forums

The star game...

MetiSkeemz

MetiSkeemz

Junior
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,755
This issue has troubled me for years. Ever since ESPN and rivals started this BS 24/7 has hopped on and I feel like it's a waste of time. Back in the ESPN 150 days and with the 300 days now it's not logical. Why is it we drool over these stars when it's obvious that most time these kids aren't living up to that potential sometimes.

It feels like the fuel to their entitlement and doesn't necessarily depict how successful they'll actually be. I heard Ed reed was a 2* coming out... So much for that rating. DP was said he was too undersized for the position and made a 3*... So much for that rating. No 5 star players at ALL in the SB... So much for those ratings too.

I also have this idea that ratings aren't equivalent to talent from state to state. I feel a 3* skill position from Miami is equivalent to a 4 or 5* from Michigan or VA that's why these coaches have their grubby little hands here. Anyone care to enlighten why stars matter so much to a diluted system?
 
Advertisement
This is how it works. If your class is loaded with 4 and 5 stars then you crow about how great it is.

Conversely, when you fill up with 2 and 3 stars then you say that stars don't matter, and you cite extreme outliers of a different era like Ed Reed to prove your point
 
I think you need a good balance. A majority of highly rated players coupled with the "South FLA 3 stars". The guys like Knowles & Redwine that have a chip on their shoulder and will push some of those higher rated players. It creates great competition & depth. Just my opinion though.
 
drifters1234 said:
This is how it works. If your class is loaded with 4 and 5 stars then you crow about how great it is.

Conversely, when you fill up with 2 and 3 stars then you say that stars don't matter, and you cite extreme outliers of a different era like Ed Reed to prove your point
Click to expand...

So what about those that state the 3 stars provide depth?

I feel like the star system is diluted. It's catered to please the athletes who feel they're better than they really are. I feel these "experts" merely glance at tape and provide analysis of maybe the first few clips. You know how many people showed love to Robert knowles highlight tape AFTER he signed yesterday or Redwine AFTER he signed? It's almost as if they smack a rating on a kid just to do it.
 
Someone just needs to sticky the past 10 MNC champions and their 3 year recruiting average and how the only champ to average outside the top 10 was Auburn and they averaged #12….
 
MetiSkeemz said:
drifters1234 said:
This is how it works. If your class is loaded with 4 and 5 stars then you crow about how great it is.

Conversely, when you fill up with 2 and 3 stars then you say that stars don't matter, and you cite extreme outliers of a different era like Ed Reed to prove your point
Click to expand...

So what about those that state the 3 stars provide depth?

I feel like the star system is diluted. It's catered to please the athletes who feel they're better than they really are. I feel these "experts" merely glance at tape and provide analysis of maybe the first few clips. You know how many people showed love to Robert knowles highlight tape AFTER he signed yesterday or Redwine AFTER he signed? It's almost as if they smack a rating on a kid just to do it.
Click to expand...

I would much rather have other 4-5 stars like Willis McGahee and Kellen Winslow as depth for the Shockey and Gore/Portises than Jimmy Gaines, Tyrone Cornelius, AJ Highsmith, and other three stars, so that answers that.
 
bobbydigius said:
Someone just needs to sticky the past 10 MNC champions and their 3 year recruiting average and how the only champ to average outside the top 10 was Auburn and they averaged #12….
Click to expand...

This. Shut this abomination of a thread down and anyone going forward who attempts the superfan "star don't matter" argument should be beheaded.
 
Advertisement
MetiSkeemz said:
drifters1234 said:
This is how it works. If your class is loaded with 4 and 5 stars then you crow about how great it is.

Conversely, when you fill up with 2 and 3 stars then you say that stars don't matter, and you cite extreme outliers of a different era like Ed Reed to prove your point
Click to expand...

So what about those that state the 3 stars provide depth?

I feel like the star system is diluted. It's catered to please the athletes who feel they're better than they really are. I feel these "experts" merely glance at tape and provide analysis of maybe the first few clips. You know how many people showed love to Robert knowles highlight tape AFTER he signed yesterday or Redwine AFTER he signed? It's almost as if they smack a rating on a kid just to do it.
Click to expand...

Can you back that up though? Look recruiting is still a crapshoot but the services keep getting better and better as millions upon millions of dollars are poured into the industry. I started following this stuff back in 2003 when it was really blowing up and there was definitely a time where the qualifications of these guys was questionable at best. The only advantage they had over someone like myself was essentially they got to see a bunch of kids up close, which, many people in SFLA can if they want. That was 10+ years ago though. In 10 years time even a novice can become proficient at something if given the resources, and resources have certainly been given. This idea that these guys are just some guy looking at film and putting a star label on a player is short sighted. They are being paid good money at this point to do this. Are they NFL level scouts? **** no, but just because you aren't a CFO of a Fortune 500 company doesn't mean you can't be proficient at your job. Speaking of the NFL, that is a billion dollar machine, and they still get evals wrong all the time. Evaluating football players is difficult but to deny that it is getting much better on a college level is putting your head in the sand.
 
MetiSkeemz said:
drifters1234 said:
This is how it works. If your class is loaded with 4 and 5 stars then you crow about how great it is.

Conversely, when you fill up with 2 and 3 stars then you say that stars don't matter, and you cite extreme outliers of a different era like Ed Reed to prove your point
Click to expand...

So what about those that state the 3 stars provide depth?

I feel like the star system is diluted. It's catered to please the athletes who feel they're better than they really are. I feel these "experts" merely glance at tape and provide analysis of maybe the first few clips. You know how many people showed love to Robert knowles highlight tape AFTER he signed yesterday or Redwine AFTER he signed? It's almost as if they smack a rating on a kid just to do it.
Click to expand...

You can't really believe that the recruiting services actually "cater to please the athletes who feel they're better than they really are." What does that even mean? Why would they go out of their way to prop up a lesser athlete to make him feel better?

They base their evaluations on players' measurables, production, and their success in countless competitive camps and 7 on 7 tournaments.

And they've gotten much better at it over the years.
 
This article does a pretty nice job articulating why the star rankings still have plenty of value:

http://www.footballstudyhall.com/20...-matters-why-the-sites-get-the-rankings-right

Golden has totally fcked recruiting at UM in a plethora of ways.

Ideally, you want to supplement blue chip talent with guys who may not be five stars, but are still ballers, the types of kids south Florida is loaded with. Kids like Fenton, Rod Archer in this class. Burgess, Dowels, etc. in previous classes.

Problem is, not only is Golden not landing blue chip talent, he's not even landing the south Florida kids you supplement with that talent.

The past few recruiting classes in south Florida have been remarkably talented, program-changing type players right down the street, and we've whiffed badly. No two ways around it.
 
No one knows if the woman they marry is going to get obese after the honeymoon. Some do, some don't.

But isn't it better to start out with a hot chick that works out than a fat chick that smokes pot every day?? If so, then you cannot hate on the star rankings. They provide a starting point based on a kid's high school performances, camp performances, etc...
 
You either recruit like a superstar or coach like a superstar and Al-bortion can't do either.

recruting.webp

http://coachingsearch.com/article?a=Chart-Comparing-the-top-25-teams-to-their-recruiting-rankings
 
The star system is overated when you land a ****** class. I have yet to see a post after someone lands a top 5 class talking about the rating system.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top