The Star System

[Coloradojacket]

So, I like CPJ think that recruiting ranking is a joke, or should say it is a cottage industry to sell views and subscriptions. What is a 5 star? Let's see Georgia had one, who has now transferred because he got beat out by a Freshman. Don't know if this will sit behind the pay wall, but read this MyAjc article about our guy C'Bo. I think it is now coming out that stars mean nothing. http://www.myajc.com/sports/college...fter-his-season-ended/rM95yFOPJwcRLVPMvc5XuL/

 

[smokey_wasp]

I wouldn't say they mean nothing, but they don't mean everything...somewhere in between. Certainly a 4-5 star is going to be much better than a 1-2 star, but when you get to more subtle differences, it doesn't mean much.

I do think that situations like C'Bo's have been played up for drama because with the early signing period, a lot of that drama is gone.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Alabama has had guys commit to them who were totally unrated, and then got bumped to 4 and 5 stars. Hilarious.

Ratings in general are pretty accurate. But like anything, there are exceptions. There are always guys who are extremely overrated and extremely underrated.

 

[Cam]

For what it's worth, Christian Malloy just committed to us at B-Back likely taking C'Bo's spot. Very similar measurables. He's rated lower than C'Bo on 247 composite, but it'll be interesting to track both of their progress over the next couple years.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

For what it's worth, Christian Malloy just committed to us at B-Back likely taking C'Bo's spot. Very similar measurables. He's rated lower than C'Bo on 247 composite, but it'll be interesting to track both of their progress over the next couple years.

Well CBo was a 2* guy until he got interest from Notre Dame and Tennessee, and only because of that 247 upgraded him from the 70s to an 86 - 2/3rds of the way to a 4*. Ridiculous.

 

[MikeJackets1967]

Well CBo was a 2* guy until he got interest from Notre Dame and Tennessee, and only because of that 247 upgraded him from the 70s to an 86 - 2/3rds of the way to a 4*. Ridiculous.

Yeah it's a popularity contest Tennessee's recruiting class I believe is either #9 or #10 right now when it was around #65 a m0nth ago.

 

[Milwaukee]

Stars matter. There is a massive amount of proof, but lets continue to beat this horse. Some 5 stars bust and some walk ons turn out to be All Americans, but look at the overall percentages.

I can't wait to hear what we say when we do snag a 5 star, and I believe we will. "Yes!!!" "Recruiting is really getting there!!!" etc etc. I doubt there will be one poster with a "Yea, stars don't really matter".

 

[Deleted member 2897]

I doubt there will be one poster with a "Yea, stars don't really matter".

You underestimate our fan base.

 

[Coloradojacket]

Stars matter. There is a massive amount of proof, but lets continue to beat this horse. Some 5 stars bust and some walk ons turn out to be All Americans, but look at the overall percentages.

I can't wait to hear what we say when we do snag a 5 star, and I believe we will. "Yes!!!" "Recruiting is really getting there!!!" etc etc. I doubt there will be one poster with a "Yea, stars don't really matter".

Not sure there is proof in Stars matter. Take UGA, yes they mad the big game this year, with a down year in the SEC and 30 Seniors on the roster. But that same team won 8 games last year and UGA has had top ten recruiting classes for the last 10 years. I do believe there is a vast difference in kids from the south and the north, thus southern teams are better. But saying a kid is a 2 or 3 vs a 5. Wasn't C'Bo the leading running back in the state this last year. He is 6 feet tall 195 and a 4.5 40. Why isn't he a 5 star.

 

[smokey_wasp]

Not sure there is proof in Stars matter. Take UGA, yes they mad the big game this year, with a down year in the SEC and 30 Seniors on the roster. But that same team won 8 games last year and UGA has had top ten recruiting classes for the last 10 years. I do believe there is a vast difference in kids from the south and the north, thus southern teams are better. But saying a kid is a 2 or 3 vs a 5. Wasn't C'Bo the leading running back in the state this last year. He is 6 feet tall 195 and a 4.5 40. Why isn't he a 5 star.

