Recruit Rankings Debate

[GaTigerFan 0]

I think we sometimes get too caught up in how many stars a player has. We need to remember who is doing the evaluating. Are they really experts? There are so many examples of why this is a little too much... here's a couple to consider.

2010 Pro Style Quaterbacks

#1 Jake Heaps - 4* BYU ?????

#2 Phillip Sims - 4* Alabama - did he ever play anywhere???

#44 Blake Bortles - 3* UCF - you may have seen him against Baylor in the Fiesta, threw for over 300 yards....

and 2009 - Jordan Lynch was not even in the top 50 QB's and he ends up a Heisman finalist.

Hey it's fun to follow it but I'm just saying don't get too caught up in rankings.

[auburn4ever 1,266]

Your spot on.

[AuburnNTexas 7,198]

Stars matter when you are looking at the overall picture. Teams that consistently sign 4 and 5 star players do well. Starts don't matter at the individual level. At the individual level there are so may things that can affect how a recruit does. A 5 Star may have picked a school that doesn't utilize his talents so he doesn't make it but if he had gone to another team he might have shown. Stars can't predict desire, heart, injury, football IQ, Growtth in the weight room, etc.

One of the reason so many on this board are always saying trust the coaches is they know the HS coaches people at the schools, etc. They often get an insight the recuiting services don't get.

[BirdofPrey76 0]

Stars matter when you are looking at the overall picture. Teams that consistently sign 4 and 5 star players do well. Starts don't matter at the individual level. At the individual level there are so may things that can affect how a recruit does. A 5 Star may have picked a school that doesn't utilize his talents so he doesn't make it but if he had gone to another team he might have shown. Stars can't predict desire, heart, injury, football IQ, Growtth in the weight room, etc.

One of the reason so many on this board are always saying trust the coaches is they know the HS coaches people at the schools, etc. They often get an insight the recuiting services don't get.

Please do not forget one of the most important--work ethic.

[ValleyTiger 2,894]

Stars matter when you are looking at the overall picture. Teams that consistently sign 4 and 5 star players do well. Starts don't matter at the individual level. At the individual level there are so may things that can affect how a recruit does. A 5 Star may have picked a school that doesn't utilize his talents so he doesn't make it but if he had gone to another team he might have shown. Stars can't predict desire, heart, injury, football IQ, Growtth in the weight room, etc.

One of the reason so many on this board are always saying trust the coaches is they know the HS coaches people at the schools, etc. They often get an insight the recuiting services don't get.

Completely agree, all great points.

[lionheartkc 6,150]

The one area that stars really matter is to the kids. It's frustrating when a kid is playing lights out and dominating, and the services don't give him the respect that is deserved.

Sean White, for instance, is a great example of where stars matter. He's not getting his due, and that has to be frustrating for him.

[berrytgr 0]

The one area that stars really matter is to the kids. It's frustrating when a kid is playing lights out and dominating, and the services don't give him the respect that is deserved.

Sean White, for instance, is a great example of where stars matter. He's not getting his due, and that has to be frustrating for him.

This is a good point but it can work both ways. Some kids that get rated 5 stars can feel like they have accomplished a lot and will not have the work ethic or attitude in college that they need. Those that think they were under ranked can use it as motivation to work harder.

I think they stars and recruiting ranking matter the most to the hard core college football fans. The people that are willing to spend money on these websites. These websites cater to those fans because it is where they make their money. I think the fans here are more upset about Sean's ranking than Sean probably is.

[aucanucktiger 1,805]

Even evaluators don't agree on what the stars mean. I've read some declaring stars indicate just how the player did at the high school level while others mix in how likely the player will be good in college - which is odd since they don't know what school/system/coaching staff the player will commit to when picking stars. The #1 multi purpose RB may be just another decent RB in an O that rarely throws to the RB.

[WhiteTiger 2]

Some so called 5* players have peaked out in HS and that alone will not make you a star at the SEC level. You have to get better to compete in D1 play. Some don't.

[VAtiger12 112]

Even evaluators don't agree on what the stars mean. I've read some declaring stars indicate just how the player did at the high school level while others mix in how likely the player will be good in college - which is odd since they don't know what school/system/coaching staff the player will commit to when picking stars. The #1 multi purpose RB may be just another decent RB in an O that rarely throws to the RB.

Yeah, this does tend to be a big issue with recruiting. On one hand you have people saying he was a top player in high school so he gets 5 stars. (In my view, this means that he was a great player in HIGH SCHOOL. The same way that Tebow was a top player in college). On the other hand, some sites are more apt to state that a guy is a 5 star prospect meaning talent at the collegiate level. .. Most however fall somewhere in between and none are 100% accurate (which would be impossible anyway).

[ellitor 33,114]

While all the services do miss on individual recruits, stars do matter in terms of winning big. In the 16 years of the BCS every BCS champion had a minimum of 2 top 10 classes leading into their championship. Most had 3 or 4 top 10 classes leading into the championship year. That holds true for the BCS title game losers as well. Every BCS game loser except Va. Tech in 1999 had at least 2 top 12 classes leading into their championship game appearance. Again most had 3 or 4. Do stars ensure succes? No. But it usually means you have a better chance at being succesful. The next part of the equation is coaching and player development. That is a must no matter the talent level.

