Why stars DO matter.

[datdude81]

In case this is news to anybody. I always hear that "stars don't matter" but the facts don't bear that out. Recruiting is like gambling. It's all about stacking the odds in your favor. You might strike gold on a 3* recruit, but more often than not the 4/5* kid is going to be better. And in the end, it's all about the odds.


Here are the facts:


A five star recruit has a 74% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 23 picked out of 31 total)
A four star recruit has a 21% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 76 picked out of 354 total)
A three star recruit has a 7% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 90 picked out of 1202 total)

And it goes without saying... having a roster stacked with future NFL talent means you're likely to win some games.



Also, we can look at the number of blue chip player on every team's roster, and see that it matches up very well with the team's success:

Number of blue chips currently on the roster:

1.) Alabama (***** 18, **** 51)
2.) Ohio State (***** 7, **** 56)
3.) USC (***** 8, **** 41)
4.) Georgia (***** 11, **** 43)
5.) FSU (***** 10, **** 38)
6.) LSU (***** 4, **** 48)
7.) Michigan (***** 3, **** 46)
8.) Auburn (***** 4, **** 41)
9.) Clemson (***** 6, **** 34)
10.) Notre Dam (***** 0, **** 46)

compare that to...


Current College Football Rankings

1. Clemson
2. Oklahoma
3. Georgia
4. Alabama
5. Ohio State
6. Wisconsin
7. Auburn
8. USC
9. Penn State
10. UCF

Obviously there's no coincidence there. Out of 120 Division 1 teams, you see the same names on that top 10 list for a reason. Talent = winning.

(BTW, Miami is #20 in talent with ***** 1 and **** 24, and we are #11 in the rankings)


So my point is that recruiting highly ranked guys is like stacking the deck in your favor. It's like playing with house odds. Sure, you might lose a hand here or there, but in the long run the odds always win out.

Stars DO matter. And we shouldn't fool ourselves in to believing otherwise.

Stop pulling up NFL player stats

It's about who is winning national championships in the NCAA

The NFL game is different then college

 

[Meat]

Saying stars matter misses the point. Saban doesn’t recruit kids because others rate them highly. It’s closer to the opposite. He recruits the ones he thinks are the best kids. Others rate them highly because he recruits them.

Yes, the system tends to get it right at the end of the day. But ‘at the end of the day’ means by signing day. It’s a hindsight rating come Feb. the kids who got chased the most by the best programs get up-rated. Makes sense. Ends up being right. Doesn’t tell you much at all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier, however. Which is when the top kids get recruited.

If UM becomes relevant agan, the kids we recruit will get ratings bumps. Our classes will ‘improve’ on paper. Coker recruits got ratings bumps long after Miami fans realized Coker was a dumpster fire. High ratings didn’t help in ‘04 and ‘08 because Coker and Shannon were bad to middling evaluators.

Richt needs to keep the best local kids home, first and foremost. Do that and we’ll be fine, whatever the ratings gurus say about those kids. Fail to do it and we won’t be fine, no matter how many rhyan andersons we pull from other parts of the country.

The 08 class wasn't as good on paper as it first looks. He filled the class with far too many 2 and 3 stars in addition to the several 4 and 5 stars.

But recruiting rankings have also improved since then. If the numbers in this thread are correct 74% of 5 stars drafted is a vast improvement even from 6 years ago. I remember reading a rivals article back then saying about 55% of 5 stars were drafted.

There may be a recruiting bump when a good school offers, but if it wasn't accurate then these numbers wouldn't look this good. In the past we've lost a lot of the big recruiting battles.

My point is that saying stars matter doesn't miss the point. From a coaching perspective, yes they shouldn't just offer people with 4+ stars for no reason. We aren't the coaches. We analyze how we're progressing, and with Richt everything looks great. Recruiting isn't all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier. I would imagine we recruit a TON of kids based on their potential. I doubt Golden was refusing to recruit some of the best players in south florida when they were younger. He just couldn't compete with other coaches and we ended up with kids that weren't as highly rated. In this day and age there should never be someone that says all of our 3 stars are under the radar. Maybe a few of them are, but filling a class with 18 three stars and claiming it's a good class because the coaches are good evaluators is dubious.

