forums

10yr Review (2012 - 2022) 5* to All Pro

Advertisement
Cool video. Gonna watch the whole thing here in a minute thanks for posting

I’ve always had somewhat of a controversial opinion about rankings. It seems to be based on NFL potential. Not that I think that’s irrelevant but I always take it with a grain of salt because all I care about is if a kid is going to be elite in college. You could argue it’s the same thing but I dunno…plenty of guys I see are elite players but don’t fit the NFL requirements to be future first round picks based on size, speed etc

I could just be full of **** as well I dunno
 
JHallCanes said:
Cool video. Gonna watch the whole thing here in a minute thanks for posting

I’ve always had somewhat of a controversial opinion about rankings. It seems to be based on NFL potential. Not that I think that’s irrelevant but I always take it with a grain of salt because all I care about is if a kid is going to be elite in college. You could argue it’s the same thing but I dunno…plenty of guys I see are elite players but don’t fit the NFL requirements to be future first round picks based on size, speed etc

I could just be full of **** as well I dunno
Click to expand...

It’s interesting that the positions with the highest correlation for success are also the ones with the most reliance on physical skill (DL, RB, DB, WR) and positions that require FBI really have a high bust rate.

Then there’s the OL; lmao.

Tying this back to Miami’s recruiting philosophy (or at least what it appears to be moving toward) is

Invest heavy in high school recruits at DL, WR, and RB. Im not adding DB on purpose. I don’t know what the **** is going on there.

A mix of evals and high-end talent at LB and OL.

Avoid high $ acquisitions at QB from high school and depend on evals. An interesting test will come quickly in this space. Nickel is going to command a high NIL. Since it is an eval by Miami already; will they pay it? The answer is yes, but I wanted to illustrate that these aren’t hard and fast rules.
 
Excellent
But I would really like it if he broke it down in terms of year to year and see if there are any patterns.
The reason being is that I feel like the ranking services are becoming more accurate than 20 years ago. More film and camps and more eyes on players than ever before.

Also, I would like to know if career ending injuries or career ending mistakes like crime or drugs are taken into account.

But the video is really saying that getting the best hs players together guarantees success for those teams that have it.

But the nfl gets the best regardless of whether your team is the cfb champ or a G5 bottom feeder.

And that’s why predicting who will be playing 5-10 years after they got drafted is another metric I would like to see.

These young bucks see dollar signs with day one contract and act like that’s the goal and not realizing that in 3-4 years you may be on the brink of getting cut.
This is why the 2001 team is just another level of ridiculous.
The talent level as well as the longevity of the careers on that team and the accolades they collected are just on another level.
 
The ranking system that 247 uses is supposed to be relative to their projected draft position. Sometimes, that's the case as they'll refuse to rank a clear 5 star talent as a 5 star player because of things like measurements. If Rueben Bain was 6'5" he would have been a consensus top 5 player instead he was a 4 star because he's 6'2". It's also why you don't see a ton of 5 star guys at non-premier positions like guard or non-edge linebacker. It's also why kickers never get more than 3 stars even if they're the best kicking prospect in a generation.

I don't particularly care for that system though because I want Miami to sign the best college players. I don't care if they don't have ideal pro potential. I'll take 5'9" un draftable D'Eriq King 10/10 over 6' 5" pro prospect Kyle Wright. One guy was an All American quality college player, the other was trash.

Then there's the whole phenomenon of guys who weren't particularly great college players but have had great professional careers. Sometimes, they're late bloomers. Sometimes they didn't play in systems that showed their talent. Sometimes, they played for terrible coaches and never got the development. ****, sometimes it's because the NFL is so different than college that a guy's skills translate better to the pro game than college. Tom Brady was a very average college player. So was Josh Allen. Gus Edwards is a much better NFL running back than he ever was at UM or Rutgers. Trying to predict NFL draft positions of 17 year old kids is near impossible. Even some "100% can't miss" guys still never make it.
 
Advertisement
pacusmc said:
Excellent
But I would really like it if he broke it down in terms of year to year and see if there are any patterns.
The reason being is that I feel like the ranking services are becoming more accurate than 20 years ago. More film and camps and more eyes on players than ever before.

Also, I would like to know if career ending injuries or career ending mistakes like crime or drugs are taken into account.

But the video is really saying that getting the best hs players together guarantees success for those teams that have it.

But the nfl gets the best regardless of whether your team is the cfb champ or a G5 bottom feeder.

And that’s why predicting who will be playing 5-10 years after they got drafted is another metric I would like to see.

These young bucks see dollar signs with day one contract and act like that’s the goal and not realizing that in 3-4 years you may be on the brink of getting cut.
This is why the 2001 team is just another level of ridiculous.
The talent level as well as the longevity of the careers on that team and the accolades they collected are just on another level.
Click to expand...

That’s a great idea on the bust rate per year, per position, so you could see if the process/industry is refining and improving their output.

I wonder if @Lance Roffers would take a crack at something like that (Miami-focused of course).
 
DTP said:
The ranking system that 247 uses is supposed to be relative to their projected draft position. Sometimes, that's the case as they'll refuse to rank a clear 5 star talent as a 5 star player because of things like measurements. If Rueben Bain was 6'5" he would have been a consensus top 5 player instead he was a 4 star because he's 6'2". It's also why you don't see a ton of 5 star guys at non-premier positions like guard or non-edge linebacker. It's also why kickers never get more than 3 stars even if they're the best kicking prospect in a generation.

I don't particularly care for that system though because I want Miami to sign the best college players. I don't care if they don't have ideal pro potential. I'll take 5'9" un draftable D'Eriq King 10/10 over 6' 5" pro prospect Kyle Wright. One guy was an All American quality college player, the other was trash.