[mustache eagle 2,416]

My biggest issue with the whole star debate is it is often based/influenced on nfl measurables.

Case in point - if Carl Lawson was 2-3 inches taller then he very likely is the number one consensus recruit last year. To me ... That's just stupid.

I would have more respect for the stars if they based it on how well they will play in college. But like mentioned, that can be seriously influenced by the school/scheme you play at.

Grant may never get a snap at bama, but he is a serious contributor to our run this year. Marshall doesn't get a chance at QB for Georgia, but he is one of the prime ingredients to our success. But it also works in reverse occasionally. Prosch is not recruited into malzahn's system because he is not the typical HB for Gus, but by happenstance prosch could arguably be the 3rd most important piece to our run game this year behind Marshall/grant.

Prosch will be a stereotypical FB in the nfl. As an aside, I think his versatility in Gus's O improved his draft stock - even for a FB.

Regardless, in context, stars are an indicator of future success. I have one exception to this though ... Too many "wrong" 5 stars on a team will lead to entitlement traits and bad team chemistry. Team chemistry is vital to success in college football.

[InfernoOrangeSS 321]

Personally, I don't give much stock to the star debate. Don't get me wrong, I love when we pick up a "5*". My biggest concern is that we get what we need. As long as we are in the top 10 of recruiting and we get players in areas of need, I am happy.

[Eagle Eye 7 2,535]

the big problem with stars as it applies to AU is that A 350 lbs OT might rate a 5 star because in a pro offense he might be good ( Cyrus K) but in Gus's offense he would not be worth 2 cents. Same with a pro style QB which get higher ratings than Dual threats. Some rating groups also rate according to the college he goes to. To say all these 5 stars are great because they all play on one team is also not exactly true. If you took some off these 5 stars and put them on like Western Kentucky, I am very sure they would not get much attention. I am sure that Gus and company pick their players according to what their needs are and if they will that player will meet there needs as a humane also. As we have seen before if you go out and get a " Me" 5 star that completely destroys your chemistry then that is not a good thing. Nick was a four star last year and not highly recruited. To Auburn he was a top seed 5 Star in what they needed and what he delivered. Not just because of his talent but as well as his mental toughness and calm. So I know the stats can be shown that classes with 5 stars win more but they are usually programs that win more anyway. They also get more media attention. Good example. Most sites still have S. White as a lower 4 star, yet all the real QB experts say he is the best out there (winner of elite 11 and UA MVP as well as according to Trent Differ former pro QB). WDE

[wareaglebaby1345163024 0]

i started a thread to ask when all the sites come out with their new rankings but i guess it got deleted. does anyone happen to know?

[AU64 10,122]

the big problem with stars as it applies to AU is that A 350 lbs OT might rate a 5 star because in a pro offense he might be good ( Cyrus K) but in Gus's offense he would not be worth 2 cents. Same with a pro style QB which get higher ratings than Dual threats. Some rating groups also rate according to the college he goes to. To say all these 5 stars are great because they all play on one team is also not exactly true. If you took some off these 5 stars and put them on like Western Kentucky, I am very sure they would not get much attention. I am sure that Gus and company pick their players according to what their needs are and if they will that player will meet there needs as a humane also. As we have seen before if you go out and get a " Me" 5 star that completely destroys your chemistry then that is not a good thing. Nick was a four star last year and not highly recruited. To Auburn he was a top seed 5 Star in what they needed and what he delivered. Not just because of his talent but as well as his mental toughness and calm. So I know the stats can be shown that classes with 5 stars win more but they are usually programs that win more anyway. They also get more media attention. Good example. Most sites still have S. White as a lower 4 star, yet all the real QB experts say he is the best out there (winner of elite 11 and UA MVP as well as according to Trent Differ former pro QB). WDE

IMO one of the issues that is not addressed is the age of the players.....in various states we have 19 year olds making most of their stats against 16 and 17 year olds. There is a huge difference in physical development for boys in their late teens. And you have grown men at 300# plus playing against some 200# 16 year old....or a 19 year old 200+ pound RB running through an opposing defensive backfield full of 150 pound 5'7" kids....of course they are going to look dominant. It's not until the 4 and 5* guys get up against guys their same size ( or maybe even larger/stronger) that we learn what's what.

I trust the judgment of experienced coaches looking these guys in the eye more than some cherry picked film showing a bunch of great runs or tackles. These combines and all-star games are a good indicator of what the high rated players are able to do against kids of equal size, strength and talent. IMO, that's why we see stars added and deleted from rankings.

[AURex 2,054]

The rating services are not always accurate. And also, a lot of players don't develop their body and skill set until they receive college-level coaching.

Still, 4 and 5 star recruits make up only about 13% of the recruiting class each year. Yet each year, 4 and 5 star recruits make up 50%-60% of the 1st round picks in the NFL draft. Which means they had a very successful college career.

That advantage is pretty much consistent throughout the draft. Overall, 5 star player has a much better chance of getting drafted than a 3 star player.