Per Rivals, that class had 2 5* kids and 15 4* kids. That is a huge class. Except Randy evaluated poorly. Ben Jones, VT, Holton, Futch, were garbage. Davon Johnson didn’t do much either. And the many 2* kids were just head scratchers for the most part.

I use 247 composite which had 16 4 and 5 stars, and 16 others. That is a good amount of talent, but getting that many 2 and 3 stars dilutes the class a bit. That and you have to get that number of blue chips every year. This year we'll likely end up with about 16 4 and 5 stars, and only a handful of 3 stars. If you look at the elite teams out there, they have a blue chip ratio in the 60% range. I think Bama is around 70%. With this class we're back on track. Right now I believe we're in the mid 30%. Next year we'll be around 45-48%

Alabama's is 82%.

 

[jhtheking]

Saying stars matter misses the point. Saban doesn’t recruit kids because others rate them highly. It’s closer to the opposite. He recruits the ones he thinks are the best kids. Others rate them highly because he recruits them.

Yes, the system tends to get it right at the end of the day. But ‘at the end of the day’ means by signing day. It’s a hindsight rating come Feb. the kids who got chased the most by the best programs get up-rated. Makes sense. Ends up being right. Doesn’t tell you much at all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier, however. Which is when the top kids get recruited.

If UM becomes relevant agan, the kids we recruit will get ratings bumps. Our classes will ‘improve’ on paper. Coker recruits got ratings bumps long after Miami fans realized Coker was a dumpster fire. High ratings didn’t help in ‘04 and ‘08 because Coker and Shannon were bad to middling evaluators.

Richt needs to keep the best local kids home, first and foremost. Do that and we’ll be fine, whatever the ratings gurus say about those kids. Fail to do it and we won’t be fine, no matter how many rhyan andersons we pull from other parts of the country.

The 08 class wasn't as good on paper as it first looks. He filled the class with far too many 2 and 3 stars in addition to the several 4 and 5 stars.

But recruiting rankings have also improved since then. If the numbers in this thread are correct 74% of 5 stars drafted is a vast improvement even from 6 years ago. I remember reading a rivals article back then saying about 55% of 5 stars were drafted.

There may be a recruiting bump when a good school offers, but if it wasn't accurate then these numbers wouldn't look this good. In the past we've lost a lot of the big recruiting battles.

My point is that saying stars matter doesn't miss the point. From a coaching perspective, yes they shouldn't just offer people with 4+ stars for no reason. We aren't the coaches. We analyze how we're progressing, and with Richt everything looks great. Recruiting isn't all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier. I would imagine we recruit a TON of kids based on their potential. I doubt Golden was refusing to recruit some of the best players in south florida when they were younger. He just couldn't compete with other coaches and we ended up with kids that weren't as highly rated. In this day and age there should never be someone that says all of our 3 stars are under the radar. Maybe a few of them are, but filling a class with 18 three stars and claiming it's a good class because the coaches are good evaluators is dubious.

Per Rivals, that class had 2 5* kids and 15 4* kids. That is a huge class. Except Randy evaluated poorly. Ben Jones, VT, Holton, Futch, were garbage. Davon Johnson didn’t do much either. And the many 2* kids were just head scratchers for the most part.

I use 247 composite which had 16 4 and 5 stars, and 16 others. That is a good amount of talent, but getting that many 2 and 3 stars dilutes the class a bit. That and you have to get that number of blue chips every year. This year we'll likely end up with about 16 4 and 5 stars, and only a handful of 3 stars. If you look at the elite teams out there, they have a blue chip ratio in the 60% range. I think Bama is around 70%. With this class we're back on track. Right now I believe we're in the mid 30%. Next year we'll be around 45-48%

Alabama's is 82%.

