The star system

[longislandcuse]

Omg, can we just get good so people stop trying to validate our 3 star recruits every week.

Better recruiting classes win in CFB. I don't understand why this topic keeps coming up.

 

[TheCusian]

Omg, can we just get good so people stop trying to validate our 3 star recruits every week. Better recruiting classes win in CFB. I don't understand why this topic keeps coming up.

Nobodies actually reading the thread. They are all reading INTO the thread.

 

[tipphill]

I really appreciate the effort we are making to try and discredit the star system to make us look better, but it's just not possible. In the past decade we've brought in mainly 2 and 3 star kids. During that time we have 3 seasons above 6 wins, topping off at 8, and we've had to scrape and fight just to get to that point. I don't get the point those against the star system are trying to make? We all know there are outliers, but for the most part the programs bringing in the 4 and 5 stars, are the programs winning big. The programs that are winning big with 3 and 4 stars are the ones who have implemented superior schemes.

people who discredit the star system are the ones that envy the schools that do well with that same system and quietly relent our own recruiting failures in the 4-5 star range. we will always need to coach up, with the hope we get the occasional 4-5 star guy.--

 

[CuseOnly]

Well, you also think that an undefeated Syracuse would be left out of the top four. So there's that.

And, I do believe there are only about 20-25 five stars a year. I may be mistaken though.

An undefeated Syracuse team that started the season in the 50-70's in rankings would absolutely not be in the final 4. Marshall was undefeated until their bowl last year, did they get in? Nope.

Take our schedule for 2015, if we run the table we will have played a down LSU team, a down FSU team without their Heisman QB ad Clemson. The rest is mediocre.

You think that will get you in over a 1 loss Alabama, Auburn, Oregon, USC, Oklahoma, Texas, TCU, Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, Michigan State, Stanford, etc. When most of them will be ranked in the top 25 pre-season, guess what, it won't. FSU was barely allowed in as a 4 seed last year and they were the returning champs and 3 1-loss teams were ahead of them.

 

[HOFCeluck]

An undefeated Syracuse team that started the season in the 50-70's in rankings would absolutely not be in the final 4. Marshall was undefeated until their bowl last year, did they get in? Nope.

Take our schedule for 2015, if we run the table we will have played a down LSU team, a down FSU team without their Heisman QB ad Clemson. The rest is mediocre.

You think that will get you in over a 1 loss Alabama, Auburn, Oregon, USC, Oklahoma, Texas, TCU, Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, Michigan State, Stanford, etc. When most of them will be ranked in the top 25 pre-season, guess what, it won't. FSU was barely allowed in as a 4 seed last year and they were the returning champs and 3 1-loss teams were ahead of them.

What power conference is Marshall in? Are all twelve of those teams going to have one loss In the same year?

 

[anomander]

An undefeated Syracuse team that started the season in the 50-70's in rankings would absolutely not be in the final 4. Marshall was undefeated until their bowl last year, did they get in? Nope.

Take our schedule for 2015, if we run the table we will have played a down LSU team, a down FSU team without their Heisman QB ad Clemson. The rest is mediocre.

You think that will get you in over a 1 loss Alabama, Auburn, Oregon, USC, Oklahoma, Texas, TCU, Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, Michigan State, Stanford, etc. When most of them will be ranked in the top 25 pre-season, guess what, it won't. FSU was barely allowed in as a 4 seed last year and they were the returning champs and 3 1-loss teams were ahead of them.

How can I pass up a spot to argue Syracuse's case for the Final 4??? Anyways, if we were to run the table I definitely think we'd be in the Final 4. Sure a lot will depend on other resume's, but I don't think it would be possible for 4 other schools to have a better case. As for starting the season in the 50-70's, they don't do that. That's why the rankings come out in October. They watch the first half of the season, and then make a poll. But if we have wins vs LSU, Clemson, @FSU, @Louisville, and then the Coastal champion we'd be impossible to pass up. LSU, Clemson, FSU, and Louisville will all start the season ranked. FSU may be down a bit this year, but I don't think their record will reflect that. Plus schools like Virginia, NCST, and Pitt are all expected to be better this year. and possibly ranked. The only ACC opponent, who is expected to be worse is Boston College, but then again that was supposed to be the case this year as well. The ACC is getting better. As a conference they have always recruited well, but they now have the coaches to get the most out of the talent. Last year the ACC was able to hold it's own, or at least out of conference they were. FSU may be down a bit, but everybody else is improving, so I don't think schedule strength would be a problem.

