forums

T Chris Washington commits

Advertisement
calinative umstudent said:
Well this aint the 80's anymore. I could see a TE moving down to OLine if he has the frame, but aint no WR's moving to OLineman anymore. This dude looks like he has the frame which is important. But my point is we can't just miss on top recruits and only get guys that will need 2-3 yrs to develop...
Click to expand...
Jalen Rivers is a top recruit, so we can develop this kid. Who’s to say he’s a 2-3 year wait? Nelson was said to be a 2-3 year project but he’s going to play as a true freshman. OL is hard to go off ratings. Rivals will only see him if he camps.
 
Ajcane8 said:
There were 2 linemen in the 2014 class that received 5* in the 247composite - 1 was drafted. 4 linemen in the 2015 class received 5* - 1 was drafted (92d overall). 2/3 of 2016's 5* were drafted - the highest rated one was picked after an unranked kid from Alabama state and a 6'6" 3* converted tight end. Over half of the most recent draft eligible 5* o linemen have not gotten drafted - is that recent enough?

This is the first 10 linemen drafted last year...

Name - 247comp * ranking - position in 2019 draft
Jonah Williams - 5* .98 - 11
Chris Lindstrom - 3* .84 - 14
Garrett Bradbury - 3* (te) .80 - 18
Andre Dillard - 3* .81 - 22
Tytus Howard - unranked - 23
Kaleb McGary - 3* .90 - 31
Jawaan Taylor - 3* .84 - 35
Greg Little - 5* .99 - 37
Cody Ford - 3* .86 - 38
Dalton Risner - 3* .86 - 41

Does the NFL really care if poindexter at rivals thought "o lineman x" was a blue chipper? Should we?
Click to expand...

So basically what you are saying is that the absolute worst year for Rivals recruiting in the past 5 years they still had 25% of 5 stars get drafted in the 1st round. Then in their best year 1-2% of 3 stars ended up getting drafted. Seems like we should care what poindexter at rivals though of o linemen x.
 
Advertisement
OriginalGatorHater said:
So basically what you are saying is that the absolute worst year for Rivals recruiting in the past 5 years they still had 25% of 5 stars get drafted in the 1st round. Then in their best year 1-2% of 3 stars ended up getting drafted. Seems like we should care what poindexter at rivals though of o linemen x.
Click to expand...

So basically what you are saying is that we should all trust poindexter on everything he says about o linemen even though he can't even be bothered to be better than a coin flip with respect to "can't miss" talents.

Funny how focusing on percentages and applying narrow parameters can help skew an argument. What % of 4* o linemen got drafted in the first 40 picks last year? 0%. I guess there's no point recruiting them.
 
Opinions are great, but I would love to know how many people have seen him in any capacity. A game, camp, on highlights, or film.

Welcome to the U. Make that offer a dream and show why the coaches believed enough in you to make the offer.
 
OriginalGatorHater said:
So basically what you are saying is that the absolute worst year for Rivals recruiting in the past 5 years they still had 25% of 5 stars get drafted in the 1st round. Then in their best year 1-2% of 3 stars ended up getting drafted. Seems like we should care what poindexter at rivals though of o linemen x.
Click to expand...

Some of our posters give these guys way too much credit.

It’s not just that they fare at ____ percentage, it’s that they get every piece of information to evaluate these players from. They get all tape. They get all combine events. They get coaches. They get interviews. They get athleticism testing. They get historical data. They get to use actual coaches offering kids as proxy’s.

Imagine revering a site that has all of that still fares at such a poor rate. You get to choose your top players out of everyone. Your choice.

Remember, you can’t even get to a 3-star player unless they’ve been evaluated and passed over for higher ratings in the process (obviously).

It truly blows my mind that sites get so much leeway in this stuff. I’d be absolutely embarrassed with those results if I were an evaluator.
 
Advertisement
Lance Roffers said:
Some of our posters give these guys way too much credit.