Wow.

 

[jhtheking]

In case this is news to anybody. I always hear that "stars don't matter" but the facts don't bear that out. Recruiting is like gambling. It's all about stacking the odds in your favor. You might strike gold on a 3* recruit, but more often than not the 4/5* kid is going to be better. And in the end, it's all about the odds.


Here are the facts:


A five star recruit has a 74% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 23 picked out of 31 total)
A four star recruit has a 21% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 76 picked out of 354 total)
A three star recruit has a 7% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 90 picked out of 1202 total)

And it goes without saying... having a roster stacked with future NFL talent means you're likely to win some games.



Also, we can look at the number of blue chip player on every team's roster, and see that it matches up very well with the team's success:

Number of blue chips currently on the roster:

1.) Alabama (***** 18, **** 51)
2.) Ohio State (***** 7, **** 56)
3.) USC (***** 8, **** 41)
4.) Georgia (***** 11, **** 43)
5.) FSU (***** 10, **** 38)
6.) LSU (***** 4, **** 48)
7.) Michigan (***** 3, **** 46)
8.) Auburn (***** 4, **** 41)
9.) Clemson (***** 6, **** 34)
10.) Notre Dam (***** 0, **** 46)

compare that to...


Current College Football Rankings

1. Clemson
2. Oklahoma
3. Georgia
4. Alabama
5. Ohio State
6. Wisconsin
7. Auburn
8. USC
9. Penn State
10. UCF

Obviously there's no coincidence there. Out of 120 Division 1 teams, you see the same names on that top 10 list for a reason. Talent = winning.

(BTW, Miami is #20 in talent with ***** 1 and **** 24, and we are #11 in the rankings)


So my point is that recruiting highly ranked guys is like stacking the deck in your favor. It's like playing with house odds. Sure, you might lose a hand here or there, but in the long run the odds always win out.

Stars DO matter. And we shouldn't fool ourselves in to believing otherwise.

Stop pulling up NFL player stats

It's about who is winning national championships in the NCAA

The NFL game is different then college

This isn't NFL player stats. This is a pretty good way to show how good a player ended up being in college. Getting drafted doesn't mean they'll play well in the NFL. It means they played well in college.

 

[Meat]

The 08 class wasn't as good on paper as it first looks. He filled the class with far too many 2 and 3 stars in addition to the several 4 and 5 stars.

But recruiting rankings have also improved since then. If the numbers in this thread are correct 74% of 5 stars drafted is a vast improvement even from 6 years ago. I remember reading a rivals article back then saying about 55% of 5 stars were drafted.

There may be a recruiting bump when a good school offers, but if it wasn't accurate then these numbers wouldn't look this good. In the past we've lost a lot of the big recruiting battles.

My point is that saying stars matter doesn't miss the point. From a coaching perspective, yes they shouldn't just offer people with 4+ stars for no reason. We aren't the coaches. We analyze how we're progressing, and with Richt everything looks great. Recruiting isn't all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier. I would imagine we recruit a TON of kids based on their potential. I doubt Golden was refusing to recruit some of the best players in south florida when they were younger. He just couldn't compete with other coaches and we ended up with kids that weren't as highly rated. In this day and age there should never be someone that says all of our 3 stars are under the radar. Maybe a few of them are, but filling a class with 18 three stars and claiming it's a good class because the coaches are good evaluators is dubious.

Per Rivals, that class had 2 5* kids and 15 4* kids. That is a huge class. Except Randy evaluated poorly. Ben Jones, VT, Holton, Futch, were garbage. Davon Johnson didn’t do much either. And the many 2* kids were just head scratchers for the most part.

I use 247 composite which had 16 4 and 5 stars, and 16 others. That is a good amount of talent, but getting that many 2 and 3 stars dilutes the class a bit. That and you have to get that number of blue chips every year. This year we'll likely end up with about 16 4 and 5 stars, and only a handful of 3 stars. If you look at the elite teams out there, they have a blue chip ratio in the 60% range. I think Bama is around 70%. With this class we're back on track. Right now I believe we're in the mid 30%. Next year we'll be around 45-48%

Alabama's is 82%.