That said, plenty of 3 star players do get drafted and have successful pro careers. It's just that the odds for any one 3 star player making it are much lower, because there are so many 3 star players.

All college football programs recruit 2 and 3 star players, based on the evaluations of the coaches. If you look at the roster of Bama, LSU, UGA, any team, you'll find players who were rated 3 stars coming out of high school. But players don't get 4 and 5 star ratings unless they are outstanding football players. Coaches would love to have them.

[ellitor 33,114]

i started a thread to ask when all the sites come out with their new rankings but i guess it got deleted. does anyone happen to know?

I answered your question and merged your thread into the All Things Class Rankings thread Pinned near the top of the recruiting forum. If you go to your profile and view your posts you will see it's still there. It's the second post right now in your post history Link and here was my answer Link

[wareaglebaby1345163024 0]

i started a thread to ask when all the sites come out with their new rankings but i guess it got deleted. does anyone happen to know?

I answered your question and merged your thread into the All Things Class Rankings thread Pinned near the top of the recruiting forum. If you go to your profile and view your posts you will see it's still there. It's the second post right now in your post history Link and here was my answer Link

oh okay, my bad. but thanks for the answer both times!

[berrytgr 0]

The rating services are not always accurate. And also, a lot of players don't develop their body and skill set until they receive college-level coaching.

Still, 4 and 5 star recruits make up only about 13% of the recruiting class each year. Yet each year, 4 and 5 star recruits make up 50%-60% of the 1st round picks in the NFL draft. Which means they had a very successful college career.

That advantage is pretty much consistent throughout the draft. Overall, 5 star player has a much better chance of getting drafted than a 3 star player.

That said, plenty of 3 star players do get drafted and have successful pro careers. It's just that the odds for any one 3 star player making it are much lower, because there are so many 3 star players.

All college football programs recruit 2 and 3 star players, based on the evaluations of the coaches. If you look at the roster of Bama, LSU, UGA, any team, you'll find players who were rated 3 stars coming out of high school. But players don't get 4 and 5 star ratings unless they are outstanding football players. Coaches would love to have them.

I want to compliment you on this post. I am not a fan of recruiting experts and ranking these kids. I also thought those numbers I highlighted in bold would be wrong. I went back to last years NFL draft and looked at the first round and then looked those players recruit rankings up. You were right it was in the 50-60% range. There several 3 stars, a 2 star, and some not ranked but more than half were big time 4-5 star recruits. Obviously not all the 4-5 star recruits pan out but it looks like a good percentage of them do.

[weagl1 1,789]

I agree with the thought that the rankings are not always accurate as to an individual player, but if you take a team of average two and three star players vs a team of average four and five star players, the latter are normally going to have a physical advantage. That doesn't mean they will automatically win the game. It still makes a big difference what type of offensive and defensive schemes they are running and how well they are coached. When Boise State beat Oklahoma a few years ago if you just looked at the two teams physically you would not have thought they had a chance. Same thing with Georgia Southern beating Florida this year.

[AUbritt 611]

I don't understand these rankings. Why is UF ranked above us when we have the same number of commits, 2 more 5*, 2 fewer 3* and one fewer 4* -- and a higher average * ranking?

[BirdofPrey76 0]

I don't understand these rankings. Why is UF ranked above us when we have the same number of commits, 2 more 5*, 2 fewer 3* and one fewer 4* -- and a higher average * ranking?

Rivals can't add. 3+10+7=20 not 21.

[AUbritt 611]

I don't understand these rankings. Why is UF ranked above us when we have the same number of commits, 2 more 5*, 2 fewer 3* and one fewer 4* -- and a higher average * ranking?

Rivals can't add. 3+10+7=20 not 21.

Yeah, I just figured we had one they ranked below 3*.

Checked -- they have Devaroe Lawrence ranked 2*. Still, if we have the same number of recruits and a higher average star ranking, shouldn't we be ranked higher?!

[ellitor 33,114]

I don't understand these rankings. Why is UF ranked above us when we have the same number of commits, 2 more 5*, 2 fewer 3* and one fewer 4* -- and a higher average * ranking?

Rivals can't add. 3+10+7=20 not 21.

Yeah, I just figured we had one they ranked below 3*.

Checked -- they have Devaroe Lawrence ranked 2*. Still, if we have the same number of recruits and a higher average star ranking, shouldn't we be ranked higher?!

Because it's about more than stars an average. Points are based on their Rivals rating and bonus points id players are in the Rivals 250. Thier rankings are very simple and explained thoroughly in the OP of the All Things Class Rankings thread Pinned near the top of this forum. Link Quick example. KD Cannom is the highest ranked 4* on Rivals right now. He has a Rivals rating of 6.0 and is 29th overall. Looking at the tables from the link above we see he is worth 188 points. Andrew Williams on the other hand is #250 with a 5.8 Rivals Rating. That combined is worth 108 points and is a big gap from Cannom. Florida has higher ranked players than Auburn even if they have the same stars. Also, we have some jucos. Jucos do not get any ranking bonus points. They only get their Rivals Ratings points.