 

[CIL]

An undefeated Syracuse team that started the season in the 50-70's in rankings would absolutely not be in the final 4. Marshall was undefeated until their bowl last year, did they get in? Nope.

Take our schedule for 2015, if we run the table we will have played a down LSU team, a down FSU team without their Heisman QB ad Clemson. The rest is mediocre.

You think that will get you in over a 1 loss Alabama, Auburn, Oregon, USC, Oklahoma, Texas, TCU, Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, Michigan State, Stanford, etc. When most of them will be ranked in the top 25 pre-season, guess what, it won't. FSU was barely allowed in as a 4 seed last year and they were the returning champs and 3 1-loss teams were ahead of them.

I get what you are laying down there. However, Marshall lost their final regular season game to WKU, not their bowl game.

 

[HOFCeluck]

http://m.espn.go.com/ncf/story?storyId=12138345&src=desktop

This isn't exactly the best metric, but this has three top 25 teams on the schedule, plus whoever we'd pay in the ACCCG.

 

[CuseOnly]

How can I pass up a spot to argue Syracuse's case for the Final 4??? Anyways, if we were to run the table I definitely think we'd be in the Final 4. Sure a lot will depend on other resume's, but I don't think it would be possible for 4 other schools to have a better case. As for starting the season in the 50-70's, they don't do that. That's why the rankings come out in October. They watch the first half of the season, and then make a poll. But if we have wins vs LSU, Clemson, @FSU, @Louisville, and then the Coastal champion we'd be impossible to pass up. LSU, Clemson, FSU, and Louisville will all start the season ranked. FSU may be down a bit this year, but I don't think their record will reflect that. Plus schools like Virginia, NCST, and Pitt are all expected to be better this year. and possibly ranked. The only ACC opponent, who is expected to be worse is Boston College, but then again that was supposed to be the case this year as well. The ACC is getting better. As a conference they have always recruited well, but they now have the coaches to get the most out of the talent. Last year the ACC was able to hold it's own, or at least out of conference they were. FSU may be down a bit, but everybody else is improving, so I don't think schedule strength would be a problem.

Let's just suppose...

Alabama wins the SEC with one conference loss early on to Auburn.
TCU and Baylor have the same thing that happened this year and are named co-champs each with one loss.
Ohio St Loses one game during the season and wins the B1G against Mich State in the CCG giving each of them 1 loss.
Georgia wins all their games and loses to Bama in the SEC CCG.
Oregon loses an early game to Stanford but goes on to win the division meeting undefeated USC in their CCG game and wins.

With the above scenario there would be:
Bama 1 loss
Georgia 1 loss
TCU 1 loss
Baylor 1 loss
Ohio State 1 loss
Michigan State 1 loss
Oregon 1 loss
USC 1 loss
Add in the possibility of ND having a great season and they could be another.

8 teams with one loss, not all that improbable and every one of those teams would get in ahead of an undefeated SU. Most if not all of them will be ranked pre-season, where SU won't. Look at their SOS compared to an ACC with a not so great football perception. The talking heads would all explode if a 1 loss SEC, PAC, Big 12 or B1G school was left out for an Undefeated SU.

My original list of teams wasn't meant to have all of those teams with 1 loss in the same year as someone else was suggesting I meant. It was meant to illustrate that all of those "name" teams if they had 1 loss would get in ahead of an undefeated SU.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Let's just suppose...

Alabama wins the SEC with one conference loss early on to Auburn.
TCU and Baylor have the same thing that happened this year and are named co-champs each with one loss.
Ohio St Loses one game during the season and wins the B1G against Mich State in the CCG giving each of them 1 loss.
Georgia wins all their games and loses to Bama in the SEC CCG.
Oregon loses an early game to Stanford but goes on to win the division meeting undefeated USC in their CCG game and wins.