Then there's the whole phenomenon of guys who weren't particularly great college players but have had great professional careers. Sometimes, they're late bloomers. Sometimes they didn't play in systems that showed their talent. Sometimes, they played for terrible coaches and never got the development. ****, sometimes it's because the NFL is so different than college that a guy's skills translate better to the pro game than college. Tom Brady was a very average college player. So was Josh Allen. Gus Edwards is a much better NFL running back than he ever was at UM or Rutgers. Trying to predict NFL draft positions of 17 year old kids is near impossible. Even some "100% can't miss" guys still never make it.
Click to expand...

I’m the furthest thing from a star *****, but the data is piling up and is becoming insurmountable at this point.

Top rated classes - more often than not - lead to CFP and Championships.
 
I was going to post this in Nickel thread, but it applies here too.

If a HS player only played HS ball and some winter/spring sport but didn't do any camps or 7v7, will that negatively impact their ranking since they're not "visible" to the recruiting scouts?

I'm just thinking if a kid who had very good traits, winner at the HS level and athletic in multiple sports. Would he be undervalued and thus a gem because 247/Rivals aren't getting eyes to "properly evaluate" him.
 
IMO.... I think the Road to 300 is the ideal marker for success... going by stars is pretty hit or miss or at least has a ton of outliers.... The newest breakdown in the 300 thread is pretty in your face with what teams were scoring those types of classes and who has been on top of CFB...
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Ghandi said:
I’m the furthest thing from a star *****, but the data is piling up and is becoming insurmountable at this point.

Top rated classes - more often than not - lead to CFP and Championships.
Click to expand...
Correct, and I'm glad the video pointed out that all the CFB champs had top 10 classes. It's very different between scouting for college and for the NFL.

If all these sites rate HS players on NFL potential, are there any that rate players on their CFB potential rather than NFL? If not, probably a good niche to break into if someone has the capacity.
 
CaneLife93 said:
I was going to post this in Nickel thread, but it applies here too.

If a HS player only played HS ball and some winter/spring sport but didn't do any camps or 7v7, will that negatively impact their ranking since they're not "visible" to the recruiting scouts?

I'm just thinking if a kid who had very good traits, winner at the HS level and athletic in multiple sports. Would he be undervalued and thus a gem because 247/Rivals aren't getting eyes to "properly evaluate" him.
Click to expand...
I remember watching something on MLB scouting years ago. They said scouts dug back to HS and earlier to see what kids played multiple sports vs those that only played baseball year-round. Scouts preferred the kids that played—I believe—3+ sports because it developed different muscles, different reflexes, and their brain processing. These kids also had healthier careers because they properly developed all their muscles instead of overworking the same ones over and over (particularly pitchers).

I'd be curious if anyone has done that study with NFL and CFP kids. Do QBs that played multiple sports pre-college have a higher success rate? Has it mattered at all?
 
Ghandi said:
I’m the furthest thing from a star *****, but the data is piling up and is becoming insurmountable at this point.

Top rated classes - more often than not - lead to CFP and Championships.
Click to expand...
I think star ratings are important aggregately not individually, per se.

The Blue Chip Ratio proves depth matters and from there you hope it's spread across positions.

Washington's RB got hurt and they had to play him, he stunk the joint up. Michigan's 2nd stringer hit their 2 big TD's.
Michigan also has BC's at a ton of position groups. Not all crammed only into OL.
 
Advertisement
dumb question who actually assigns the star rating is it like one dude or is it a computer program?
 
Last edited:
JHallCanes said:
All I care about is if a kid is going to be elite in college. You could argue it’s the same thing but I dunno…plenty of guys I see are elite players but don’t fit the NFL requirements to be future first round picks based on size, speed etc
Click to expand...
It's definitely not the same thing.. but it's probably not an easy thing to project. The Denzel Perryman's (elite at both) are few and far between. How do you know when scouting DJ Ivey or Sean Spence? Have to find that balance between a high enough floor/ceiling & hope for the best.
 
Advertisement
Ghandi said:
Interesting video breaking down 5* to All Pro correlation from 2012 to 2022.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...


Great video; I’ve shared similar info/data over the past several months on this.

I believe HS recruiting sites need to use an algorithm to project what that recruit will mean at the next level (CFB), not forecasting NFL projections. That’s way too difficult.

A coach’s job is to put their kids in the best possible to succeed at the next level. A HS coach’s job is to win & showcase his players talents to get them a collegiate scholarship. A college coach’s job is to take those prospects & put them in the best position possible to get drafted.

I think to how we used Chick & Chad v. how USCe used Clowney or how TAMU used Myles Garrett. I think to how egregious T Howard was used v. Ronald Darby. We’ve had bad schemes, schemes that didn’t fit the guys we recruited, therefore they went underdeveloped.

These recruiting services r much better today than yesterday, but still feel it’s too convoluted to give a 5* to a kid who u think will be a 1st round draft pick. Much rather the stars be based upon kids having the biggest impact on a Power 4 team. It still won’t be 100%, but I believe the hit ratio would be much better.
 
L A M P said:
It's definitely not the same thing.. but it's probably not an easy thing to project. The Denzel Perryman's (elite at both) are few and far between. How do you know when scouting DJ Ivey or Sean Spence? Have to find that balance between a high enough floor/ceiling & hope for the best.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. Probably easier to just do it the other way. Sometimes I see really productive kids in high school ranked lower than non productive ones because of their projections to the NFL and I just kinda shrug
 
the NFL doesn't need scouting departments. they just need to pick the 5 stars in high school. what a relief.

thank christ ivins and newberg are there to tell them what to do.

the most telling data point from the video is that the supermajority of All-Pro's weren't even projected to be good enough to make an NFL roster.

(not surprising)
 
Last edited:
Advertisement
Back
Top