forums

In case you needed another reminder that stars don't mean anything

Advertisement
Here is what stars don't mean. It doesn't mean a player of whatever star is guaranteed to be a star, or good player or average player. Here is what it means, the chances of being a good player is higher, the higher your star rating is. So if you have a team full of blue chip players it doesnt mean they are all gonna be stars, it means more of them are likely to become and good and elite players. And its the opposite way as well. U have a team of 3 stars, doesn't mean they are all gonna be average players, it means less of them will become good to elite players.

You increase your chances with blue chippers and decrease them with less ranked players. They matter
 
COCane4Life said:
Why do you guys do this? The math doesn’t lie. There are always going to be misses but the data comes out the same. The hit rate percentage is what matters. If you say stars don’t matter you’re basically saying I don’t believe in math.
Click to expand...
Because people think if a 5* ever fails or a 3* ever makes it they can pretend the rankings don't work. They can't stand a system that doesn't give them guarantees.
 
Mia305cubancane said:
McFadden didn’t get drafted but was an all American ,kid had 8 ints his sophomore year.I’ll take 5 stars all day.
Click to expand...
Not disagreeing, but again just adding context. He was basically the Trevon Diggs of college football for one season, and then the ball production stopped.

And Trevon Diggs without INTs is not a good corner.
 

Attachments

  • 5DDF9A1D-531F-4166-8C9E-18EB0EFC4F70.jpeg
    5DDF9A1D-531F-4166-8C9E-18EB0EFC4F70.jpeg
    517.7 KB · Views: 8
Advertisement
mossmadness said:
It’s also not really an example. Cinn. was a cute story until they got on the field with a team loaded with 4* and 5* players. And then the recruiting rankings took over.
Click to expand...
I am not here to argue that stars don't matter (they do), but unless several NFL scouts are way off, Cincinnati (while not near the level of Alabama/UGA) had 9 players drafted this year. The entire ACC had 21. So they did overperform.

Like most things, it is not totally black and white and there are other factors at play, but the stats don't lie - the higher your recruiting ranking the more likely you will succeed.
 
Stars matter for a collection of talent, they don’t necessarily matter for individual talent.

Every 5-star player is not a 5-star talent & every 3-star player is not a 3-star talent.

Individually, there are guys who were 3-stars or even unranked in some cases who are better than 4/5-stars.

However, as a team, you want as many 4/5-star players as you can accumulate because it raises the talent level floor of your team. The reason why UGA & Bama have the best teams is because they have the highest collection of talent, they basically have an entire starting lineup as their backups in the 2-deep.

The teams that can consistently accumulate the most talent in a 4 year time span are usually the teams that win the most games on an annual basis.

Now there is an alternative, teams like Utah, OK ST, Baylor, Kentucky, Wake Forest, Pitt, Cincinnati, BYU, SD ST, UTSA etc win due to having a strong culture in place & very good coaches that can evaluate & develop guys that fit their system. Teams like Texas, TAMU, USC, UNC, Penn ST, UF & FSU are a reminder that just having talent with a bad coaching staff doesn’t get you wins.

Talent doesn’t get you wins, it just increases the odds of you winning, the other elements of being a winning program are equally as important as accumulating talent, but people just tend to always make this an either or discussion when in reality you need both. You have to have great talent AND a great coaching staff, having one without the other gets you the same results every time, which is losing when it matters most.
 
we finally have to stop this stars dont matter narrative
and that south florida 3 star dogs are 4/5 stars in other states
we finally have a coach with financial backing who loves to acquire talent
so leave the stars dont matter talk to the fsu and uf fanbase
 
Liberty City El said:
Stars matter for a collection of talent, they don’t necessarily matter for individual talent.

Every 5-star player is not a 5-star talent & every 3-star player is not a 3-star talent.

Individually, there are guys who were 3-stars or even unranked in some cases who are better than 4/5-stars.

However, as a team, you want as many 4/5-star players as you can accumulate because it raises the talent level floor of your team. The reason why UGA & Bama have the best teams is because they have the highest collection of talent, they basically have an entire starting lineup as their backups in the 2-deep.

The teams that can consistently accumulate the most talent in a 4 year time span are usually the teams that win the most games on an annual basis.

Now there is an alternative, teams like Utah, OK ST, Baylor, Kentucky, Wake Forest, Pitt, Cincinnati, BYU, SD ST, UTSA etc win due to having a strong culture in place & very good coaches that can evaluate & develop guys that fit their system. Teams like Texas, TAMU, USC, UNC, Penn ST, UF & FSU are a reminder that just having talent with a bad coaching staff doesn’t get you wins.

