5 stars

[Rellyrell]

OP, you would do well to see how many 5 star players are superstars at the next level in the NFL...not that many. ****, look at the five stars we had here...Marcus Fortson, Kyle Wright, Robert Marve, Arthor Brown, Graig Cooper, Reggie Youngblood, Ray Ray Armstrong...all of the top of the dome...where are they???

 

[maurice3p]

OP, you would do well to see how many 5 star players are superstars at the next level in the NFL...not that many. ****, look at the five stars we had here...Marcus Fortson, Kyle Wright, Robert Marve, Arthor Brown, Graig Cooper, Reggie Youngblood, Ray Ray Armstrong...all of the top of the dome...where are they???

So don't recruit 5-star players?

 

[Canedog]

Richt needs to bust his Miami 5* recruiting cherry at Miami.

 

[Richard Belding]

The teams that have won national championships the last 10 years, (Alabama, FSU, auburn, Florida, LSU, OSU) have an average recruiting ranking in the top 6.

Exactly. It's that simple.

So if we expect national titles, then first we need a few top 5 recruiting classes in a row

 

[FyreHam]

Stars don't mean sh*t you still can be a bust if you're a 5*

If stars don't mean ****, how come Urban Meyer and Nick Saban recruit so many 4/5 stars?

Think about it.

Alabama's best WR in the championship game was a Walk on.

Stars are NOT irrelevant, but they also aren't accurate more than 60% of the time, meaning they can't be counted on.

They can be counted on, because it's all relative. Teams that land a higher percentage of blue chip recruits (4/5 star) are usually better than teams that don't.

So we can count on the correlation that getting elite prospects is going to work out more than not getting elite prospects.

Everyone gets defensive about this.

 

[sstcane]

The facts are that you need to recruit top level talent....develop them and have good coaches running your O/D/ST.

You also need the right 4/5* players - we signed a bunch of entitled, lazy athletes. You need intelligent, hungry savages
with talent!

 

[Squid Bumciorek]

Wasn't Oregon down around 20th ranked the years they played in the championship game? There is a lot of really good talent at the two and three star level, it might be that the players have received little coaching or have never had proper nutrition (especially kids from the projects). Kid might be 6'4" 230 lbs, but get him on that good protein and in a year he is a 270 lb beast. The problem is that I didn't trust Golden to identify the kids with the right potential or have faith that they'd get good coaching.

 

[FyreHam]

The facts are that you need to recruit top level talent....develop them and have good coaches running your O/D/ST.

You also need the right 4/5* players - we signed a bunch of entitled, lazy athletes. You need intelligent, hungry savages
with talent!

There is no evidence that 4 and 5-star players are more inherently lazy than 3-star players. You need the right players period.

 

[FyreHam]

Wasn't Oregon down around 20th ranked the years they played in the championship game? There is a lot of really good talent at the two and three star level, it might be that the players have received little coaching or have never had proper nutrition (especially kids from the projects). Kid might be 6'4" 230 lbs, but get him on that good protein and in a year he is a 270 lb beast. The problem is that I didn't trust Golden to identify the kids with the right potential or have faith that they'd get good coaching.

The exception is not the rule. You need everything. Coaching + Strength/Conditioning + Recruiting to be clicking to contend for national titles. There are plenty of really good 3-star prospects who will be good or even great college players, especially in South Florida, but the fact is programs that get a higher balance of blue chip prospects usually do better.

 

[Squid Bumciorek]

Suppose I proposed a wager for $10000 that a 3 star kid recruited by Coach Kool will end up drafted higher than a 5 star kid (who he didn't recruit) who decides to attend Washington State. Would you take that bet?

 

[Likedis]

It's not always about the stars it's about having a foundation class. A class that plays above their rankings with a chip on their shoulder that's the kind of class you need to build the foundation. I think last years and this years class will be the classes that outplay their rankings ala the reed/Santana/Wayne class.

When you look back the class that got Usc rolling wasn't ranked that high in 2001 it was lin the 20s but that class got things rolling and allowed Carroll to land that sick 2003 class with Reggie bush and boys.

