Stars matter

[cheewgumm]

Recruit recruit recruit

[jumbo]

ok

[ShotgunDawg]

Recruit recruit recruit

Awesome thanks! Does that mean we get an extra win if we recruit a 4 star instead of a 3 star?

[Political Hack]

stars don't matter. tackles and TDs do.

[BLITZII]

I understand what you are saying about stars...............but true evaluation of a player both on and off the field is what matters.

We can all list 5* players who did not make it and 2* that did.......we can also list 5* who did.

Again, true evaluation matters unless you are only trying to win in February.

[defiantdog]

Stars matter to an extent with skill positions. You can't teach speed, instincts, and will to play. But proper technique is taught. You can't just throw a bunch of degenerates on the field and expect them to win either.

I'd rather have a 3* Running QB than a 5* Star Pro Style QB that runs a 7 sec forty and will break like a twig. But at the same, I'd take any 5* defensive player possible..... Especially at safety.

[cheewgumm]

If someone said " for the next 4 yrs you can sign nothing but 4 star players, sight unseen" or if they said " you can sign 3 star players sight unseen".... Which do u pick?

Every time we sign a 4 or 5 star we celebrate then say " stars don't matter"

[Political Hack]

Which group has more character and willingness to work?

[MaxedOutMaroon]

Name the six best players on our team (#7 in the country and the most regular season wins in school history), then report back to me on stars. Stop being butt hurt and stuck in the egg bowl. Like political hack said, which has more character and willingness to work? Is it good together highly starred players, yes. Does it determine how good you are, no

[Really Clark?]

If someone said " for the next 4 yrs you can sign nothing but 4 star players, sight unseen" or if they said " you can sign 3 star players sight unseen".... Which do u pick?

Every time we sign a 4 or 5 star we celebrate then say " stars don't matter"

I probably turn both down to take only the players I can evaluate. You can get away with recruiting like that in a video game but not the real world. Stars don't matter if the pieces and personalities don't fit. You can't know that without evaluations.

[ShotgunDawg]

Stars matter, so long as the recruiting website's evaluation is correct.

The biggest problem with the star system is that Benadrick McKinney, Dak Prescott, Ben Beckwith, Josh Robinson, DeRunnya Wilson, Taveze Calhoun, Matt Wells, Preston Smith, Dillon Day, etc... weren't evaluated correctly. I think the assumption that MSU just develops better than anyone else, is not entirely correct. While I do believe that MSU develops very well, the truth is that these players were not evaluated correctly by the recruiting websites. Whatever systematic way or scouting methods that the websites use, their system doesn't quite show the ability to quantify many of our players. That doesn't mean that our players weren't very good, it means that their system of evaluation was incorrect.

Assuming that recruiting websites were sound in their player evaluations, and the only question was scheme & fit, then stars would absolutely matter.

I love Dave Bartoo on Bo Bounds, but the biggest flaw in Dave's analysis is that he assumes that the recruiting websites have evaluated each player with the same effort, under the same criteria, under the same checklist, and offered the same amount of time to each recruit.

Unfortunately or fortunately, for Mississippi is that a high percentage of our players fall into the category of being under evaluated, when compared to players from FL, GA, AL, &LA.

The cause for this is that MS has many raw, under developed players, that come from small poor high schools, that are in the middle of nowhere, with no local news outlet, that have below average equipment to film games, and the player is likely playing out of position, due to the team needing their best player to play QB or some other position.

I'm not saying that we are recruiting as well as Alabama, LSU, Auburn, etc..., but I watch a ton of college football, and I can absolutely tell you we are bringing more talent than some teams the always recruit ahead of us in the star rankings.

[cheewgumm]

Look, I'm all for character and willingness to work. And I think we have found some overlooked talent obviously.

But you guys need to embrace reality. I know you can gce me examples of 2 star guys who
Made it big. But for every one of those there are 10 " star" players.

It's jut reality.

[HoopsDawg]

Of course Stars matter. Anyone who disagrees can exit the conversation.

But what matters just as much if not more is who are our coaches targeting and are they landing these players. That's how you judge a class. If they are moving on to plan B's and plan C's, then we are not doing a good job on the recruiting front.

For example, we really went after OG prospect Chandler Jones. Paul and Gene and all the recruiting guys thought he was MSU bound and then the day he announced, he committed to Louisville. A couple of days later we picked up a OG named Trey Derouen. Everyone said, See, we got a guy just as good. Trust the staff. Oh really? Because earlier this week we asked Derouen to greyshirt setting the stage for his decommitment. Then we targeted Geron Christian, he also committed to Louisville. Now we are in a position of scrambling for a HS OG. We will just have to see if we land a prospect with legit Power 5 offers or if we reach for a developmental (everyones favorite word) prospect like we had to last year.

