Why doesn't NFL Draft mirror Rivals rankings?

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Originally Posted by NoahBeanBizzel

It's not about the x's and o's; it's about the jessies and joes. In other words, you have to coach these kids up. Nobody was better than Meyer when it came to this.

So .. "the x's and o's" is coaching them up, which is why everyone's harping on that statement, FYI.

[Nicho]

Originally Posted by NoahBeanBizzel

No, I'm implying that it's all what happens when they get on campus.

Again, personnel matters; just not as much as the Jessies and Joes do.

Roberson was the #1 corner in his class according to some sites. That, and he was committed to Auburn and Texas Tech before flipping to UF at the eleventh hour.

You also can't seem to grasp the meaning of the J & J quote.

[NoahBeanBizzel]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

As for "On the other hand, look at how many five-star flops we've had," that's just nonsensical. As a percentage of players recruited, 5-star guys have a far better batting average than 3-star guys.

From 2002-2008, how many flops do you count:
Ciatrick Fason
Joe Cohen
Andre Caldwell
Chad Jackson
Jarvis Moss
Dee Webb
Derrick Harvey
Percy Harvin
Carl Johnson
Brandon Spikes
Tim Tebow
Torrey Davis
Carlos Dunlap
Cam Newton
James Wilson
Will Hill
Omar Hunter
Carl Moore
Matt Patchan

I see maybe 3 total flops.

That's all relative to what you believe a "flop" truly is. I'm looking at a list you made, and maybe three of those guys (Spikes, Harvin and Tebow) have actually done anything significant as a pro. And Harvin is the only one on that list, who you could legitimately build a franchise around. I don't count Newton, because he played at Auburn.

If you put in proper perspective what a five-star recruit is billed as, the best and brightest in high school football in terms of predicted college-and pro-production, there's a lot of untapped potential there, friend.

Again, it's about the Jessies and Joes.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

First of all, since we're talking about recruiting, you absolutely have to include Newton as we recruited him. I think you might want to put Derrick Harvey, Andre Caldwell, Carlos Dunlap and Will Hill on that list as I believe they're all starters.

That's like a "hit rate" of 30% if you count everyone using your requirements.

Now do the same for the 3-star guys. I think there's maybe 2 or 3 that are playing or did play in the NFL out of 50 or so in the same time period.

5-star players are absolutely, quantitatively better bets than 3-star players.

[nawlinsgator]

Originally Posted by NoahBeanBizzel

No, I'm implying that it's all what happens when they get on campus.

Again, personnel matters; just not as much as the Jessies and Joes do.

Ummmm....somebody still doesn't understand his own quote.

[orangeblueorangeblue]

Originally Posted by Nicho

You also can't seem to grasp the meaning of the J & J quote.

Yeah, this is actually sort of amazing.

[tilly]

Originally Posted by NoahBeanBizzel

That's all relative to what you believe a "flop" truly is. I'm looking at a list you made, and maybe three of those guys (Spikes, Harvin and Tebow) have actually done anything significant as a pro.

BUT....they were not recruited to be Pros. They were recruited to be Gators.
As Gators most were very successful.

[StrangeGator]

The article is about quarterbacks, one of the most difficult positions to evaluate when looking at high school juniors and seniors. We also have to consider that coaches are evaluating QBs to fit into their own college systems. Was Chris Leak a bad recruit because he wasn't drafted? Wad Tebow because he's yet to pan out?

Articles like this are relevant about just about any other position, but not QB. Why is it that I'm the dumbest guy on this board and I was the first person to figure this out?

[nawlinsgator]

Danny Wuerffel, the greatest Gator ever, was a flop as a pro. But he's still the greatest Gator ever.

[theologator]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

As for "On the other hand, look at how many five-star flops we've had," that's just nonsensical. As a percentage of players recruited, 5-star guys have a far better batting average than 3-star guys.

From 2002-2008, how many flops do you count:
Ciatrick Fason
Joe Cohen
Andre Caldwell
Chad Jackson
Jarvis Moss
Dee Webb
Derrick Harvey
Percy Harvin
Carl Johnson
Brandon Spikes
Tim Tebow
Torrey Davis
Carlos Dunlap
Cam Newton
James Wilson
Will Hill
Omar Hunter
Carl Moore
Matt Patchan

I see maybe 3 total flops.

Not arguing your point, but which service did you use? I'm pretty sure there were more than these per scout.com, though the additions wouldn't undermine your point. I'm thinking off the top of my head of Chris Rainey and John Brown. Brown flopped because of all sorts of off the field issues. Rainey was All-SEC. The rating systems of the various sites is a whole other discussion.

I did a 5-year analysis a few years ago. It was clear that significantly more 5-star guys made it than 4, more 4-star guys than 3. There are busts and surprises, but you're absolutely right that on average they are useful. For good reason.

Speaking of the coaches' personal ratings, Muschamp asked if the services ere going off the coaching ratings. The answer is yes, absolutely, and it has always been so.

Among the earliest recruiting reporting in Florida was the Tampa Tribune's Blue Chip list that cane out each year on Christmas Day. They would ask the coaches at UF, FSU and Miami which players they were after. If a kid was on all 3 lists he was 'blue chip', 2 lists = red, 1 = gold.

