Something to think about?

C

CitySting

Guest
I was reviewing our Recruit list and how each are ranked by stars. Why do you suppose we are lacking in 4 and 5 star recruits. When I look at the ranking reports of all the schools-Tenn., Oklahoma, Nebraska, Michigan have as many 12-15 4/5 star commitments. Don't get me wrong, I know we have some great commitments, but we need some real all star talent to compete in this now stellar conference(ACC). Your thoughts....

http://georgiatech.rivals.com/commitlist.asp?year=2005&school=27
 
Ye Ole...you know stars dont matter!! but with that said, we are in tough period...our records over the past few years have been down, kids dropping out of school, losing to our instate rival, our academic standards and other issues are deterrents for bringing in top talent. But one good year can change a lot of problems, and I feel pretty good about our up coming season. Go Jackets!! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/cheers.gif
 
Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

..as the Farmers Almanac weather predictions.

They are created by guys that have never played or coached div 1 football...they rely on watching a few minutes of tape and conversations with coaches of big hs programs.

Do not fall into the fallacy of valuing a recruiting class based upon the "star" system.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

I think it was Barrel o Rum that said it but he was saying the difference between 4/5 star and 2/3 is that a 4 or 5 could come in right away and be productive. He was talking about O-line but I think that is true with all positions. Look at Calvin, 4 star wide reciever and he was dominant in his freshman year. Imagine if we had a qb or if we ran an offense that was a passing offense. Calvin could have been all american his first year i think.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

We've actually had pretty bad luck with the highly rated kids we've signed overall. For every CJ there's at least one Hobie Holiday.

Everybody wants the 4/5 star kids, but the odds of Tech ever getting very many is slim IMO. The kids not only have to want to come here and major in something we offer, but they also have to have good HS grades and SATs and be willing to do the class work. The truth is many of those kids just want to play football and aren't ready for a school like Tech.

It goes better when we're winning, and we can pull in higher rated classes than we're doing right now. But for those waiting for those top 15 classes every year, I wouldn't hold my breath.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

As many of us already know the stars label means absolutely nothing. Stars seem to be put on kids from high profile schools. I often wonder how many kids get overlooked because they play for a rural school that either don't get that much attention or aren't that good. When I was in high school back in the late 80's (1990 grad)we played other rural schools...(Gilmer, Fannin, Lumpkin)why go down to the burbs and get pounded? I guess what I am saying is that I would much rather have a kid come in with something between his ears and a huge heart for the game. The leg humpers and the rest of the factories will always get the "stars" recruits with little brain cells. GO JACKETS!!!!
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

Hey, Gilmer was a big time school in the early 80's, come on give me some love. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/greenclap.gif
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

Hey there! Lumpkin County was a powerhouse in '68...powered by nonother than GoldZ himself at tailback! THWG
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

GoldZ, I can't believe they are dissing our football up here. Let's put a team together and meet in the parking lot, my money says we win. What do you think?
 
Somewhat disagree. The "stars" do mean something. CJ earned those stars as a high school senior and I think he proved they mean something. What they do not mean is that the young man will be successful. Time will be the judge of that. One good season can make a difference, but anyone can have one good season. You have to prove to kids that it is not a fluke. You have to use one good season as a building block to make other good seasons. If you have a setback you have to overcome that with a bigger win to keep building. One good season does not mean you have arrived. It means you have to do better than that season to survive. Some schools have reached that level and recruit kids with the "stars" all the time. Some do it because the school is easier academically. Some do it because the coach is a lights out recruiter.

But let us not kid ourselves, we need, like everyone else, to sign kids with more stars. That is how you keep gettin better.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

Bring em on fellow YJ and mountain man...or should I say mountain of a man!? THWG

I must tell ya however, my 40 time has "matured" from a legit 4.6 to a Forty-six! THWG...did I say that already? My feet aren't the only thing slowing a bit!
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

No you are on my team, and who said we had to run. If they play they play by our rules. I don't play fair by the way.
 
How about this (and there's no chance it will happen):

We have two polls for college football rankings, why not have two distinct star systems. Keep the one we have currently that ranks on field performance and another that ranks their classroom performance.

4 star RB out of East Bumble, 6'0", 210 lbs, 4.27 40, is a 1/2 star student at East Bumble High, 700 SAT, 2.5 HS GPA, Can barely spell his own name.

This way if we are to claim we recruit Student Athletes we can have the star-system to back it up. Can you imagine some of the comments that would come from it? "Strong enough to lift a house which is good because he's as bright as a load of bricks" /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugher.gif
 
I did an analysis of UGA\'s recruits from

2002, 2003, and 2004. The percent of recruits in each classification that are not on the depth chart is remarkably similar. Also, UGA's limited one and two star guys (3 and 6 respectively) are more likely to be on the chart than their three star guys. It is true, however, that of the six players from these classes that are already first string, five are four or five star guys.

For us, the story is even more pronounced. There is no positive correlation between stars and starting for one, two or three star recruits for us. In fact, only 21% of our 19 three star recruits are first or second string while 38% of our 26 two star recruits and 33% of our 6 one star recruits are. (I used scout? from the hive for star rankings)

Our limited number of four (5) and five (1) star recruits are all on the depth chart except for the kicker Jordan.

This proves in my mind that there is serious problems with the bulk of the star rankings. If we are recruiting a player who is two or even one star they are just as likely (actually more likely) to play than the three star guys we tend to fret over. If UGA is recruiting a one or two star guy they are probably legit sleepers.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

Gold and Fridge...you missed my point. I am from Pickens...A mighty Dragon. I was just wondering how many players fall through the cracks because they don't play for big city schools. Spent four years going to battle with the cats and indians.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

I didnt' miss your point i was just kidding around with you. Damn, i can't believe i'm talking to a dragon. What has this world come to.

I will say this if my principle who is a uga grad but a faithful tech man didn't put me in the right classes i would have never gone to tech. I remember going to classes with 2 or 3 students in them just so i could get it on my transcript.
 
Re: I did an analysis of UGA\'s recruits from

That is good info, all of which of course does not mean we would not be better with more recruits with more stars. No guarantee, but probably a better chance. We do want to do better than 6,7, or even 8 wins in a season.

But we will know about these guys in 2 or 3 years.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

Hey JD,
Good to see you back in the swing. I saw your post on the procedure at the hospital. Good going. Looking forward to seeing your two cents rattlin on the table again.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

Personally, I believe to be better than a 6 win season we need to recruit big time players....Again, Look at the USC's, Miami's and FSU's of the world. For that matter VaTech. They all get top ranked high school recruits. Do we have time to sit back and hope these 1-2-3 star players and some not ranked-can compete in this conference. I'm sorry, I want another 10 win season and right now its not looking so good.
 
Re: Recruiting rankings are about as accurate..

half of those guys would flunk out at Tech. And the other half are a bunch of thugs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top