[Eric Nies Grind Time]

Stars matter as an overall measure. You can look at the teams that have recruited well and they are generally the teams that are good. Do they matter for saying some individual player is going to be good? Not particularly.

[dawgpound]

Stars definitely matter but there will always be 3 stars who make it to the nfl and 5 star busts... just the way it goes but if you give me the option of a 5 star or a 3 star, i'm taking the 5 star every time.

[jumbo]

Of course Stars matter. Anyone who disagrees can exit the conversation.

But what matters just as much if not more is who are our coaches targeting and are they landing these players. That's how you judge a class. If they are moving on to plan B's and plan C's, then we are not doing a good job on the recruiting front.

For example, we really went after OG prospect Chandler Jones. Paul and Gene and all the recruiting guys thought he was MSU bound and then the day he announced, he committed to Louisville. A couple of days later we picked up a OG named Trey Derouen. Everyone said, See, we got a guy just as good. Trust the staff. Oh really? Because earlier this week we asked Derouen to greyshirt setting the stage for his decommitment. Then we targeted Geron Christian, he also committed to Louisville. Now we are in a position of scrambling for a HS OG. We will just have to see if we land a prospect with legit Power 5 offers or if we reach for a developmental (everyones favorite word) prospect like we had to last year.


not to derail this thread, but Derouen was a greyshirt from the beginning and Christian was not a replacement for him.

[maroonmania]

Stars matter, so long as the recruiting website's evaluation is correct.

The biggest problem with the star system is that Benadrick McKinney, Dak Prescott, Ben Beckwith, Josh Robinson, DeRunnya Wilson, Taveze Calhoun, Matt Wells, Preston Smith, Dillon Day, etc... weren't evaluated correctly. I think the assumption that MSU just develops better than anyone else, is not entirely correct. While I do believe that MSU develops very well, the truth is that these players were not evaluated correctly by the recruiting websites. Whatever systematic way or scouting methods that the websites use, their system doesn't quite show the ability to quantify many of our players. That doesn't mean that our players weren't very good, it means that their system of evaluation was incorrect.

Assuming that recruiting websites were sound in their player evaluations, and the only question was scheme & fit, then stars would absolutely matter.

I love Dave Bartoo on Bo Bounds, but the biggest flaw in Dave's analysis is that he assumes that the recruiting websites have evaluated each player with the same effort, under the same criteria, under the same checklist, and offered the same amount of time to each recruit.

Unfortunately or fortunately, for Mississippi is that a high percentage of our players fall into the category of being under evaluated, when compared to players from FL, GA, AL, &LA.

The cause for this is that MS has many raw, under developed players, that come from small poor high schools, that are in the middle of nowhere, with no local news outlet, that have below average equipment to film games, and the player is likely playing out of position, due to the team needing their best player to play QB or some other position.

I'm not saying that we are recruiting as well as Alabama, LSU, Auburn, etc..., but I watch a ton of college football, and I can absolutely tell you we are bringing more talent than some teams the always recruit ahead of us in the star rankings.

I tend to agree, we have certainly had our fair share of players we have NOT developed. I would put guys like Damien Robinson, Curtis Virges and even Justin Cox and Denico Autry (given their expectations) in that category. Doesn't mean lower rated players can't be as good or better than higher rated players but it would seem to be more of an overall risk that they will.

[HoopsDawg]

not to derail this thread, but Derouen was a greyshirt from the beginning and Christian was not a replacement for him.

We didn't ask Derouen to greyshirt to open up a spot for Chrisitian so in that sense, he wasn't a replacement. But in reality, we were/are looking for an OG prospect.

[Jack Lambert]

I wonder if you went back five years and research where each school ended up ranked in the College recruiting services rankings each year between than and now what would the average finish for the top ten in the CFP would be? Where would Baylor average being? Where would Oregon be average over the five years. Where would MSU be average. Where would Ole Miss be average? Where would State be averaged? How about TCU? We know where Bama would be.

Where is LSU, Auburn, TExas, A&M? Stars did not help them this year did it.

[bulldawg28]

Stars matter if your paying recruiting sites for information. Every player in the SEC is an above average athlete. It takes coaching to get the most out of potential and put players where they'll have the most impact. When coaches do that good things happen for the team.