Wow.

Yeah, they have 18 five-stars and 51 four-stars out of 84 players. It's just stupid.

 

[datdude81]

In case this is news to anybody. I always hear that "stars don't matter" but the facts don't bear that out. Recruiting is like gambling. It's all about stacking the odds in your favor. You might strike gold on a 3* recruit, but more often than not the 4/5* kid is going to be better. And in the end, it's all about the odds.


Here are the facts:


A five star recruit has a 74% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 23 picked out of 31 total)
A four star recruit has a 21% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 76 picked out of 354 total)
A three star recruit has a 7% chance of getting drafted to the NFL (2017 draft: 90 picked out of 1202 total)

And it goes without saying... having a roster stacked with future NFL talent means you're likely to win some games.



Also, we can look at the number of blue chip player on every team's roster, and see that it matches up very well with the team's success:

Number of blue chips currently on the roster:

1.) Alabama (***** 18, **** 51)
2.) Ohio State (***** 7, **** 56)
3.) USC (***** 8, **** 41)
4.) Georgia (***** 11, **** 43)
5.) FSU (***** 10, **** 38)
6.) LSU (***** 4, **** 48)
7.) Michigan (***** 3, **** 46)
8.) Auburn (***** 4, **** 41)
9.) Clemson (***** 6, **** 34)
10.) Notre Dam (***** 0, **** 46)

compare that to...


Current College Football Rankings

1. Clemson
2. Oklahoma
3. Georgia
4. Alabama
5. Ohio State
6. Wisconsin
7. Auburn
8. USC
9. Penn State
10. UCF

Obviously there's no coincidence there. Out of 120 Division 1 teams, you see the same names on that top 10 list for a reason. Talent = winning.

(BTW, Miami is #20 in talent with ***** 1 and **** 24, and we are #11 in the rankings)


So my point is that recruiting highly ranked guys is like stacking the deck in your favor. It's like playing with house odds. Sure, you might lose a hand here or there, but in the long run the odds always win out.

Stars DO matter. And we shouldn't fool ourselves in to believing otherwise.

Stop pulling up NFL player stats

It's about who is winning national championships in the NCAA

The NFL game is different then college

This isn't NFL player stats. This is a pretty good way to show how good a player ended up being in college. Getting drafted doesn't mean they'll play well in the NFL. It means they played well in college.

What I am saying is people always try to do the star debate

Yes their will always be kids that peak later on or come from small schools and ball out

My point is look at who is winning national championships year after year and they are consistently have top ten classes

We have to get star players making it to the NFL is just a different path for everyone but I will say playing for a winning team will help you get noticed and drafted rather a kid becomes a bust or not is on them

One guy gave me some perspective bama has more busts in the NFL because the probability of them having a bust goes up the ,ore kids they have drafted

A kid gets drafted from the U it's just different now

 

[AdrianP]

Stars are irrelevant to miami. Stars and star whores have NEVER been relevant. Our national championships have NEVER been won by star whoring 4-5 star primadonnas.

Mami fans lusting after stars are plain Jane STUPID.

 

[Meat]

Stars are irrelevant to miami. Stars and star whores have NEVER been relevant. Our national championships have NEVER been won by star whoring 4-5 star primadonnas.

Mami fans lusting after stars are plain Jane STUPID.

Hate to do this.... but Miami hasn't won a national championship in 16 years. Times are different now.

All during the Golden and Shannon years, we filled up our classes with "underrated" South Florida 3 stars. How many ships did those kids win us? How many ACC championships? How many coastal championships?

 

[Meat]

South Florida 3-stars we have signed since 2012...

