forums

Interesting read let the debate begin

Advertisement
The QB position is the hardest position to project. Heck for all we know, Olsen and Kaaya will probably turnout to be bums despite their 4* rating. But let's be perfectly clear, each class has thousands of no star to 3* QB prospects who are DEFINITELY NOT NFL material, so don't look to the star-system for any kind of safety. The biggest indicator in a QB's chances quite frankly comes down to the evaluation of the guy recruiting him.

If David Cutcliffe thinks you are a good QB, chances are you are going to be top-flight. Same thing for Butch Davis, if he thought you could play, he was more often right than wrong. So just before guys get on here and say stars don't matter, here's a tidbit....they are right 70% of the time.

Yahoo has a series on recruiting and goes in to statistical detail about the averages. Stephen Morris was a considered better than average, look where he is now. Murray at Georgia was considered very good, Tajh Boyd was considered very good, Bridgewater was considered very good, RGIII was considered very good and so was Andrew Luck.....look where they are now.

Don't get mad at the star-system, get mad at the coach the school pays to recruit talent that misses more often than he makes. He's the one that gets paid to judge talent and coach it.
 
I don't really give a **** one way or the other with stars. I look at the film on every single commit we get and decide wether or not I think he is a good fit. I'm sure the coaches do a good deal more than that, although there was stories of guys like Asante with the last staff that were offered from Youtube. I believe Cain as well.

I don't think being a 2 Star means you will or won't be successful any more than the 5 star. Statistically, the star system holds up pretty well except for the obvious outliers. So a highly ranked kid is definately not bad news. It all just matters how hard they are going to work more than anything and you can't measure that so the whole thing is a little silly and sensationalized.

I think Both Kaaya and Olsen are stud QB's and I only hope we can keep them both somehow.
 
Advertisement
DeepEyez said:
The QB position is the hardest position to project. Heck for all we know, Olsen and Kaaya will probably turnout to be bums despite their 4* rating. But let's be perfectly clear, each class has thousands of no star to 3* QB prospects who are DEFINITELY NOT NFL material, so don't look to the star-system for any kind of safety. The biggest indicator in a QB's chances quite frankly comes down to the evaluation of the guy recruiting him.

If David Cutcliffe thinks you are a good QB, chances are you are going to be top-flight. Same thing for Butch Davis, if he thought you could play, he was more often right than wrong. So just before guys get on here and say stars don't matter, here's a tidbit....they are right 70% of the time.

Yahoo has a series on recruiting and goes in to statistical detail about the averages. Stephen Morris was a considered better than average, look where he is now. Murray at Georgia was considered very good, Tajh Boyd was considered very good, Bridgewater was considered very good, RGIII was considered very good and so was Andrew Luck.....look where they are now.

Don't get mad at the star-system, get mad at the coach the school pays to recruit talent that misses more often than he makes. He's the one that gets paid to judge talent and coach it.
Click to expand...

Personally I am not devout follower of the star system, like some are here, I defer to evaluations of the staff first and foremost. But one thing that is for certain both RG3 and Andrew Luck were not highly rated, in fact I believe Luck was ranked the 30 something best QB prospect. Neither of the 2 were highly rated, Morris was a 3 star and I believe a low 3 star as well. Aaron Murray and Bridgewater were 4 star guys, don't recall Tahj Boyd.

And as for that 70% success rate, I would like to see the reference for that. I find it extremely difficult to believe that colleges have a higher success rate on hitting on their prospects than the NFL. The NFL who spends way way way more money and resources per team than any university and has a much much smaller pool of talent to pull from with access and processes more sophisticated and in depth than any university. If a successful draft is hitting on 40-50% of your drafted players in the NFL, I find it hard to believe that a university hits on 70% of the highly rated kids.
 
I'm pretty sure Luck was highly rated. I could check, but that would take effort.
 
I stand corrected RG3 and Luck were rated 4 stars on Rivals, based on the schools recruiting them these "experts" would say low 4 star, but they were 4 star recruits. Scout had Luck as a high 4. I was wrong
 
Advertisement
Hey, didn't Randy have three qbs transfer in one or two years? Al's seems to be holding on to his, even the one everyone expects to transfer. QB is most important position and the coach/player relationship in more important there then any other. Al has done fantastic job with Morris and Morris has really come though. That is probably the most important fact of the last two years. Now Olsen can redshirt and get ready for the three way battle with Cow and Williams next spring. We could see Cow transfer is he loses it, but I think Kaaya will take a shirt and wait his turn.
 
Advertisement
Morris was a gem. My buddy went to high school with him and said that most people in town were wondering how Morris got a Miami offer. Obviously some recruiting people knew he was legit as well as the coaches but morris was definitely under the radar to most people
 
Fzac75 said:
DeepEyez said:
The QB position is the hardest position to project. Heck for all we know, Olsen and Kaaya will probably turnout to be bums despite their 4* rating. But let's be perfectly clear, each class has thousands of no star to 3* QB prospects who are DEFINITELY NOT NFL material, so don't look to the star-system for any kind of safety. The biggest indicator in a QB's chances quite frankly comes down to the evaluation of the guy recruiting him.

If David Cutcliffe thinks you are a good QB, chances are you are going to be top-flight. Same thing for Butch Davis, if he thought you could play, he was more often right than wrong. So just before guys get on here and say stars don't matter, here's a tidbit....they are right 70% of the time.