[maroonmania]

We didn't ask Derouen to greyshirt to open up a spot for Chrisitian so in that sense, he wasn't a replacement. But in reality, we were/are looking for an OG prospect.

I really don't know why we would go ahead and ask Derouen to greyshirt until we had another guy better ready to commit? Christian was a low probability prospect for us from the word go so I have to absolutely believe we weren't stupid enough to ask someone to greyshirt based on the remote chance of getting him.

[maroonmania]

Stars matter if your paying recruiting sites for information. Every player in the SEC is an above average athlete. It takes coaching to get the most out of potential and put players where they'll have the most impact. When coaches do that good things happen for the team.

You are correct in that recruiting sites are influenced significantly by the number of subscribers they have for certain schools. If it was just unbiased evaluators out ranking these kids the stars would be a much better indicator but the business model of these sites have to suck up to the fanbases that pad their pockets.

[Really Clark?]

Look, I'm all for character and willingness to work. And I think we have found some overlooked talent obviously.

But you guys need to embrace reality. I know you can gce me examples of 2 star guys who
Made it big. But for every one of those there are 10 " star" players.

It's jut reality.


Actually most who are disagreeing with you, to an extent, are basing their thoughts on realty. You cannot recruit strickly from recruting services There are too many flaws in this thinking. Yes consistent elite programs recruit highly rated players. There are a significant number of those players who get rated highly because they get an offer from an elite school. If you recruit as much as we do in this state then there is a large percentage of players who are not evaluated properly from the beginning. The players are raw and many times play out of position. Even with Chris Jones, a highly rated recruit, the sites under valued him until late. Amazing that when Alabama started recruiting him hard he became a 5 star. Even with us, you normally see a no rated recruit become mid 3 star overnight when we offer. The same player in Alabama gets a Bama and Auburn offer and he is a 4 star recruit. He is no better of a player but the receuiting site perception causes rankings to be skewed.

[HancockCountyDog]

Recruit recruit recruit

Can we please put to bed that our team this year didn't have "stars".

Wells, Eulls, PJ Jones, Chris Jones, Wells, B. Brown, Richie Brown, Cox, and Redmond were all 4 star players by at least one recruiting service.

Dak was offered by LSU - he may have been a 3 star, but by offers he was a stud. Bear had an AU offer.

The only real position that I feel like we haven't signed guys in HS that are "stars" or have multiple BCS offers is OL. We have a coach that has proven he can mold guys into All SEC players.

[Interpolation_Dawg_EX]

I think the stars matter more at positions like o-line and safety, which we have struggled recruiting lately. I honestly think if we had just a little more talent at these 2 positions, we would not have given up the big plays on defense and we would've been able to run the ball effectively against bama and om like we did against most every other opponent. WR is a good example on our team that has been considered a weakness in the past, but with the improved recruiting and higher rated players, we are seeing major improvement at that position.

[CadaverDawg]

My thoughts on the "star" system is probably a little different than most.

To me, the only thing "stars" tell us is whether A) A recruit is more polished, B) He dominated a high division and very competitive league in highschool, or C) How much the player has actually been seen at all and evaluated.

I also think the system is flawed because you cant look at all states, and positions the same. In other words, a 4 star WR from MS like Joe Morrow, is going to be far less polished than a 4 Star WR from Texas, like Fred Ross. Why are those guys both listed as 4 stars? If you watched the highschool video of either one, you knew Ross had more front end talent and was less "raw" from a refinement standpoint. That it why I keep saying we need to do better at recruiting OL talent. It's not that we are recruiting bad players....it's that we are ending up with a stable of raw, undeveloped linemen that take a ton of development to reach SEC standards...much less All-SEC standards. Imagine what we could do with better front end talent. That's why so often people act like I just care about "stars" when it comes to OL...but thats not true. I want to mix in a few higher "star" players because they will have the potential to reach their ceiling quicker than most of the guys we typically get. Not trying to start the OL discussion again, I just wanted to give an example to help explain my point.

So as many have said...When it comes to skill positions, I want 4-5 stars if possible, but only if they are from skill position states, like Texas, Florida, etc. Not saying that all of our skill guys are behind those guys, because there are exceptions....but as a general rule, a 4 star MS WR is probably a 3Star or worse in Texas in terms of front end talent and refinement. The opposite is typically true for Defensive Linemen and Running Backs though. Since our MS high schools are built around the power running game for the most part, we usually have really good RB and DL talent. We also have good LB talent.