Talent doesn’t get you wins, it just increases the odds of you winning, the other elements of being a winning program are equally as important as accumulating talent, but people just tend to always make this an either or discussion when in reality you need both. You have to have great talent AND a great coaching staff, having one without the other gets you the same results every time, which is losing when it matters most.
Click to expand...
I'd argue UGA doesn't have great coaching.
 
Advertisement
Liberty City El said:
Stars matter for a collection of talent, they don’t necessarily matter for individual talent.

Every 5-star player is not a 5-star talent & every 3-star player is not a 3-star talent.

Individually, there are guys who were 3-stars or even unranked in some cases who are better than 4/5-stars.

However, as a team, you want as many 4/5-star players as you can accumulate because it raises the talent level floor of your team. The reason why UGA & Bama have the best teams is because they have the highest collection of talent, they basically have an entire starting lineup as their backups in the 2-deep.

The teams that can consistently accumulate the most talent in a 4 year time span are usually the teams that win the most games on an annual basis.

Now there is an alternative, teams like Utah, OK ST, Baylor, Kentucky, Wake Forest, Pitt, Cincinnati, BYU, SD ST, UTSA etc win due to having a strong culture in place & very good coaches that can evaluate & develop guys that fit their system. Teams like Texas, TAMU, USC, UNC, Penn ST, UF & FSU are a reminder that just having talent with a bad coaching staff doesn’t get you wins.

Talent doesn’t get you wins, it just increases the odds of you winning, the other elements of being a winning program are equally as important as accumulating talent, but people just tend to always make this an either or discussion when in reality you need both. You have to have great talent AND a great coaching staff, having one without the other gets you the same results every time, which is losing when it matters most.
Click to expand...
At this point you got this copy and paste ready for the next time the stars don't matter argument comes up?
 
Wow, this dumbass thread came earlier than usual this year. It's usually the dog days of summer where people try to throw this bozo chit against the wall.

Yes, Ed Reed was a 2-star. We know. So stars don't matter.
 
Advertisement
SWFLHurricane said:
It's ALL about Evaluations, and Development.....Bottomline....
Click to expand...

Of course it is.

But we can run an experiment. I'll develop 85 5-stars, and you develop 85 3-stars. We'll see who has the best football team.

This whole thread is so tired, recruiting has been a multi-million dollar business for 2 decades now and we talk about it 24/7 and people are still so insanely clueless. It makes no sense to me.

You are correct...evaluations are paramount. And there is no one singular thing that makes a great team. But when people say things like stars don't matter when we all watch the same teams play in the playoff year after year after year and those same teams sign top ~5 classes year after year after year....what in the **** are we even talking about here?
 
OrangeBowlMagic said:
Of course it is.

But we can run an experiment. I'll develop 85 5-stars, and you develop 85 3-stars. We'll see who has the best football team.

This whole thread is so tired, recruiting has been a multi-million dollar business for 2 decades now and we talk about it 24/7 and people are still so insanely clueless. It makes no sense to me.

You are correct...evaluations are paramount. And there is no one singular thing that makes a great team. But when people say things like stars don't matter when we all watch the same teams play in the playoff year after year after year and those same teams sign top ~5 classes year after year after year....what in the **** are we even talking about here?
Click to expand...
@OrangeBowlMagic ....Great Staffs are paramount as well....
 
Advertisement
cway313 said:
Kirby with anything other than a top 3 roster is fired in 4 years. So yea, I'm serious.
Click to expand...

LMAO he's 58-10 since Year 2. Fired?

Nick Saban lost 7 games his first 5 years (not counting Year 1). Kirby has lost 10. Part of being a good coach is hiring other good coaches around you. Todd Monken >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> James Coley. So yeah, he had some bumps in the road along the way to get to the staff he has now. But they just had like 50 kids drafted. They can't coach?
 
https://www.thedailystampede.com/20...igning-day-info-news-average-nfl-draft-trends


"This means that roughly 13% of five-stars have become a consensus all-American player, or arguably the best player at his position in the respective season. Once again, four-stars have an outside shot with about 2.4% of them accomplishing this. But just like with the draft, after this point you are reaching unicorn status if you’re able to pull off this feat. 71 consensus All-American three-stars may seem like a lot, but with over 16,000 candidates, well you know what they say about a broken clock."
 
Advertisement
Back
Top