Yahoo has a series on recruiting and goes in to statistical detail about the averages. Stephen Morris was a considered better than average, look where he is now. Murray at Georgia was considered very good, Tajh Boyd was considered very good, Bridgewater was considered very good, RGIII was considered very good and so was Andrew Luck.....look where they are now.

Don't get mad at the star-system, get mad at the coach the school pays to recruit talent that misses more often than he makes. He's the one that gets paid to judge talent and coach it.
Click to expand...

Personally I am not devout follower of the star system, like some are here, I defer to evaluations of the staff first and foremost. But one thing that is for certain both RG3 and Andrew Luck were not highly rated, in fact I believe Luck was ranked the 30 something best QB prospect. Neither of the 2 were highly rated, Morris was a 3 star and I believe a low 3 star as well. Aaron Murray and Bridgewater were 4 star guys, don't recall Tahj Boyd.

And as for that 70% success rate, I would like to see the reference for that. I find it extremely difficult to believe that colleges have a higher success rate on hitting on their prospects than the NFL. The NFL who spends way way way more money and resources per team than any university and has a much much smaller pool of talent to pull from with access and processes more sophisticated and in depth than any university. If a successful draft is hitting on 40-50% of your drafted players in the NFL, I find it hard to believe that a university hits on 70% of the highly rated kids.
Click to expand...

correct, colleges don't hit anywhere near 70%. i have heard saban, meyer, butch davis, and many other great evaluators state that if you get 3 starters in a class you have a great class. on average only about 25% of recruits CONTRIBUTE much less become starters or better.

and i agree with you on the star system. what people fail to recgonize is that these scam artists have created a nice little niche for themselves where even when they're wrong, they aren't wrong. by that i mean they can completely miss on a guy but a few weeks later they change a ranking when a guy starts getting better offers. they basically piggyback off of the real coaches doing the recruiting. its why you will see a guy be a 2-star this week, get offers from a major program and then be a 4-star the next week. if they were truly 'evaluating' then their rankings would be independent of what schools offer a kid. how can a guy go from a 2-star to a 4-star without playing a game?

not to mention a rivals employee has admitted to changing rankings depending on size of the fanbase, number of prescriptions, etc. they also change rankings years after the fact in their rankings revisited segments. must be nice to be able to change rankings on a whim and then tell everyone how accurate you are. that would be like me giving you ysterdays weather the day after.
 
Advertisement
Fzac75 said:
DeepEyez said:
The QB position is the hardest position to project. Heck for all we know, Olsen and Kaaya will probably turnout to be bums despite their 4* rating. But let's be perfectly clear, each class has thousands of no star to 3* QB prospects who are DEFINITELY NOT NFL material, so don't look to the star-system for any kind of safety. The biggest indicator in a QB's chances quite frankly comes down to the evaluation of the guy recruiting him.

If David Cutcliffe thinks you are a good QB, chances are you are going to be top-flight. Same thing for Butch Davis, if he thought you could play, he was more often right than wrong. So just before guys get on here and say stars don't matter, here's a tidbit....they are right 70% of the time.

Yahoo has a series on recruiting and goes in to statistical detail about the averages. Stephen Morris was a considered better than average, look where he is now. Murray at Georgia was considered very good, Tajh Boyd was considered very good, Bridgewater was considered very good, RGIII was considered very good and so was Andrew Luck.....look where they are now.

Don't get mad at the star-system, get mad at the coach the school pays to recruit talent that misses more often than he makes. He's the one that gets paid to judge talent and coach it.
Click to expand...

Personally I am not devout follower of the star system, like some are here, I defer to evaluations of the staff first and foremost. But one thing that is for certain both RG3 and Andrew Luck were not highly rated, in fact I believe Luck was ranked the 30 something best QB prospect. Neither of the 2 were highly rated, Morris was a 3 star and I believe a low 3 star as well. Aaron Murray and Bridgewater were 4 star guys, don't recall Tahj Boyd.

And as for that 70% success rate, I would like to see the reference for that. I find it extremely difficult to believe that colleges have a higher success rate on hitting on their prospects than the NFL. The NFL who spends way way way more money and resources per team than any university and has a much much smaller pool of talent to pull from with access and processes more sophisticated and in depth than any university. If a successful draft is hitting on 40-50% of your drafted players in the NFL, I find it hard to believe that a university hits on 70% of the highly rated kids.
Click to expand...
couple things need to be pointed out here,

both luck and griffin were highly rated. luck was a scout 5 star, rivals 4 star but top 5 positional player on both. griffin was a consensus 4 star, top 15 at his position.
so no, that is not one thing that is for sure. whether anyone wants to admit it, the star system actually does a pretty good job when you look at it statistically over multiple classes, and refrain from using a single occurrence as stronger proof than it is. each level, per capita, does remarkably better than the level below it, be it in earning d 1 scholarships, winning awards, getting drafted, and succeeding in the nfl. and it is only getting better as the scouting services have larger resource pools.

coaching is the great equalizer, getting more (boise st's chris peterson) or less from your players (lane kiffin) has an obvious impact. it is funner to call people star whores and always go back to some phantom rivals employee claiming something though, ignoring that is in the best interest to be right to gain the tens of thousands followers across the country using your site as a reference, as opposed to the few hundred or thousand usc fans.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
blake bell OU 5 star, 3rd ranked QB that year, did not win the starting job. Stephen Morris 3 star might play himself into the first round of the nfl draft.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top