And Dan deserves a ton more credit for his recruitment of so many small highschool QB's in MS. These kids are typically head and shoulders the best athlete on these teams, but they are playing out of position because their coach has nobody else that can generate offense. So we end up signing a bunch of raw athletes that have been playing "wildcat" QB their entire life. Truth is, many of these guys are 4 Star caliber athletes that are simply out of position. So we are able to mold them into Safeties, Corners, Slot WR's (Gabe, Jameon), and even stud Linebackers (BMac).

So, while I think stars matter....they really don't mean as much as they could if they weren't so flawed overall. That's why I keep up with recruiting some, but I don't get bent out of shape over certain recruits unless I actually think they are worthy of their star rating.

[EAVdog]

This class has a lot of stars in it. Also the recruiting services have a. caught on to the fact that Mullen is a good judge of talent and will rate a kid accordingly, and b. they are spending a lot more time in Starkville at our camps.

I doubt we have a lot of 2 star diamonds in the future. See Traver Jung, went from not rated to 4 star. Mullen just found him first.

[Johnson85]

I think the stars matter more at positions like o-line and safety, which we have struggled recruiting lately. I honestly think if we had just a little more talent at these 2 positions, we would not have given up the big plays on defense and we would've been able to run the ball effectively against bama and om like we did against most every other opponent. WR is a good example on our team that has been considered a weakness in the past, but with the improved recruiting and higher rated players, we are seeing major improvement at that position.

Cox was a five star and I'd say only adequate at safety.

OL is the position where I think stars matter the least. Lots of people get rated high strictly for being large in high school like Damien Robinson. Lots of people like Justin Senior are rated 2 star because they are going to require at least two years to put enough weight on to be effective. There are some can't miss prospects, but most prospects, even highly rated ones, are going to take a year to be adequate and two years to fully develop. That's hard even for coaches to project and the recruiting sites are pretty much completely incapable of it.

[HoopsDawg]

This class has a lot of stars in it. Also the recruiting services have a. caught on to the fact that Mullen is a good judge of talent and will rate a kid accordingly, and b. they are spending a lot more time in Starkville at our camps.

I doubt we have a lot of 2 star diamonds in the future. See Traver Jung, went from not rated to 4 star. Mullen just found him first.

247sports with Paul and Robbie have basically eliminated 2 stars from Ms State recruiting. So how do you evaulate a class. 1) are we landing our obvious top targets 2)what are said recruits other Power 5 offers

[ShotgunDawg]

My thoughts on the "star" system is probably a little different than most.

To me, the only thing "stars" tell us is whether A) A recruit is more polished, B) He dominated a high division and very competitive league in highschool, or C) How much the player has actually been seen at all and evaluated.

I also think the system is flawed because you cant look at all states, and positions the same. In other words, a 4 star WR from MS like Joe Morrow, is going to be far less polished than a 4 Star WR from Texas, like Fred Ross. Why are those guys both listed as 4 stars? If you watched the highschool video of either one, you knew Ross had more front end talent and was less "raw" from a refinement standpoint. That it why I keep saying we need to do better at recruiting OL talent. It's not that we are recruiting bad players....it's that we are ending up with a stable of raw, undeveloped linemen that take a ton of development to reach SEC standards...much less All-SEC standards. Imagine what we could do with better front end talent. That's why so often people act like I just care about "stars" when it comes to OL...but thats not true. I want to mix in a few higher "star" players because they will have the potential to reach their ceiling quicker than most of the guys we typically get. Not trying to start the OL discussion again, I just wanted to give an example to help explain my point.

So as many have said...When it comes to skill positions, I want 4-5 stars if possible, but only if they are from skill position states, like Texas, Florida, etc. Not saying that all of our skill guys are behind those guys, because there are exceptions....but as a general rule, a 4 star MS WR is probably a 3Star or worse in Texas in terms of front end talent and refinement. The opposite is typically true for Defensive Linemen and Running Backs though. Since our MS high schools are built around the power running game for the most part, we usually have really good RB and DL talent. We also have good LB talent.

And Dan deserves a ton more credit for his recruitment of so many small highschool QB's in MS. These kids are typically head and shoulders the best athlete on these teams, but they are playing out of position because their coach has nobody else that can generate offense. So we end up signing a bunch of raw athletes that have been playing "wildcat" QB their entire life. Truth is, many of these guys are 4 Star caliber athletes that are simply out of position. So we are able to mold them into Safeties, Corners, Slot WR's (Gabe, Jameon), and even stud Linebackers (BMac).

