Recruiting Service Star Ratings

[gymgator]

Morrison was a 4 Star on Rivals. Gaffney was a great call as I recall he was not rated high and ended up being a 2nd round pick.
While the other players were good college starters, non were drafted very high or at all.

[gator85jd]

Originally Posted by missourigator

There are probably less 5 star busts than 3 star super success stories. Stars do matter because of status, PR and attention it brings to the school. All I am saying is if we great a #1 or #2 class. We are all talking about how fantastic our recruiting is. If we get a class ranked 25 or so, then it is, "trust the coaches and stars don't matter. Look at our players than stood out Floyd, Elam, etc. were all 4 or 5 stars.

Star ratings are too susceptible to errors, though. Recruiting services can't factor in work ethic or ability to learn a system. A lot of these HS players get rated when they're 16 or 17 years old, but a lot of what they're rated on is going to change as they grow up. Putting too much emphasis on star ratings doesn't make sense.

[missourigator]

I am not saying they (star ratings) are perfect. OF COURSE the raters will make mistakes. But a great coach will win more games with 5-stars than 3. Yes, there are some great 3-stars players. But on a team of 105 players you expect that 80 of them being 3 stars, some will shine.

[fubar1]

Originally Posted by gator85jd

Star ratings are too susceptible to errors, though. Recruiting services can't factor in work ethic or ability to learn a system. A lot of these HS players get rated when they're 16 or 17 years old, but a lot of what they're rated on is going to change as they grow up. Putting too much emphasis on star ratings doesn't make sense.

Do you know anyone on this thread that is saying ONLY look at star ratings when recruiting a kid? That's a false argument.

This fantasy that some of you seem to hold that portrays this mythical college coach that can go out and find all the 2 and 3-star, underrated guys that no other coaching staff can see and then coach them up beyond their natural abilities to overachieve and defeat teams like Alabama and LSU year-in and year-out is just nonsensical.

That said, there will always be lower rated guys that dot Florida's recruiting classes. There's a place for those who haven't quite tapped their potential and were overlooked by the experts.

But for every Brandon James out there, I'll show you several 5-star guys that proved their rankings correct. And I'll take that team of 4 and 5-star guys and beat your ass every time.

[gator85jd]

Originally Posted by fubar1

Do you know anyone on this thread that is saying ONLY look at star ratings when recruiting a kid? That's a false argument.

This fantasy that some of you seem to hold that portrays this mythical college coach that can go out and find all the 2 and 3-star, underrated guys that no other coaching staff can see and then coach them up beyond their natural abilities to overachieve and defeat teams like Alabama and LSU year-in and year-out is just nonsensical.

That said, there will always be lower rated guys that dot Florida's recruiting classes. There's a place for those who haven't quite tapped their potential and were overlooked by the experts.

But for every Brandon James out there, I'll show you several 5-star guys that proved their rankings correct. And I'll take that team of 4 and 5-star guys and beat your ass every time.

Did I say that there's anyone advocating (or any program that recruits) looking at recruiting service star ratings ONLY? Back away from the caffeine, buddy. You're working yourself into a dither over a simple conversation. I had a neighbor once who had a pit bull that would act like that -- working itself into a frenzy. It was pretty annoying!

[gator7_5]

People always use Brandon James as an example of a low rated player succeeding. He was a return man. That's it. Ranking systems don't rank return men. Brandon James had a very unremarkable career on offense. He's definitely not a good example of failed ranking system.

Check out

Harvin
Tebow
Spikes
Hernandez
Dunlap
Harvey

etc etc etc...

Those are guys who dominated on the field all game, and won Championship MVP's. FWIW, if Harvin weren't so valuabe on O, BJ probably doesn't even return a kick.

[rserina]

Just look at the national champions over the last decade and the ranking of their recruiting classes in several years preceding their championship season. You will invariably find one or two classes ranked near the top nationally. It is pretty much axiomatic.