You don't have to use uga as an example. Look at the last however many national championship teams there have been since star ratings became a thing and I bet you'll find mostly 4 and 5 stars. As for C'Bo, he didn't play against top competition and he runs a 4.5 when there are faster guys. I do think stars are overrated to a certain extent. A lot of your 3 stars are going to be every bit as good as your 4 stars, and sometimes their ratings are going to depend on where they end up. Some guys do get overlooked completely and are diamonds in the rough. There are so many high schools out there and so many players, that is bound to happen. Other guys just develop really quickly. But there isn't any question that on balance, you want the highest rated players. A lot is invested in evaluating players, and it pays for these folks to get it at least mostly correct. That's why I say stars mean something, but not everything.

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

I do not care how many “stars” someone I do not know and someone unrelated to GT gives to a S/A that GT is recruiting.

I do care that our coaches are able to sign as many of the S/A as possible that they offer, regardless if those kids are also offered by ugag, ut, Stanford, fsu, um, ga southern, Kansas, or anyone.

And I expect those kids to be better S/As after 4 years than when we sign them.

At that point, recruiting stars are no more important than how many unsold hot dogs the V has to dispose of at the end of the day.

 

[Milwaukee]

I do not care how many “stars” someone I do not know and someone unrelated to GT gives to a S/A that GT is recruiting.

I do care that our coaches are able to sign as many of the S/A as possible that they offer, regardless if those kids are also offered by ugag, ut, Stanford, fsu, um, ga southern, Kansas, or anyone.

And I expect those kids to be better S/As after 4 years than when we sign them.

At that point, recruiting stars are no more important than how many unsold hot dogs the V has to dispose of at the end of the day.

You'd rather have the kids that Kansas is offering over the kids that FSU is offering, just because.

Do you even listen to your comments?

 

[FightWinDrink]

Stars matter. There is a massive amount of proof, but lets continue to beat this horse. Some 5 stars bust and some walk ons turn out to be All Americans, but look at the overall percentages.

I can't wait to hear what we say when we do snag a 5 star, and I believe we will. "Yes!!!" "Recruiting is really getting there!!!" etc etc. I doubt there will be one poster with a "Yea, stars don't really matter".

And every team that has won a national championship in the last decade had a 4 year recruiting average in the top 10 except 2016 Clemson, I believe.

 

[Yomanser]

There is 100% truth in the belief that stars matter. Are they the final say in who will be good and who won't? Of course not. But the statistics show that by far and away, the star ratings matter. For instance:

• 37% of all blue-chip recruits play in the SEC. The next highest conference, the Pac-12, has 22% of all blue-chip recruits. The other 3 Power 5 conferences don't even get 20% (it has absolutely nothing to do with there being any difference whatsoever in recruits from the North vs recruits from the South, let alone a "vast difference"; SEC teams just have more blue-chip recruits, and if players from the South were really that much better then the Big 10 wouldn't have gone 7-1 in bowl games and the SEC wouldn't have gone 4-5 in bowl games)
• The SEC is the conference with the most draft picks in the last five years, as well as the most national championships in the last 10 years, mostly due to their talent disparity
  
• Blue-chip recruits are almost 1,000% more likely to be drafted in the first round of the NFL draft
• 5-star recruits are about 33 times more likely to be All-Americans than 2-star recruits are
• Power 5 teams (of which there are 65) that consistently recruit Top 20 classes have a 60% chance of becoming a Top 20 program and a 35% chance of regularly inhabiting the Top 10
• By contrast, Power 5 teams that finish outside the Top 20 in recruiting have a lower than 18% chance of fielding Top 20 teams and just a 6.7% chance of even reaching the Top 10
• If we were to place a 50% threshold for blue-chips on a college roster, then only 13 teams have enough talent to win a national championship: Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, Notre Dame, Florida State, Michigan, Auburn, UCLA, Texas A&M, Georgia, Clemson, and Texas
• Of the list above, 13 of the last 15 national championships (choosing 15 because that's about the start of the ratings era) were won by one of these schools (the other 2 years being Florida, when they did meet the 50% threshold, so technically, 15 of the last 15 national championships were won by teams that have at least 50% of their roster being blue-chip recruits)

