- Dec 30, 2015
You could not be more wrong.You’re basing that off one article that came out about Rivals almost 10 years ago.
There is no anti-canes bias, and players don’t get bumps because they commit to schools with big fan bases.
Anybody who is reasonably smart and who has taken one semester of statistics can easily verify for themselves that star rankings do correlate with success.
Stars absolutely matter. Your feelings don’t.
UM QB commit Tyler Van Dyke literally got bumped from a 3 star rated player to a 4 star rated player just by receiving an offer from Miami.
Player ratings go randomly up and down, even during the off-season. It is done to generate clicks and revenue. If they didn't constantly change player ratings, there'd be no reason for people to pay for a subscription to the recruiting web sites.
Not one time have I ever made a statement regarding "anti-canes bias". You're literally just making up stuff.
Not one time have I ever said that stars don't "correlate with success". As a matter of fact I said exactly that in my earlier post. It's not a 100% direct correlation though because there's plenty of teams who are full of highly rated players that frankly aren't very good.
I'm sorry you got duped into paying for a subscription for a recruiting website and you're stupid enough to believe that the people who work for that website are more qualified than FBS coaching staffs at evaluating players but unfortunately for you, that's the truth. Once again, the coaches know who can play and who can't. They don't need to see an arbitrary rating next to their name to know whether or not that player is good.
If determining the best team was as simple as seeing who had the highest rated classes, then Alabama would not have gotten blown out by Clemson in the championship game last season.