JaWand Blue
Vernon Davis
Larry Hope
Gabriel Terry
Josh Witt
David Thompson
Walter Tucker
Mike Smith
Ryan Mayes
Trayone Gray
Tyre Brady
Marques Gayot
Nick Linder
Terry McCray
James King
Terrance Henley
Sheldrick Redwine
Robert Knowles
RJ McIntosh
Darrell Langham
Demetrius Jackson


TO EVERYONE WHO SAYS... "SOUTH FLORIDA 3 STARS ARE BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE'S 5 STARS."

How can you say that when you see this list? Looks like a couple studs and a whole lot of scrubs to me.

A 3-star is a 3-star, if you ask me.

 

[jhtheking]

Stars are irrelevant to miami. Stars and star whores have NEVER been relevant. Our national championships have NEVER been won by star whoring 4-5 star primadonnas.

Mami fans lusting after stars are plain Jane STUPID.

I mean you're wrong. Prove it otherwise. I have high doubts in your rhetoric, though, because your previous proof was that Miami was 10-0 when we had 10 years of mostly poorly ranked classes and poor on field performance. It was clear we weren't really that good this year either. You can't seem to comprehend statistics of any kind and that means any argument you come up with carries very little weight.

You're deluding yourself.

 

[da truth]

Wisconsin. 1 loss, primarily all 3stars also vt is mostly 3stars. F u star whores, 3* Michael Jackson says hello

 

[jhtheking]

Wisconsin. 1 loss, primarily all 3stars also vt is mostly 3stars. F u star whores, 3* Michael Jackson says hello

Do you understand how that argument means nothing? You're the type of guy to buy 100 lottery tickets every week because you know someone that won it once, or the guy that won't vaccinate his kids because you know of one person who has a child with autism that was vaccinated. If you actually look at all of the data, the sentiment of this thread holds true. You won't be able to understand this though so I'm not going to try anymore. Some people just can't make analytical conclusions. You're one of them.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

It's called an "outlier."

That's the way statistics work.

Here's your problem: This board struggles with that concept. Simplistic angry males who frequent sports message boards overwhelmingly struggle with that concept. Somehow a lifetime of bar stool-type arguments taught them that if you come up with one counter example then you've won the argument.

No, you've lost the lifetime, which is a heck of a lot more consequential than flubbing one argument. Anyone who desperately reaches for outliers as if they hold any meaning at all is likely to make that fundamental blunder throughout their lifespan. It's where they instantly default as soon as any topic is posed...oh yeah, what about that?

Great. You found the 2%. I'll hold onto this 98%. Thank you very much. Then you pat them on the head.

 

[Pete]

You asked the question"stars do matter?"Another question then if stars matter,what
do they mean?

 

[Dghustla]

Saying stars matter misses the point. Saban doesn’t recruit kids because others rate them highly. It’s closer to the opposite. He recruits the ones he thinks are the best kids. Others rate them highly because he recruits them.

Yes, the system tends to get it right at the end of the day. But ‘at the end of the day’ means by signing day. It’s a hindsight rating come Feb. the kids who got chased the most by the best programs get up-rated. Makes sense. Ends up being right. Doesn’t tell you much at all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier, however. Which is when the top kids get recruited.

If UM becomes relevant agan, the kids we recruit will get ratings bumps. Our classes will ‘improve’ on paper. Coker recruits got ratings bumps long after Miami fans realized Coker was a dumpster fire. High ratings didn’t help in ‘04 and ‘08 because Coker and Shannon were bad to middling evaluators.

Richt needs to keep the best local kids home, first and foremost. Do that and we’ll be fine, whatever the ratings gurus say about those kids. Fail to do it and we won’t be fine, no matter how many rhyan andersons we pull from other parts of the country.

Thank you for this. Didn’t feel like typing all that but great points. Like Richt said the other day they aren’t recruiting based off a list. It’s based on their evaluations. Since everyone has the same tape and sees the same camp film that means it’s no secret who the top guys are. Getting great players is important but development is still king.