It’s not just that they fare at ____ percentage, it’s that they get every piece of information to evaluate these players from. They get all tape. They get all combine events. They get coaches. They get interviews. They get athleticism testing. They get historical data. They get to use actual coaches offering kids as proxy’s.

Imagine revering a site that has all of that still fares at such a poor rate. You get to choose your top players out of everyone. Your choice.

Remember, you can’t even get to a 3-star player unless they’ve been evaluated and passed over for higher ratings in the process (obviously).

It truly blows my mind that sites get so much leeway in this stuff. I’d be absolutely embarrassed with those results if I were an evaluator.
Click to expand...
What is your data set that tells you a 25% hit rate on FIRST rounders is underwhelming?
 
Ajcane8 said:
So basically what you are saying is that we should all trust poindexter on everything he says about o linemen even though he can't even be bothered to be better than a coin flip with respect to "can't miss" talents.

Funny how focusing on percentages and applying narrow parameters can help skew an argument. What % of 4* o linemen got drafted in the first 40 picks last year? 0%. I guess there's no point recruiting them.
Click to expand...

You are the one that narrowed the parameters to try and push your BS agenda. Over the past 5 or so years 5* OL have been drafted at the highest percent in the 1st round. Then 4 *s then Then 3. Then unranked.
 
Lance Roffers said:
Some of our posters give these guys way too much credit.

It’s not just that they fare at ____ percentage, it’s that they get every piece of information to evaluate these players from. They get all tape. They get all combine events. They get coaches. They get interviews. They get athleticism testing. They get historical data. They get to use actual coaches offering kids as proxy’s.

Imagine revering a site that has all of that still fares at such a poor rate. You get to choose your top players out of everyone. Your choice.

Remember, you can’t even get to a 3-star player unless they’ve been evaluated and passed over for higher ratings in the process (obviously).

It truly blows my mind that sites get so much leeway in this stuff. I’d be absolutely embarrassed with those results if I were an evaluator.
Click to expand...

More often than not they don't give them enough credit. Everyone likes to point out the outliers, but the fact is no team has won the NC in the past decade without having a team loaded with 4 and 5 stars.
 
Lance Roffers said:
I don’t think anyone is saying, 3 star > 5 star kids.

I think what can reasonably be evaluated with recruiting services is built-in bias. They’re artificially biased towards larger OL. Why? It reduces risk. Those players have already shown the capacity to gain that weight, hold it, play with it, move at it etc. A large percentage of 250 OL will always be exactly that: too small to play at the highest levels. Even the best evaluators will miss on which kids are going to weight and strength and keep it on.

They’re biased towards offers. They use the coaches as proxy’s to do the real evaluations for them. It’s no secret the SEC top programs have built-in bumps for players who get offers to those programs.

The NFL also gives inherent bias towards 5-star recruits. Teams have a specific scouting notation for former 5-star players and they love to take them as if they have higher upside or untapped potential that they believe NFL coaching can get to.

If we were living in a perfect world we’d only recruit the very top guys, and we’d hand select every 5-star kid we wanted each year and do quite well.

But we live in a world where that’s only feasible for a few programs- one of which we are not among. That means Miami has to use the pitch they have right now (be a part of TNM, make the crib great again, early playing time, create a legacy etc.). That works on only a certain percentage of kids. Usually one marquee guy at a position (like they’re trying to do with Flowe). You aren’t getting five marquee guys at one position with that pitch. So, what do you do? Evaluate. Develop. Use data to identify the types that most often hit higher than their ranking.

I believe that’s what Miami is doing.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.
 
Advertisement
OriginalGatorHater said:
You are the one that narrowed the parameters to try and push your BS agenda. Over the past 5 or so years 5* OL have been drafted at the highest percent in the 1st round. Then 4 *s then Then 3. Then unranked.
Click to expand...