Does that mean every program that recruits well is going to be successful? No. Does it mean that a team without good coaching can be good just because it recruits well? No. Coaching, especially in terms of player development, off-season strength and conditioning, scheme and game plan implementation, etc., will maximize that talent better than a staff which is worse in those regards, but without a high level of talent --especially in our league--the margin for error becomes too thin to overcome without absolutely perfect execution. Put a more talented athlete on the field that can turn a short gain into a long one, make a catch no one else can, get to the second level on a block quicker, beat your man to the quarterback, track down a ball carrier from behind, or close on a receiver, and that margin becomes a little greater.

[phideltdj]

EJ Manuel was the number 2 ranked dual threat QB coming out of high school and he never developed...coaching does matter. On that list of top 25 that includes RG3 and T. Pryor...the other 23 did nothing in college.

[fubar1]

Originally Posted by gator85jd

Did I say that there's anyone advocating (or any program that recruits) looking at recruiting service star ratings ONLY? Back away from the caffeine, buddy. You're working yourself into a dither over a simple conversation. I had a neighbor once who had a pit bull that would act like that -- working itself into a frenzy. It was pretty annoying!

No frenzy...but I do get an allergic reaction when folks use platitudes, false arguments, and even more bogus comparisons to defend a position that is easily debunked by using common sense and factual evidence.

[LeafUF]

Every year this type of thread comes up and countless people go on to say how some 5 star bust and 2 star stud proves that rankings do not matter.

Well the numbers tell a much different story.

On predicting team success

Here is the conclusion of that article:

It's a simple equation: The better your recruiting rankings by the gurus, the better your chances of winning games, against all classes. Emphasis on the word chances — the counterexamples are obvious and legion in both directions. But as far as forming a reasonable basis for predictions, well, it probably goes without saying that you never want to count on being one of the anomalies.

On being an All-American and NFL Draftee.

The ratio always looks identical on a per-capita basis, and it is not a crapshoot. Four and five-star players are roughly seven times as likely as two and three-star players to land on an All-America team, and the numbers in the NFL Draft tend to be even even more lopsided toward the hyped recruits. All the more reason to want as many of them as you can get your hands on.

It is far better to bet on higher rated players when building your team.

[gator85jd]

Originally Posted by fubar1

No frenzy...but I do get an allergic reaction when folks use platitudes, false arguments, and even more bogus comparisons to defend a position that is easily debunked by using common sense and factual evidence.

Simple solution -- don't click on the link and you won't have your "allergic reaction." I have similar allergic reactions to posters who are bellicose assholes, but I don't go into a dither about them.

[gator07]

Originally Posted by gator85jd

Simple solution -- don't click on the link and you won't have your "allergic reaction." I have similar allergic reactions to posters who are bellicose assholes, but I don't go into a dither about them.

LoL

[fubar1]

Originally Posted by gator85jd

Simple solution -- don't click on the link and you won't have your "allergic reaction." I have similar allergic reactions to posters who are bellicose assholes, but I don't go into a dither about them.

Not the first time I've been called an a-hole by a drooling simpleton. Makes me smile.

I'm still waiting for you to offer anything of substance to the argument besides knee-jerk blather.

WARNING: Don't read LeafUF's links….they might encourage you to critically think for once.

[gator85jd]

Uh-oh, I've been outed. You're right, I'm a drooling simpleton. Wow, you've hurt my feelings. You're such a keyboard tough guy. I wish I could be just like you. Actually, it's interesting that you're calling for critical thinking while also acting like a four year old.

Again, if clicking on this thread causes you to act like an ass, simply don't click on the thread -- unless acting like an ass somehow makes you feel significant.

In response to your simple-minded ideas on this thread, you might want to give some thought to what Jeff Dillman has to say on the subject. Also go back and look at the initial post on this thread.

[gator7_5]

^ nerdiest internet fight ever.

[rserina]

Originally Posted by gator7_5

^ nerdiest internet fight ever.

Like an emo battle of the bands.

