Superbowl Recruiting

I'm actually a little surprised there are so few diamonds in the rough
 
So taking out all of the "N/A"s and kickers you get 41 players (48 total players minus 4 Ks/Ps and 3 other N/As).

There are eight 4*guys, or about 19.5% of the total pool.

There are twenty 3* guys, or about 48.8%.

There are ten 2*s and three NRs, or 31.7%.

So the distribution is weighted more to the four stars and three stars than the 2*s. I wouldn't put much stock into the 5 star guys as I doubt its statistically significant based on the small sample size and small number of 5 stars.
 
What this clearly demonstrates is the star rating system used by the Recruiting services has little to do with long term success as a football player. I know the rabid fan bases of these factory schools like to pound their chests and brag about a top whatever recruiting class, but, the truth is you don't know what you got until it takes the field in the years to come. Meanwhile, the ones that succeed are the ones who take whatever talent they have, work their tails off and take pride in their craft. It's hard to measure which guys have that level of commitment.

Go Jackets!
 
Jerry the Jacket said:
What this clearly demonstrates is the star rating system used by the Recruiting services has little to do with long term success as a football player. I know the rabid fan bases of these factory schools like to pound their chests and brag about a top whatever recruiting class, but, the truth is you don't know what you got until it takes the field in the years to come. Meanwhile, the ones that succeed are the ones who take whatever talent they have, work their tails off and take pride in their craft. It's hard to measure which guys have that level of commitment.

Go Jackets!
Click to expand...

Absolutely. In recruiting there is a very large element of randomness.
 
Legal Jacket said:
"This isn't that surprising, as five-stars make up less than 1 percent of all FBS/FCS recruits, four-stars less than 10 percent, and three-stars roughly 37 percent. About 55 percent are rated two-stars or unrated."
Click to expand...


It's the same principle when people point out very successful C students as evidence that classroom performance doesn't matter at all.

The Bell curve of the higher rated group is to the right of the one for the lower rated group but each group's high tail outliers are way above the average for either.
 
Jerry the Jacket said:
What this clearly demonstrates is the star rating system used by the Recruiting services has little to do with long term success as a football player. I know the rabid fan bases of these factory schools like to pound their chests and brag about a top whatever recruiting class, but, the truth is you don't know what you got until it takes the field in the years to come. Meanwhile, the ones that succeed are the ones who take whatever talent they have, work their tails off and take pride in their craft. It's hard to measure which guys have that level of commitment.

Go Jackets!
Click to expand...
A small college coach told me once, speaking about his star running back who had "all the tools" ... "You can't know what is in their heart." He didn't make it.
 
Measurables do not make the man alone. You have to look at heart, determination, and football IQ. Recruiting is similar to the NFL combine in a way. You got guys with all the measurables that were marginal college players. GMs fall in love and pick them higher then they should. A lot of times you never hear from these guys again but some do turn out productive careers like Vernon Davis. But for every Vernon Davis you have five Heyward-Beys.
 
Jerry the Jacket said:
What this clearly demonstrates is the star rating system used by the Recruiting services has little to do with long term success as a football player. I know the rabid fan bases of these factory schools like to pound their chests and brag about a top whatever recruiting class, but, the truth is you don't know what you got until it takes the field in the years to come. Meanwhile, the ones that succeed are the ones who take whatever talent they have, work their tails off and take pride in their craft. It's hard to measure which guys have that level of commitment.

Go Jackets!
Click to expand...


Actually it demonstrates that 4-star players are twice as likely to make it to the chAmpionship game as their population would predict (20% in game vs 10% population).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Chris Cooley is now a local DC radio guy and I turn them on for 15 minutes or so. He was raving about how the Patriots don't suffer fools and demand so much out of their players in the little things. He said the Pats are definitely not the "most talented team" but they do everything right from a team and execution standpoint.

Basically the NFLs Spurs.

A lot can be said about finding the guys who want to hone their role for the benefit of the team and the other more highly decorated players who want to make money. Not saying all 5-stars are like that but by and large I'd say a majority are a little on the selfish side and you have to be to be that good.
 
Jerry the Jacket said:
What this clearly demonstrates is the star rating system used by the Recruiting services has little to do with long term success as a football player.
Go Jackets!
Click to expand...

and, its not supposed to, since it is a tool to use for selecting the kid for college, or at most the next 5 years of his life. thats not really "long-term"

its not just injuries and such, but also just the fact that 17-yr olds are not all done growing or maturing. some are, some arent. some turn from QBs to DEs or BBacks. some turn from agile to too heavy, etc

if you want to rate the 'long-term' success of a player then go ahead and make most of them 2* because less than a handful (maybe that many) will ever play more than 6 years from any recruiting class, in other words, more than 2 years after they leave college
 
one might also argue (after looking at the lists) that the positions that seem to be able to do better with lower rankings are positions where technique and reading the play are more critical. LB, WR (not deep threat but "possession" WR), TE

this might mean they got more out of coaching and learned better technique most likely AFTER they got recruited.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top