Guy 1 said something about there being more 2/3* pro bowl o linemen than 4/5. Simple fact - until you said anything before 2008 doesn't count, that of those from classes after 2008 75% (a whopping 3/4) were blue chippers and that 5*s get drafted at a higher % than non-5*s (you don't say? I think we should do it your way and only accept commitments from 5*s from now on). Forgive me if I mistakenly took that as you moving the goalposts.

Also - please let me know what my bs agenda is because I'd really like to know. Especially if your novel argument is something along the lines of "it's easier to guess right 4x/9x than it is to guess correctly 50x/1000x." That's some high order Nobel-level thinking right there.
 
Ajcane8 said:
Guy 1 said something about there being more 2/3* pro bowl o linemen than 4/5. Simple fact - until you said anything before 2008 doesn't count, that of those from classes after 2008 75% (a whopping 3/4) were blue chippers and that 5*s get drafted at a higher % than non-5*s (you don't say? I think we should do it your way and only accept commitments from 5*s from now on). Forgive me if I mistakenly took that as you moving the goalposts.

Also - please let me know what my bs agenda is because I'd really like to know. Especially if your novel argument is something along the lines of "it's easier to guess right 4x/9x than it is to guess correctly 50x/1000x." That's some high order Nobel-level thinking right there.
Click to expand...
The reason I said pre 08 doesn't count is because that is when you notice a massive jump in the recruiting services. Prior to that they were very hit or miss. Currently 90% of 5 stars make NFL rosters. as opposed to 07 when it was like 40%.

My point is that yes 5 stars are better than 4 stars most of the time and 4 stars are better than 3 most of the time. We have a bunch of guys on here that literally think we can win NCs with a bunch of 3 stars and they literally think 3 stars are better than the others.
 
OriginalGatorHater said:
The reason I said pre 08 doesn't count is because that is when you notice a massive jump in the recruiting services. Prior to that they were very hit or miss. Currently 90% of 5 stars make NFL rosters. as opposed to 07 when it was like 40%.

My point is that yes 5 stars are better than 4 stars most of the time and 4 stars are better than 3 most of the time. We have a bunch of guys on here that literally think we can win NCs with a bunch of 3 stars and they literally think 3 stars are better than the others.
Click to expand...
Fair enough - but, literally none of that is true with respect to o linemen. This thread is about an o lineman - you should be able to realize why you’re getting some pushback against the otherwise benign/unassailable point of “higher rated players = more winning”
 
Advertisement
I will take trying to develop athletes into quality college linemen over getting 4 stars and transfers to play on the scout team any day. If you go by stars Miami supposedly has quite a bit of quality talent at OL, when today we really should only feel confident with maybe 3-5 guys out of the 13-15 scholarship offensive lineman on the team.
 
Ajcane8 said:
Fair enough - but, literally none of that is true with respect to o linemen. This thread is about an o lineman - you should be able to realize why you’re getting some pushback against the otherwise benign/unassailable point of “higher rated players = more winning”
Click to expand...

It is true though. The last 5 drafts 35% of 5 star ol were drafted. 4% of 4 stars. 1% of 3 stars.
 
Patreek said:
I will take trying to develop athletes into quality college linemen over getting 4 stars and transfers to play on the scout team any day. If you go by stars Miami supposedly has quite a bit of quality talent at OL, when today we really should only feel confident with maybe 3-5 guys out of the 13-15 scholarship offensive lineman on the team.
Click to expand...

We only have 4 4* OL on the team and they make up most of those 3-5 guys we feel confident about.
 
OriginalGatorHater said:
It is true though. The last 5 drafts 35% of 5 star ol were drafted. 4% of 4 stars. 1% of 3 stars.
Click to expand...
You’d agree that 35 is fewer than 90, correct?

Using % of total drafted as some sort of arbiter of recruiting services’ “success” rate just seems a little disingenuous because, like I said, it’s a lot easier to be “right” when taking 9 guesses as opposed to 1000.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top