Obviously, there are exceptions, just like in everything. However, statistic after statistic supports the fact that stars and ratings do in fact matter. It's remarkably simple, really: the most talented teams will win more games than the lesser talented teams. What Coach Paul Johnson has a problem with is not that stars don't matter (even he would admit that they do); what he says is he doesn't believe you can really differentiate, for example, between the number 12 and number 14 offensive tackle in the country. That's where his qualms come into play. But even he would say you absolutely can differentiate between the number 5 and number 30 offensive tackle in the country. To say stars don't matter is simply burying your head in the sand and refusing to listen to facts. By every metric they do matter, whether you like it or not

 

[presjacket]

There is 100% truth in the belief that stars matter. Are they the final say in who will be good and who won't? Of course not. But the statistics show that by far and away, the star ratings matter. For instance:

• 37% of all blue-chip recruits play in the SEC. The next highest conference, the Pac-12, has 22% of all blue-chip recruits. The other 3 Power 5 conferences don't even get 20% (it has absolutely nothing to do with there being any difference whatsoever in recruits from the North vs recruits from the South, let alone a "vast difference"; SEC teams just have more blue-chip recruits, and if players from the South were really that much better then the Big 10 wouldn't have gone 7-1 in bowl games and the SEC wouldn't have gone 4-5 in bowl games)
• The SEC is the conference with the most draft picks in the last five years, as well as the most national championships in the last 10 years, mostly due to their talent disparity
  
• Blue-chip recruits are almost 1,000% more likely to be drafted in the first round of the NFL draft
• 5-star recruits are about 33 times more likely to be All-Americans than 2-star recruits are
• Power 5 teams (of which there are 65) that consistently recruit Top 20 classes have a 60% chance of becoming a Top 20 program and a 35% chance of regularly inhabiting the Top 10
• By contrast, Power 5 teams that finish outside the Top 20 in recruiting have a lower than 18% chance of fielding Top 20 teams and just a 6.7% chance of even reaching the Top 10
• If we were to place a 50% threshold for blue-chips on a college roster, then only 13 teams have enough talent to win a national championship: Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, Notre Dame, Florida State, Michigan, Auburn, UCLA, Texas A&M, Georgia, Clemson, and Texas
• Of the list above, 13 of the last 15 national championships (choosing 15 because that's about the start of the ratings era) were won by one of these schools (the other 2 years being Florida, when they did meet the 50% threshold, so technically, 15 of the last 15 national championships were won by teams that have at least 50% of their roster being blue-chip recruits)

Obviously, there are exceptions, just like in everything. However, statistic after statistic supports the fact that stars and ratings do in fact matter. It's remarkably simple, really: the most talented teams will win more games than the lesser talented teams. What Coach Paul Johnson has a problem with is not that stars don't matter (even he would admit that they do); what he says is he doesn't believe you can really differentiate, for example, between the number 12 and number 14 offensive tackle in the country. That's where his qualms come into play. But even he would say you absolutely can differentiate between the number 5 and number 30 offensive tackle in the country. To say stars don't matter is simply burying your head in the sand and refusing to listen to facts. By every metric they do matter, whether you like it or not

Could you please define "blue-chip" for us in the context of this post? Thanks!

 

[Yomanser]

Could you please define "blue-chip" for us in the context of this post? Thanks!

4-star and 5-star recruits (most of the statistics provided come from the 247 composite rankings, so any recruits rated a 4-star or 5-star recruit by 247 composite is a blue-chip recruit in the context of the previous post)

 

[iceeater1969]

There is 100% truth in the belief that stars matter. Are they the final say in who will be good and who won't? Of course not. But the statistics show that by far and away, the star ratings matter. For instance:

• 37% of all blue-chip recruits play in the SEC. The next highest conference, the Pac-12, has 22% of all blue-chip recruits. The other 3 Power 5 conferences don't even get 20% (it has absolutely nothing to do with there being any difference whatsoever in recruits from the North vs recruits from the South, let alone a "vast difference"; SEC teams just have more blue-chip recruits, and if players from the South were really that much better then the Big 10 wouldn't have gone 7-1 in bowl games and the SEC wouldn't have gone 4-5 in bowl games)
• The SEC is the conference with the most draft picks in the last five years, as well as the most national championships in the last 10 years, mostly due to their talent disparity
  