Today, those recruiting reporters are gathering data from programs and talking to HS & college coaches nonstop. At no point are they evaluating a guy independently. It's all based on a what they can learn, it isn't as though Jamie Newberg or Tom Lemming are acting like scouts. They are reporters. Their buzz isn't fictitious but it is just reporting.

I'm glad Coach Muschamp relies on his staff and not the general buzz reported on sites. He is responsible for every decision so he'd better rely on the people he trusts as well as his own eyes.

[theologator]

Originally Posted by NoahBeanBizzel

Again, it's about the Jessies and Joes.

Noah: I think your points are reasonable and worthy of discussion whether or not people agree with you. But you keep using these phrases inaccurately, which leads people to argue with what you didn't mean to say.

The phrase "Jesses and Joes" is and has always been a catchphrase meaning talent, used in contrast with X's and O's (offensive and defensive schemes) as a point of emphasis.

Player development, which I think you mean, is another factor. It isn't "Jesses and Joes", no matter how many times you try to say it that way.

I hope that is helpful. If not, no offense intended.

[socraticsilence]

Originally Posted by NoahBeanBizzel

That's all relative to what you believe a "flop" truly is. I'm looking at a list you made, and maybe three of those guys (Spikes, Harvin and Tebow) have actually done anything significant as a pro. And Harvin is the only one on that list, who you could legitimately build a franchise around. I don't count Newton, because he played at Auburn.

If you put in proper perspective what a five-star recruit is billed as, the best and brightest in high school football in terms of predicted college-and pro-production, there's a lot of untapped potential there, friend.

Again, it's about the Jessies and Joes.

Wait you think a 5 star should be a franchise player in the NFL-- So there should be like 1 to 4 5 stars every year then right. I mean I can get that line of thought I just want to make sure you're not saying guys are busts if they're not franchise cornerstones because that is an impossibly high standard.

[socraticsilence]

Originally Posted by orangeblueorangeblue

First of all, since we're talking about recruiting, you absolutely have to include Newton as we recruited him. I think you might want to put Derrick Harvey, Andre Caldwell, Carlos Dunlap and Will Hill on that list as I believe they're all starters.

That's like a "hit rate" of 30% if you count everyone using your requirements.

Now do the same for the 3-star guys. I think there's maybe 2 or 3 that are playing or did play in the NFL out of 50 or so in the same time period.

5-star players are absolutely, quantitatively better bets than 3-star players.

This, I mean yes there are exceptions etc. but on the aggregate 5 star players are clearly, better. Heck look at the list again-- or name a non-4 or 5 star player that was a dominant force for us in the last 15 years- I'm not saying it doesn't happen (Demps springs to mind though that one always seemed more of an oversight than a guy with hidden talent- how do you when making a list largely focused on physical attributes not list the fastest 18 year old of all time as at least 4 star if he's proven he can play football).

Note that most of the examples people bring up (Shane Matthews, etc) are from back when recruiting wasn't an industry unto itself- the others are guys with non-ideal physical abilities who do genuinely surprise and play positions where mental factors are big (Johnny Football was a 3 star not because he couldn't throw but because he was slightly built and a bit short-- heck look at the thread on him a TAMU fan started last August here on Swampgas and read how many people said he'd get killed due to his size).

[socraticsilence]

Originally Posted by nawlinsgator

Danny Wuerffel, the greatest Gator ever, was a flop as a pro. But he's still the greatest Gator ever.

That's debatable I think it depends on the age of the fan-- old timers will talk about Marshall or Steve, younger guys Tim and Percy, etc.
I've always been intrigued by what happens to Leak if he has Steve as his coach- he always seemed like the ideal Spurrier QB, great touch, smart, etc- maybe he could've been Danny with a bit more mobility-- think about his true freshman year- he beat a Saban coached LSU team that would go on to win the NC in Death Valley!

Heck, I've had some people tell me Rex if Steve doesn't leave, I don't agree-- Rex is Rex he wasn't going to tame his gunslinger mentality for any coach-- but its an interesting thought.

[tilly]

Originally Posted by socraticsilence

That's debatable I think it depends on the age of the fan-- old timers will talk about Marshall or Steve, younger guys Tim and Percy, etc.
I've always been intrigued by what happens to Leak if he has Steve as his coach- he always seemed like the ideal Spurrier QB, great touch, smart, etc- maybe he could've been Danny with a bit more mobility-- think about his true freshman year- he beat a Saban coached LSU team that would go on to win the NC in Death Valley!

Heck, I've had some people tell me Rex if Steve doesn't leave, I don't agree-- Rex is Rex he wasn't going to tame his gunslinger mentality for any coach-- but its an interesting thought.

Good points. Leak threw a very pretty ball. IN an SOS system he would have been a serious Heisman threat.

Rex, might have been great, or might have gotten benched...you know how Steve gets sometimes.

[theologator]

Originally Posted by tilly

Good points. Leak threw a very pretty ball. IN an SOS system he would have been a serious Heisman threat.

Rex, might have been great, or might have gotten benched...you know how Steve gets sometimes.

Rex WAS benched by SOS. ;-)

Leak would have been cash money in the SOS system. The all-time passing leader at UF despite 3 OC's (Zaumbrecher, Fedora & Mullen) and two years in a system that wasn't his style. What a great great Gator.