With the above scenario there would be:
Bama 1 loss
Georgia 1 loss
TCU 1 loss
Baylor 1 loss
Ohio State 1 loss
Michigan State 1 loss
Oregon 1 loss
USC 1 loss
Add in the possibility of ND having a great season and they could be another.

8 teams with one loss, not all that improbable and every one of those teams would get in ahead of an undefeated SU. Most if not all of them will be ranked pre-season, where SU won't. Look at their SOS compared to an ACC with a not so great football perception. The talking heads would all explode if a 1 loss SEC, PAC, Big 12 or B1G school was left out for an Undefeated SU.

My original list of teams wasn't meant to have all of those teams with 1 loss in the same year as someone else was suggesting I meant. It was meant to illustrate that all of those "name" teams if they had 1 loss would get in ahead of an undefeated SU.

The fact that you have to construct this scenario to make your point stand kind of speaks for itself...and they'd probably still be ahead of Georgia, Michigan State, USC, TCU, and Baylor.

 

[CuseOnly]

The fact that you have to construct this scenario to make your point stand kind of speaks for itself...and they'd probably still be ahead of Georgia, Michigan State, USC, TCU, and Baylor.

Construct a "scenario"?

Here are the final standings in the college football playoff rankings where there were 5 teams that had 1 loss an FSU was undefeated. Give FSU one loss because if SU ran the table they would have beaten FSU to be undefeated. Which of the 6 teams would you put us ahead of if SU was undefeated in 2014?

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

My "scenario" would have had only 2 more one loss teams and none undefeated.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Construct a "scenario"?

Here are the final standings in the college football playoff rankings where there were 5 teams that had 1 loss an FSU was undefeated. Give FSU one loss because if SU ran the table they would have beaten FSU to be undefeated. Which of the 6 teams would you put us ahead of if SU was undefeated in 2014?

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

My "scenario" would have had only 2 more one loss teams and none undefeated.

I'd put us in Florida States spot (3).

That was easy. Give me a hard one!

 

[Phillymoose]

A 5 star kid out of HS is almost a certainty to dominate in college - but his development curve might peak at age 21-22. The NFL is filled with late bloomers who hit their full potential at 24-25 (or later). This 'discussion' is about the timing of development.

If the ratings services were to offer a post-college rating of each kid - I would argue that the ones that gain the most stars over those 4/5 years, as opposed to the ones who start with them - - are the real NFL prospects.

The 5 star kid who plays right away can help you win NC's. He might level off - but if he becomes a 4 star by the time college is over, then if I'm an NFL GM, I much prefer the 2 star kid who became a 4 star kid in college. Both (hypothetical) 4 stars. Give me recent development .. prefer him over the NC winner.

IMO - this explains the phenomenon of the OP, as well as the high correlations of stars to championships in the thread.

 

[CuseOnly]

I'd put us in Florida States spot (3).

That was easy. Give me a hard one!

Remember that FSU had the 4th seed in with the benefit of winning the 2013 NC. We won't have that luxury and we won't have 25 straight wins to buoy us into that spot, along with the #1 ranking for almost 2 years.

There is no way in hell that the committee puts us in over TCU or Baylor, undefeated or not. Or any if the 3 seeds that were selected above FSU, each with 1 loss. This is about getting into the final 4, not rankings remember.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Remember that FSU had the 4th seed in with the benefit of winning the 2013 NC. We won't have that luxury and we won't have 25 straight wins to buoy us into that spot, along with the #1 ranking for almost 2 years.

There is no way in hell that the committee puts us in over TCU or Baylor, undefeated or not. Or any if the 3 seeds that were selected above FSU, each with 1 loss. This is about getting into the final 4, not rankings remember.

.

Little light on facts there? Guess I just have to take your opinion at face value that FSU got in partially on prior seasons accomplishments and not,you know,being the only undefeated team from a power conference.

An undefeated ACC champion Cuse with five wins over ranked teams, would be in the final four. As ano said, the rankings don't even start until weeks into the season, so it kind of makes your whole premise invalid.

 

[CuseOnly]

.

