Tempest_12
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 162
FYI: Ignore list...
Star Debate/Ratings thread
- Thread starter IronJacket7
- Start date
FYI: Ignore list...
I agree. But there's realism and then there's negativity. My question to him is why he feels the need to constantly skew negative. I think this is football related.
ATL1
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 7,377
Are we really that desperate to find something of affirmation that we gonna pump our collective chest out at this list.
Kevin Cone has 1 catch in the NFL and status as a player is shoe string dubious. (Sad cause he is bigger and faster than Drew Davis, yet he was passed by an undrafted rookie on the depth chart)
Stephen Hill is a Bust so far for the Jets. (He sneek take pot shots at the offense all the time)
Bey Bey is the gold star
But this offense puts WR in the NFL ??
Most people or analyst have said these guys were drafted mostly due to their freak athleticism and potential DESPITE the offense they played under.
Stephen Hill
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ycn-11024048
Bey Bey
http://voices.yahoo.com/2010-nfl-draft-1st-round-review-denver-broncos-5889908.html
I applaud these guys for working their tails off and putting their God given freak athleticism to use by getting into the NFL. I am happy that each one of them provide GT good exposure including Calvin. But I will not say is that CPJ and his offense got them there.
ATL1
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 7,377
I give props when props are due. I just gave props to CTR and his defense. I'm measured with both, if you want negativity I'll direct you to some message boards where there are far more overt CPJ haters than me.
I agree with you that we would be hard pressed to think the current offense as it is utilized today will ever be well known to wide receivers as the road to the NFL. I will say that bay bay is a prime example of what can happen to one that is a great talent at the position though, if they came to GT. This is to say that not only are you going to get your share of TDs, yards, and humongous plays, but in the process you should become a big time blocker. This is attractive to a lot of NFL teams and scouts whether you think so or not. Combine that with the fact that GT attracts intelligent, well spoken, and grounded receivers unlike the typical a-hole types that dominate the position in the league, and you definitely have a selling point. We definitely need to sell this to potential big time receiver talents from high school better than we have recently.
johncu
Jolly Good Fellow
- Messages
- 209
I'm a little late to the party, but I had to respond to jayparr...
Regarding star ratings, you are right that signing classes full of low-rated players is not a recipe for success. If you do that, then on average you will have less talent than other teams. Even though every 4 and 5 star player doesn't pan out, more of them become superstars than do 2 and 3 star players. That's a fact. So star rankings are fairly accurate when rating entire classes, which is evidenced by the obvious correlation of recruiting rankings and team performance.
That said, star rankings are not remotely reliable at predicting the success of an individual player. As much as work as they try to put into the rankings, a ton of it is guesswork, and there are way too many factors to consider future success, including work ethic, body maturation, and coachability. I would MUCH, MUCH rather have a 2 star (who I'm sure will end up 3*) that our coaches prefer than a 4 star that the scouting services ranked higher. They liked him, and they clearly liked him a lot to offer him with so much time and so few 'ships left.
I don't have the time to go find the stats, but I've seen them before, and they very much back up what I just said. The teams that are always at the top of the recruiting rankings are generally at the top of the polls as well (assuming they have a decent coach). Even so, if you look at the eventual success of individual players (measured by All-Americans or NFL draftees) compared to their star rankings, the rankings aren't even close to accurate.
Regarding star ratings, you are right that signing classes full of low-rated players is not a recipe for success. If you do that, then on average you will have less talent than other teams. Even though every 4 and 5 star player doesn't pan out, more of them become superstars than do 2 and 3 star players. That's a fact. So star rankings are fairly accurate when rating entire classes, which is evidenced by the obvious correlation of recruiting rankings and team performance.
That said, star rankings are not remotely reliable at predicting the success of an individual player. As much as work as they try to put into the rankings, a ton of it is guesswork, and there are way too many factors to consider future success, including work ethic, body maturation, and coachability. I would MUCH, MUCH rather have a 2 star (who I'm sure will end up 3*) that our coaches prefer than a 4 star that the scouting services ranked higher. They liked him, and they clearly liked him a lot to offer him with so much time and so few 'ships left.
I don't have the time to go find the stats, but I've seen them before, and they very much back up what I just said. The teams that are always at the top of the recruiting rankings are generally at the top of the polls as well (assuming they have a decent coach). Even so, if you look at the eventual success of individual players (measured by All-Americans or NFL draftees) compared to their star rankings, the rankings aren't even close to accurate.