That's how I see last years class and partly this years class setting up the storm 18 class. Even Sagan didn't land 5 star after 5 star his first class

 

[Canesfan1899]

These boards are ******* brutal!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Astcloud11]

Stars don't mean sh*t you still can be a bust if you're a 5*

If stars don't mean ****, how come Urban Meyer and Nick Saban recruit so many 4/5 stars?

Think about it.

Alabama's best WR in the championship game was a Walk on.

Stars are NOT irrelevant, but they also aren't accurate more than 60% of the time, meaning they can't be counted on.

They can be counted on, because it's all relative. Teams that land a higher percentage of blue chip recruits (4/5 star) are usually better than teams that don't.

So we can count on the correlation that getting elite prospects is going to work out more than not getting elite prospects.

Everyone gets defensive about this.

Teams usually win, then land recruits because they are winning.

Proper TEAM evaluations and knowing how much someone can or can't fit your scheme is much more important than what random guys in a room think of a recruit.

Star Ratings are supposedly based off where website scouts evaluate a player, and rate them off their production, athleticism, upside, frame, size, and projected draft round in the NFL.

Last year was the perfect example. Jawon Hamilton was rated the 124th best RB, and 1,768th best player in last years class, at 5'9 185 lb's (very similar to Duke Johnson). Amir Rasul was rated the 9th best RB, and 223 overall playr in last years class at 5'10 200 lb's. Amir Rasul is bigger and faster than Hamilton, and has a nice frame. Athleticism comparison can be argued but I haven't watch both of em enough to say which has the upper hand. Regardless, Hamilton was the best back in Dade county last year, while Rasul wasn't even honorable mention.

Rasul 132 carries - 767 yards
Hamilton 131 carries - 1259 yards

Both of their teams were in 8A, so they had 3 teams on both schedules, and the overall competition was similar. Bottom line is, Hamilton performed much better against the same teams and got rated over a thousand spots worse. Based off what?

 

[CanesFan93]

Suppose I proposed a wager for $10000 that a 3 star kid recruited by Coach Kool will end up drafted higher than a 5 star kid (who he didn't recruit) who decides to attend Washington State. Would you take that bet?

That's not a fair bet.

For one, Kool knows how to develop talent. Secondly, the WSU kid is 9/10 going to receive less coaching there than he would elsewhere. A more accurate bet would be if a 5* kid went to USC, Michigan, MSU, etc. They'll receive about the same amount of coaching while being at programs dedicated to winning.

We're not VT yet where we can just pick up any kid and develop them. We first have to create an identity on both sides of the ball before doing that. You can't overlook the fact that 5* tend to be better players. Look at some of the top 15 5* from 2014: Leonard Fournette, Myles Garrett, Jabril Peppers, Cam Robinson, DaShawn Hand, Quin Blanding, Adoree Jackson, Speedy Noil, Kyle Allen, Marlon Humphrey, Dalvin Cook, Raashan Evans, Jalen Tabor. Those are all big-time/elite players in CFB right now. For comparison, of the first 30 3* only one has made contributions: a LB from USC.

 

[CanesFan93]

Some of y'all do know that Jerry Jeudy, Devonta Smith, Stephen Carr, Alex Leatherwood, Trevon Grimes, etc. are 5* or should be.

 

[Squid Bumciorek]

It is a fair bet, the question is whether stars matter that much. You are changing the argument to quality of school. My point is that stars are irrelevant if you have a coach who has a track record of developing talent and who knows what he is looking for. As far as D line is concerned, I don't care what the star number is if I hear that Coach Kool wants him badly.

 

[CanesFan93]

It is a fair bet, the question is whether stars matter that much. You are changing the argument to quality of school. My point is that stars are irrelevant if you have a coach who has a track record of developing talent and who knows what he is looking for. As far as D line is concerned, I don't care what the star number is if I hear that Coach Kool wants him badly.

Its not because 5* never go to schools like that. They go to P5 schools with good coaching.

Again, lets establish an identity first and then see who Kool/Manny wants.

 

[Rellyrell]

OP, you would do well to see how many 5 star players are superstars at the next level in the NFL...not that many. ****, look at the five stars we had here...Marcus Fortson, Kyle Wright, Robert Marve, Arthor Brown, Graig Cooper, Reggie Youngblood, Ray Ray Armstrong...all of the top of the dome...where are they???