IMO getting top rated recruits has an intangible benefit when it comes to rankings because you could have a team full of bust like FSU but if everyone thinks you have talent you get huge favoritism.

 

[Dghustla]

Saying stars matter misses the point. Saban doesn’t recruit kids because others rate them highly. It’s closer to the opposite. He recruits the ones he thinks are the best kids. Others rate them highly because he recruits them.

Yes, the system tends to get it right at the end of the day. But ‘at the end of the day’ means by signing day. It’s a hindsight rating come Feb. the kids who got chased the most by the best programs get up-rated. Makes sense. Ends up being right. Doesn’t tell you much at all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier, however. Which is when the top kids get recruited.

If UM becomes relevant agan, the kids we recruit will get ratings bumps. Our classes will ‘improve’ on paper. Coker recruits got ratings bumps long after Miami fans realized Coker was a dumpster fire. High ratings didn’t help in ‘04 and ‘08 because Coker and Shannon were bad to middling evaluators.

Richt needs to keep the best local kids home, first and foremost. Do that and we’ll be fine, whatever the ratings gurus say about those kids. Fail to do it and we won’t be fine, no matter how many rhyan andersons we pull from other parts of the country.

The 08 class wasn't as good on paper as it first looks. He filled the class with far too many 2 and 3 stars in addition to the several 4 and 5 stars.

But recruiting rankings have also improved since then. If the numbers in this thread are correct 74% of 5 stars drafted is a vast improvement even from 6 years ago. I remember reading a rivals article back then saying about 55% of 5 stars were drafted.

There may be a recruiting bump when a good school offers, but if it wasn't accurate then these numbers wouldn't look this good. In the past we've lost a lot of the big recruiting battles.

My point is that saying stars matter doesn't miss the point. From a coaching perspective, yes they shouldn't just offer people with 4+ stars for no reason. We aren't the coaches. We analyze how we're progressing, and with Richt everything looks great. Recruiting isn't all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier. I would imagine we recruit a TON of kids based on their potential. I doubt Golden was refusing to recruit some of the best players in south florida when they were younger. He just couldn't compete with other coaches and we ended up with kids that weren't as highly rated. In this day and age there should never be someone that says all of our 3 stars are under the radar. Maybe a few of them are, but filling a class with 18 three stars and claiming it's a good class because the coaches are good evaluators is dubious.

That drafted stat is skewed there are way more 3 stars than 5 stars therefore of course a lessor % of them will get
Drafted. As we’ve seen with this star system continuing to evolve that once a player is annointed as 5 Star ppl use confimirmation bias to fill in the gaps and keep the hype on them going. Ray ray Armstrong is a perfect example he had middling stats and was annointed a Freshman AA he rode that one hit vs OU all the way to the NFL. Jadevon clowney perfect example dude was lazy, had no motor, no cardio, no dog in him. His stats for an “all world” player were terrible. He made a couple of hits in college and for everything else there was an excuse. “He was possibly playng hurt”, “he was saving himself for the NFL”, “he’ll Be movitcated When he gets $$.” I think I even heard Lugninbill say “he was bored with colleg”..then what happened he’s been trash for a top pick. This is his best season and it’s still only ok.

If having high rated kids is all it takes then Bama and St. Nick shouldn’t have been nervous when their Lbs started getting injuries. But they were becuase they know that those players behind the starters regardless of ratings aren’t developed yet or never will.

Think of it as an assembly line: Develop>Win> Recrurit>Repeat
Of course the better you recrut theroically the better product you start with.

 

[djrion]

Do we really need 2 threads arguing about yin and yang?

Mods, mod pls

Cheeseburger, Lineage 14.1

 

[dukebeeasy305]

**** shame that FSU is so far ahead of us in that department, i'll leave it at that

Yeah, it really showed on the field.

Oh wait

What did i say that was wrong ha?

it IS a **** shame we are that far behind in 4* and 5* guys

luckily richt is changing that

Luckily every 3 years player personnel change so it's easily fixed we'll have championship blue chip ratio by next year

 

[ShadowSpring]

Literally nobody is saying stars don't matter.