While I still maintain that star rankings are largely away for recruiting services to sell subscriptions, I do like that hypothesis, john. The more of those guys you have around, the more likely some of them are to be difference makers. I do think that depth can be a problem when you shoot for only "star laden" guys, because those guys are less likely to stick around if they're not playing. I think GT's class this year is the first one since 2007 where I think every current commit could end up a starter, or a guy pushing for playing time. I also think I want guys who are excited to be here over some kid w a few more stars who picked us b/c he thought he'd play earlier here than his "Dream school."
My second point is when I look at a kid like Simmons, I see a kid that this staff offered b/c they have a specific purpose for him in mind. I remember being puzzled when they took Robbie Godhigh late. Now I'm REAL glad they did. Inversely, Ryan Ayers, who was one of the highest rated kids we'd had in several years at that point, left here b/c he wasn't playing and went to Liberty. So don't try to convince me star rankings from guys who never coached matter more than the firsthand evaluation of division one coaches.
My second point is when I look at a kid like Simmons, I see a kid that this staff offered b/c they have a specific purpose for him in mind. I remember being puzzled when they took Robbie Godhigh late. Now I'm REAL glad they did. Inversely, Ryan Ayers, who was one of the highest rated kids we'd had in several years at that point, left here b/c he wasn't playing and went to Liberty. So don't try to convince me star rankings from guys who never coached matter more than the firsthand evaluation of division one coaches.
Look at the 4 stars in the class of 07. I would much rather have that class than this one. No doubt about that. Had you rather have Dwyer or Kinlaw, Burnett or the austin twins, Morgan or Simmons. I know we had several 4 stars from that class that did not work out also. But just look what they accomplished! The coaching staff early in the recruiting process always put out offers to 4 and 5 star players. And lots of them. We just don't hear back from many. ALWAYS take a 4 over a 3. ALWAYS!!!
bat_082994
Ramblin' Wreck
- Messages
- 986
- Location
- Athens, GA
I feel like as of right now, that is an unfair comparison. Looking back at in five years after they have all played, yes that would be a fair comparison, but right now you have no idea how these guys are going to perform. Looking at it from a potential point of view, I'm with you. I'd rather have a class like 2007; however, this is what we got. The coaching staff seems to like a lot of these guys and I trust them.
Get the coaches in a sound proof room, and nobody else except a hidden listening device then listen to it the next day. I trust the coaches enough that they would pick a 4 over a 3 @ 95 % of the time. Just so their character and academia are equal. Probably just so in their character makeup the recruit would be within the law.
So we should've taken Will Korn over Josh Nesbitt? I'm sorry, but you're wrong.
Hey GT I said 95% of the time
How 'bout Cedric Everson? Should we have put up with his nonsense because of the stars next to his name? Isaiah Crowell? There's a lot of baggage with all those stars in some cases. Sometimes they're worth the headache, sometimes they're not. But to say one kid is of a higher value because of an arbitrary star ranking than another is an asinine, inefficient way of thinking...
Ok, you're still wrong. I trust coaches far more than any recruiting "expert" who's ever pressed play on vcr/dvd player. Coaches know what they need for what they're trying to accomplish way more than any recruiting guru ever has. Your obsession with star rankings is counterproductive. You take the kid who best fits your program, regardless of how many stars are next to his name...
Everson- who? As far as Crowell goes I also said within the law. From his pictures on social media you could pretty well determine that he was at best just a gangsta thug. I work in a jail. I KNOW!
By the way I heard Bobby Ross at a preseason Tech club right before that big Tech tackle assaulted a female in that restraunt bar near the campass and it right before the 90 season. In that speach he said that not all his players were high character types.
I don't get your point. I think you make the mistake of assuming that every star ranking given to a prospect is accurate. From experience, I can guarantee you that's not accurate. Often times players are ranked a certain way because they're ranked on other sites and the first site doesn't want to appear uninformed. Sometimes it's because a player went to one service's camp and not anothers. There are a host of reasons a kid could be ranked as a four star by one service and three by another, and talent usually has very little to do with it.
GTJason
Helluva Engineer
- Messages
- 1,583
Can we please make the 3* 4* nonsense it's own thread? I know I'm feeding the troll here, but if you want 4 star players at GT you need a longterm coach. CCG started getting those players after being here 5 years and that was in a climate where recruits weren't treated like gods. Every indication is CPJ has gotten better every year at recruiting, we have a 4 star RB for next year who by all indications can't even wait for another visit to the school to commit. We all agree we'll do better with better players, if that's the point you're trying to make then yes you're right, congrats Yogi Berra. This class certainly feels a lot better than last year when we couldn't seem to give the open spots on the team away...
Fair enough. And you're right, jason, it does feel entirely different than last year. i'm excited to have a class this deep (if they all sign) on the flats next spring. i shouldn't have let that discussion go on so long. maybe a good thread starter for a rainy day...