So don't recruit 5-star players?

Obviously my post didn't say that...my post is bring out that just b/c you recruit a 5 star player don't mean he's going to be a difference maker. You get the best talent, period...and sometimes the best talent is a 3 star recruit who refuses to go to any circuit camps.

 

[FyreHam]

Stars don't mean sh*t you still can be a bust if you're a 5*

If stars don't mean ****, how come Urban Meyer and Nick Saban recruit so many 4/5 stars?

Think about it.

Alabama's best WR in the championship game was a Walk on.

Stars are NOT irrelevant, but they also aren't accurate more than 60% of the time, meaning they can't be counted on.

They can be counted on, because it's all relative. Teams that land a higher percentage of blue chip recruits (4/5 star) are usually better than teams that don't.

So we can count on the correlation that getting elite prospects is going to work out more than not getting elite prospects.

Everyone gets defensive about this.

Teams usually win, then land recruits because they are winning.

Proper TEAM evaluations and knowing how much someone can or can't fit your scheme is much more important than what random guys in a room think of a recruit.

Star Ratings are supposedly based off where website scouts evaluate a player, and rate them off their production, athleticism, upside, frame, size, and projected draft round in the NFL.

Last year was the perfect example. Jawon Hamilton was rated the 124th best RB, and 1,768th best player in last years class, at 5'9 185 lb's (very similar to Duke Johnson). Amir Rasul was rated the 9th best RB, and 223 overall playr in last years class at 5'10 200 lb's. Amir Rasul is bigger and faster than Hamilton, and has a nice frame. Athleticism comparison can be argued but I haven't watch both of em enough to say which has the upper hand. Regardless, Hamilton was the best back in Dade county last year, while Rasul wasn't even honorable mention.

Rasul 132 carries - 767 yards
Hamilton 131 carries - 1259 yards

Both of their teams were in 8A, so they had 3 teams on both schedules, and the overall competition was similar. Bottom line is, Hamilton performed much better against the same teams and got rated over a thousand spots worse. Based off what?

"Proper TEAM evaluations and knowing how much someone can or can't fit your scheme is much more important than what random guys in a room think of a recruit."

It's not random guys. Even if you want to attack their credibility, it's not like the guys they rate high aren't in high demand. Corey Bender isn't some random dude by himself who thinks Alex Leatherwood is great. Jeudy, Smith, Carr, McFarland and whoever else Miami is after aren't machinations of websites. They are wanted by the programs who compete for national titles every year.

The Rasul/Hamilton comparison is selective.

The fact is 4/5 star players usually > Not 4/5 star players.

You're jumping over hurdles to get around that fact to rationalize something. It's not a knock to UM. It's just an objective fact.

 

[PharmCane305]

Stars don't mean sh*t you still can be a bust if you're a 5*

If stars don't mean ****, how come Urban Meyer and Nick Saban recruit so many 4/5 stars?

Think about it.

Alabama's best WR in the championship game was a Walk on.

Stars are NOT irrelevant, but they also aren't accurate more than 60% of the time, meaning they can't be counted on.

Where are you getting 60 percent from?

The only people who say stars don't matter are fans in denial. Fact is if we want to win championships we have to recruit way more 4/5 stars each class.

Look at Clemson's classes over the past 5 years and it makes sense why we looked physically outmatched. Look at FSU's recruiting and no wonder we haven't beaten them in years.

We need to stop recruiting like a top 30 team and start recruiting like a top 5 team IMO

Go ahead and look at FSPuke, what did all those stars do when we almost beat them 2 years in a row with the worst staff ever; furthermore ask Houston if all those stars mattered when they destroyed them.

We lost, no moral victories, we lost.

Five stars do matter, there is a correlation tho not always 100 percent accurate of course when its an 18 y/o kid and coaching, scheme variables.

We need those breakout 5 star players, Dalvin Cook, the guy at USC, those nasty d linemen that OleMiss get out of nowhere, the WR they picked up that dominates. We need those gamechangers. I'm sure Richt will get it going.