’s hard to see probabilities/patterns w/ a small number of occurrences. If you’d rather 4-5* players than 2-3* players, the ranking system isn’t “super flawed.”

 

[PAcuse]

We’re something like 2-5 vs Notre Dame since 2000 (internet recruiting ranking era), and we’ve beaten FSU and Clemson once each. Those schools don’t support your argument.

Baylor and Boise are incredible outliers - so much so that they changed the game.

And saying that the rankings work in the long run, but the system is “super flawed” because they don’t work for a handful of schools in a single year (this year) isn’t internally consistent. Winning and losing comes down to probabilities, and it’s hard to see probabilities/patterns w/ a small number of occurrences. If you’d rather 4-5* players than 2-3* players, the ranking system isn’t “super flawed.”

Please read what I've been saying. I've clearly stated in the long run I would take the 4 and 5 stars.
It's not a perfect system sure I guess saying super flawed was the wrong choice of words.
You would be crazy to say that you don't want 4 and 5 star kids.
The system is flawed due to the fact we see zero and two star kids doing great things and plenty of 5 star kids burn out into nothing.
If you can't see it being flawed just look up Rutgers classes and tell me they are right.
The whole star system has become about what offers the kids are getting early, what camps they are paying to go to, and which fan bases support the sites the most.

 

[TheCusian]

You’re both right. It’s flawed and it’s generally better to have a higher rated class.

I think the top kids and classes get picked over and then there’s a range between 30-60 where it’s a mixed bag.

Good thing our coach can work with a mixed bag to produce.

 

[SoBristol]

The ratings are flawed in many respects - they are based on junior year video, plus summer camps, and rarely updated for development or senior year performance. Some regions are covered better than other regions. We can all cite examples of recruits who were over rated or underrated by wide margins.

Still, there are reasons our staff sends out 200 offers to highly rated recruits, who have good measurables (speed, height, power) and high school performance. We want these blue chips - they would fit our system (or any system) just fine.

We were successful this season, because we had senior leadership, multi-year starters, and good players in key roles. Dungey at 6ft 4 had great measurables and was the #2 rated QB in his state. Robinson was a 4 star. Guthrie was a juco all-American. Pierce was a highly rated juco. Custis at 6ft 5 had great measurables and decent speed. Moe Neal put up serious numbers in his high school career. Servais and Heckel were among the top OL recruits in Wisconsin. We did not have a fair share of 4 stars, but our 1s weren't some bunch of lightly recruited white chips.

 

[nzm136]

Please read what I've been saying. I've clearly stated in the long run I would take the 4 and 5 stars.
It's not a perfect system sure I guess saying super flawed was the wrong choice of words.
You would be crazy to say that you don't want 4 and 5 star kids.
The system is flawed due to the fact we see zero and two star kids doing great things and plenty of 5 star kids burn out into nothing.
If you can't see it being flawed just look up Rutgers classes and tell me they are right.
The whole star system has become about what offers the kids are getting early, what camps they are paying to go to, and which fan bases support the sites the most.

Please read what I’m saying. It’s sll probabilities. You can’t say that the system is flawed and ignore large sample sizes (multiple years). Pointing out outliers doesn’t prove anything other than the fact that outliers occasionally happen in statistics.

And your post argues with itself. On one hand, you argue that you’d be crazy to not want highly rated recruits. On the other hand, you argue that A) ratings aren’t accurate because of inflation at big name schools and B) they may not be accurate in general (RU, BSU, and BU). You can’t logically have it both ways.

For the record, my belief is that the system is imperfect, but directionally right. Outliers happen, and there ARE other factors (luck, coaching, for, style, etc.), but recruiting is important and rankings/stars are a good data point, or at least usually in the right ballpark.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I've long proposed that while individual player rankings are imprecise, class rankings tend to be fairly accurate.