Little light on facts there? Guess I just have to take your opinion at face value that FSU got in partially on prior seasons accomplishments and not,you know,being the only undefeated team from a power conference.

An undefeated ACC champion Cuse with five wins over ranked teams, would be in the final four. As ano said, the rankings don't even start until weeks into the season, so it kind of makes your whole premise invalid.

What did I say that wasn't fact? Are you saying the committee didn't factor those things in? As a matter of fact the Polls are out all year, the NC rankings doesn't start until week 4.

So you are saying that FSU was ranked #1 in the committee poll after week 4 based on beating OK St. by 6, The Citadel, Clemson in OT by 6 and NC State without the committee taking into consideration their 2013 record and they were the defending NC? Or that they had the Heisman trophy winner as QB?

That is what I would call not looking at the facts on your side of the argument.

 

[reedny]

I know rested your case, but permission to approach the bench your Honor?

Playoff system or not, nearly 90% of the teams to win a NC over the last 10 years have had AT LEAST 3 Top Ten recruiting classes, including, brace yourself, the team that just won the NC in the only year you see as "valid."

The correlation between class rankings and winning NC - hell, winning in general - is about as close to a statistical certainty as you can get.

Sure ... if P (top HS recruiting rankings), then highly-likely Q (college FB success). But there's more than one way to skin a cat. Q (success in college) can still be achieved by other means (some lower-ranked/unranked kids are also quite talented, were not star-recognized because they did not get exposure with prominent programs, but will be successful college or pro players). I'm thinking Kenterious Womack here.

 

[HOFCeluck]

What did I say that wasn't fact? Are you saying the committee didn't factor those things in? As a matter of fact the Polls are out all year, the NC rankings doesn't start until week 4.

So you are saying that FSU was ranked #1 in the committee poll after week 4 based on beating OK St. by 6, The Citadel, Clemson in OT by 6 and NC State without the committee taking into consideration their 2013 record and they were the defending NC? Or that they had the Heisman trophy winner as QB?

That is what I would call not looking at the facts on your side of the argument.

Speaking of not looking at the facts, if you're going to call people out on facts,you better make sure yours are tight.

The first college football rankings don't come out week four. They come out October 26. Florida State was 7-0 by then. So that includes a win over top five Notre Dame as well.

On October 26, there was one other undefeated p5 team, and that was number one Mississippi State. A traditional college football power I'd there was any.

They had a top four-worthy resume defending NC or not.

 

[CuseOnly]

[QUOTE="
On October 26, there was one other undefeated p5 team, and that was number one Mississippi State. A traditional college football power I'd there was any.

They had a top four-worthy resume defending NC or not.[/QUOTE]

The rankings actually came out and were posted on the website on 10/28.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings#week-10

So you are saying that FSU being ranked #2 after 7 wins is not as a result partially of them being undefeated the previous year? I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you.

 

[HOFCeluck]

On October 26, there was one other undefeated p5 team, and that was number one Mississippi State. A traditional college football power I'd there was any.

They had a top four-worthy resume defending NC or not.

The rankings actually came out and were posted on the website on 10/28.
http://www.collegefootballplayoff.com/view-rankings#week-10

So you are saying that FSU being ranked #2 after 7 wins is not as a result partially of them being undefeated the previous year? I have a bridge in Brooklyn I would like to sell you.

Regardless, 10/28 is not week 4. You were wrong about that, just like you were wrong about the number of 5 stars in a given year. It's not even close to a hundred.

Is it a coincidence that the top two teams in the first poll were the only undefeated power five teams? How did Mississippi State get the top spot? They were #36 preseason, and are hardly a football factory that the "star system" is supposed to favor.

The problem with your take is there is little to no precedent for anything you say. How many undefeated power conference teams, since the start of the BCS era, have been left out of the championship? I can think of two. One was left out because they were stuck behind two other undefeated teams. The other was banned from the postseason. You can even make the argument that the committee set the precedent this year that conference championships matter, by leaving out TCU/Baylor...further solidifying SU's spot should they ever go undefeated.

All of this is moot, of course...since a team of 2-3 star caliber players probably isn't going undefeated in the ACC anytime soon.