• Blue-chip recruits are almost 1,000% more likely to be drafted in the first round of the NFL draft
• 5-star recruits are about 33 times more likely to be All-Americans than 2-star recruits are
• Power 5 teams (of which there are 65) that consistently recruit Top 20 classes have a 60% chance of becoming a Top 20 program and a 35% chance of regularly inhabiting the Top 10
• By contrast, Power 5 teams that finish outside the Top 20 in recruiting have a lower than 18% chance of fielding Top 20 teams and just a 6.7% chance of even reaching the Top 10
• If we were to place a 50% threshold for blue-chips on a college roster, then only 13 teams have enough talent to win a national championship: Alabama, USC, Ohio State, LSU, Notre Dame, Florida State, Michigan, Auburn, UCLA, Texas A&M, Georgia, Clemson, and Texas
• Of the list above, 13 of the last 15 national championships (choosing 15 because that's about the start of the ratings era) were won by one of these schools (the other 2 years being Florida, when they did meet the 50% threshold, so technically, 15 of the last 15 national championships were won by teams that have at least 50% of their roster being blue-chip recruits)

Obviously, there are exceptions, just like in everything. However, statistic after statistic supports the fact that stars and ratings do in fact matter. It's remarkably simple, really: the most talented teams will win more games than the lesser talented teams. What Coach Paul Johnson has a problem with is not that stars don't matter (even he would admit that they do); what he says is he doesn't believe you can really differentiate, for example, between the number 12 and number 14 offensive tackle in the country. That's where his qualms come into play. But even he would say you absolutely can differentiate between the number 5 and number 30 offensive tackle in the country. To say stars don't matter is simply burying your head in the sand and refusing to listen to facts. By every metric they do matter, whether you like it or not

What are all those not letter things? If i correctly remember we uzed tbings like that in calculus and statistics. Thanks for the information. Your facts are right on.



But as an aside.
Ga tech got a 4-5 * in deddrick mills, who started day 1. The 4-5 * that really work out are the chicken in the soup.

The right tackle that plays for the new england patriots (next to shaq ) went to cycreek high in Houston (my sons old school). He was a smart kid who was a three star and went to stanford - redshirted then played lights out 3 years before leaving early for draft.

The back up left corner back (eric Rowe) for the Pats is another 3 star kid from a near by high school . We know family and know the kid is very sharp. He went to Utah becoire the pros. Wife talked to his mom during game and they were very happy to see him play since he road the pine all year.

We need to hit on the 3 stars that get much better. Those 2 would have considered gt.

Thank goodness we are going to look at more 3 stars than in past

 

[jacobchbe]

Patriots only have 1 player that was rated over 4 stars on their first string offense. My favorite is starting right guard Shaq Mason (rated No 74 guard in the country in highschool). Yes, there is a correlation with stars and performance, but it is theoretically possible to have an elite college team of 2 and 3 stars. NFL level talent committed to non-factory teams are less likely to get the benefit of the doubt in the rankings. Hell, 5 time pro-bowl wide receiver Damaryius Thomas was 3 star.

WR Brandon Cooks 3 No. 371 No. 47 WR
LT Nate Solder 3 No. 884 No. 51 TE
LG Joe Thuney 2 Unranked No. 142 OT
C David Andrews 3 No. 523 No. 9 C
RG Shaquille Mason 3 No. 1,151 No. 74 G
RT Cameron Fleming 3 No. 516 No. 37 OT
TE Rob Gronkowski 4 No. 101 No. 4 TE
WR Chris Hogan 0 Unranked Unranked
QB Tom Brady NR Unranked Unranked
RB Dion Lewis 3 No. 528 No. 7 All-Purpose Back
RB James White 3 No. 551 No. 46 RB

 

[stech81]

Stars are nice but the fact is if you can coach the players up you will be fine with 3 star players. If you can't I would be looking to get a new Occupation .

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

You'd rather have the kids that Kansas is offering over the kids that FSU is offering, just because.

Do you even listen to your comments?

Do you even have one ounce of comprehension?

The reference is to, not who I want, but who the coaches are targeting and their ability to sign those guys regardless of who else they have an offer from.