It is a fact there are huge numbers of diamonds in the rough every **** year. If a staff is **** good at finding those kids than they are gonna win a **** of a lot games.

Both of those things are facts and everyone knows it.

What is the OP even arguing?

 

[jhtheking]

Saying stars matter misses the point. Saban doesn’t recruit kids because others rate them highly. It’s closer to the opposite. He recruits the ones he thinks are the best kids. Others rate them highly because he recruits them.

Yes, the system tends to get it right at the end of the day. But ‘at the end of the day’ means by signing day. It’s a hindsight rating come Feb. the kids who got chased the most by the best programs get up-rated. Makes sense. Ends up being right. Doesn’t tell you much at all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier, however. Which is when the top kids get recruited.

If UM becomes relevant agan, the kids we recruit will get ratings bumps. Our classes will ‘improve’ on paper. Coker recruits got ratings bumps long after Miami fans realized Coker was a dumpster fire. High ratings didn’t help in ‘04 and ‘08 because Coker and Shannon were bad to middling evaluators.

Richt needs to keep the best local kids home, first and foremost. Do that and we’ll be fine, whatever the ratings gurus say about those kids. Fail to do it and we won’t be fine, no matter how many rhyan andersons we pull from other parts of the country.

The 08 class wasn't as good on paper as it first looks. He filled the class with far too many 2 and 3 stars in addition to the several 4 and 5 stars.

But recruiting rankings have also improved since then. If the numbers in this thread are correct 74% of 5 stars drafted is a vast improvement even from 6 years ago. I remember reading a rivals article back then saying about 55% of 5 stars were drafted.

There may be a recruiting bump when a good school offers, but if it wasn't accurate then these numbers wouldn't look this good. In the past we've lost a lot of the big recruiting battles.

My point is that saying stars matter doesn't miss the point. From a coaching perspective, yes they shouldn't just offer people with 4+ stars for no reason. We aren't the coaches. We analyze how we're progressing, and with Richt everything looks great. Recruiting isn't all about who to recruit 2-3 years earlier. I would imagine we recruit a TON of kids based on their potential. I doubt Golden was refusing to recruit some of the best players in south florida when they were younger. He just couldn't compete with other coaches and we ended up with kids that weren't as highly rated. In this day and age there should never be someone that says all of our 3 stars are under the radar. Maybe a few of them are, but filling a class with 18 three stars and claiming it's a good class because the coaches are good evaluators is dubious.

That drafted stat is skewed there are way more 3 stars than 5 stars therefore of course a lessor % of them will get
Drafted. As we’ve seen with this star system continuing to evolve that once a player is annointed as 5 Star ppl use confimirmation bias to fill in the gaps and keep the hype on them going. Ray ray Armstrong is a perfect example he had middling stats and was annointed a Freshman AA he rode that one hit vs OU all the way to the NFL. Jadevon clowney perfect example dude was lazy, had no motor, no cardio, no dog in him. His stats for an “all world” player were terrible. He made a couple of hits in college and for everything else there was an excuse. “He was possibly playng hurt”, “he was saving himself for the NFL”, “he’ll Be movitcated When he gets $$.” I think I even heard Lugninbill say “he was bored with colleg”..then what happened he’s been trash for a top pick. This is his best season and it’s still only ok.

If having high rated kids is all it takes then Bama and St. Nick shouldn’t have been nervous when their Lbs started getting injuries. But they were becuase they know that those players behind the starters regardless of ratings aren’t developed yet or never will.

Think of it as an assembly line: Develop>Win> Recrurit>Repeat
Of course the better you recrut theroically the better product you start with.

That makes no sense. Since there are way more 3 stars then more 3 stars should be drafted if they were equally as good as 5 stars. And even your anecdotal evidence is wrong. Ray Ray wasn't drafted.. not going to explain it further though because you somehow can't comprehend this simple analysis.