[gator85jd]

Originally Posted by gator7_5

^ nerdiest internet fight ever.

Funny -- now would you please hand me the tape so I can apply it to my glasses?

Remember John Lombardi's response to The Alligator calling him a nerd? He did it at halftime of the O&B game back in the day.

[irish2u2]

We should know better guys.

Recruiting services exist for the FANS. They make big money selling information to the FANS. I'm not saying the coaches and schools don't use them but they are just one tool in the toolbelt of big time college recruiting.

Coaches know the fans get jazzed over big time recruits. Some coaches play to that aspect entirely too much. They may have more Top 10 Recruiting Class wins but they don't necessarily get more Top 10 finishes when they actually play the game.

That doesn't mean being a 5 star high school player won't get you noticed by all the top programs or that the recruiting gurus are wrong more than right. They know their business and while the assigning of stars is a little arbitrary that system isn't as broken as one might think. It's evolved. Nowadays high schoolers participate in more camps and combines. Competition has become a much more important criteria too but it is paired with the measurables and personal evaluations that camps and combines offer. What was once alchemy has become a science.

It's still an inexact science at best but the more successful coaches have developed CEO type skills in the selection process of high school talent. This where a coach like Muschamp shines because a great attitude and high character always trump questionable attitude and character no matter how highly rated the player might be.

My personal philosophy is always to trust the coaches. They know talent. They know the level of competition that talent has faced in high school. They know the coaches, teachers, parents and even friends of those kids they recruit. Coaches also know they have to try and get better than their fair share of the no-brainer type HS football stars like Tebow, Harvin, Floyd, Nelson and Elam (to name a very few). It didn't take a genius to know Percy Harvin, for example, was going to be a great major college football player. On the other hand had an out of shape grad assistant ever raced Steve Shipp he might not be part of our recruiting lore.

To me recruiting is science, psychiatry, magic and lots and lots of hard work. It's also more than a little degrading as Coach Spurrier would often state. Personally it bothers me how much we cater to some of these young people. It bothers me that grown-ups act more adolescent than the kids themselves when it comes to getting their signatures on the line that is dotted on NSD. It bothers me how naturally a 17 year old kid can become a prima donna rock star the moment he finds out some old guy who never played football has assigned him 5 stars in his ratings service.

[fubar1]

Originally Posted by gator85jd

Uh-oh, I've been outed. You're right, I'm a drooling simpleton. Wow, you've hurt my feelings. You're such a keyboard tough guy. I wish I could be just like you. Actually, it's interesting that you're calling for critical thinking while also acting like a four year old.

Again, if clicking on this thread causes you to act like an ass, simply don't click on the thread -- unless acting like an ass somehow makes you feel significant.

In response to your simple-minded ideas on this thread, you might want to give some thought to what Jeff Dillman has to say on the subject. Also go back and look at the initial post on this thread.

Don't try to be just like me. No need for stretch goals.

You're really bringing up the Dillman quote? I already illustrated on the first page why Dillman's quote offers no empirical evidence about the validity of star ratings.

Again, critically thinking can be a very helpful exercise.

The door is open when you're ready to discuss some of the data already presented in this thread, or any factual evidence for that matter instead of regurgitating uninformed, unoriginal platitudes about star ratings. Or, taking coaches' comments out of context so you don't have to research or think for yourself on the topic.

Just consider this tough love. I have a soft spot for fellow Gators.

[Zanso]

Obviously if you're a 1-3 star recruit, it doesn't automatically mean you're not going to the NFL. You're also not automatically going to the NFL if you're a 5 star recruit.

However it's more likely that a higher ranked player will succeed than a lower ranked player. Additionally 5 star=ready to contribute right away vs. 3 star=needs a year to develop 2 star=more than 1 year(may eventually turn into 5 star quality though!)

ALL 3 of our 5 star players were on the freshman all-sec team...we also had a four star player on it. Obviously player development matters and the recruiting services are not always good at judging who will develop better and who won't. But they're pretty good at judging current skill level.