So, while I think stars matter....they really don't mean as much as they could if they weren't so flawed overall. That's why I keep up with recruiting some, but I don't get bent out of shape over certain recruits unless I actually think they are worthy of their star rating.

Good thoughts. Agree

[Political Hack]

Mathers & Walton > JRob.

got it. Should've went with the stars.***

[CadaverDawg]

Mathers & Walton > JRob.

got it. Should've went with the stars.***

Kincade > Dak

#WhatTheStarzSay

[Tbonewannabe]

Look, I'm all for character and willingness to work. And I think we have found some overlooked talent obviously.

But you guys need to embrace reality. I know you can gce me examples of 2 star guys who
Made it big. But for every one of those there are 10 " star" players.

It's jut reality.

If Chris Jones didn't play in a couple of All Star games he would have been a 2 star. No matter how much athletically gifted and having great stats, those all star games gave him the recognition to get rated.

I will say it seems more 5 star players are ready day 1 to play where 2 star guys are people that might develop into better players in year 3, 4, or 5. That development is where coaches' evaluations are the most important. Patrick Willis was also a 2 star player. Some coaches like UM let the ratings services do part of their work for them and let them know who is more ready right now to help their team.

[Bubb Rubb]

Stars don't matter, period. Anyone who disagrees should leave the conversation. (See what I did there, hoopsdawg?)

Guys get stars because of measurables. Guys get stars because of who is recruiting them. Guys get stars because of who is coaching them, or what high school program they are in. Guys get stars because of who they know. Sometimes, the rankings are legit. Sometimes they are not. Personally, I'd rather trust what our coaches see in a player over what Rosebowl Robertson or David Johnson sees in a player.

Recruiting services saw a scrawny quarterback at Rosa Fort High School and labeled him a two-star athlete. Our coaching staff saw a kid with a strong work ethic and a frame suitable for added muscle and developed a first round linebacker.

These recruiting services don't see that stuff. How much weight can he lose/gain? What is his work ethic? Is he a cancer in the lockerroom? Is he coachable?

Not only should stars not matter...my opinion is that it's a racket. Too many people hang their hat on those stupid rankings, and too many of us get our panties in a bunch over it.

Trust the coaches that have proven otherwise.

Recruiting is not about stars. It's about relationships. It's about hitting the road, getting to know coaches, asking questions, and developing relationships. Chasing stars gets you Nick Brassell. Doing your homework and building relationships gets you Kendrick Market.

Rant over.

[maroonmania]

Kincade > Dak

#WhatTheStarzSay

Only reason I can figure Dak wasn't AT LEAST a 4 star coming out of HS is because he didn't have an LSU offer for most of the rating period and that is only because Les Miles is an idiot. I mean Dak had the size, speed and decision making ability needed even in HS and put up monster stats. Just another ratings blunder.

[Percho]

Not only do stars matter, so also does, size. Good Luck. :)

[TUSK]

there's a lot of good points in the thread all around...

as for me, I'll stick with "stars"...

I'd certainly rather get a 4 or 5* and develop/upgrade him than do the same with a 2 or 3*...

And I'd MUCH rather miss on a 4 or 5* (and him end up "just" being on ST, provide depth, and maybe start his SR year) than miss on a 2 or 3* and have a wasted skolly tied up for 4 years (or until he can be processed).

[HoopsDawg]

there's a lot of good points in the thread all around...

as for me, I'll stick with "stars"...

I'd certainly rather get a 4 or 5* and develop/upgrade him than do the same with a 2 or 3*...

And I'd MUCH rather miss on a 4 or 5* (and him end up "just" being on ST, provide depth, and maybe start his SR year) than miss on a 2 or 3* and have a wasted skolly tied up for 4 years (or until he can be processed).

absolutely and anyone who disagrees is in denial. one big difference between a bama 4 star and a MSU 4 star is that Bama gets commitments from kids that are already 4 stars. Where a lot of our 4 stars get their ranking after our site guy gives them a bump.

[HancockCountyDog]

absolutely and anyone who disagrees is in denial. one big difference between a bama 4 star and a MSU 4 star is that Bama gets commitments from kids that are already 4 stars. Where a lot of our 4 stars get their ranking after our site guy gives them a bump.

I miss the days of 1 and 2 star guys. Anyone remember the old borderwars site where if you had a 4 or 3 star commit, that guy was a playmaker. Now, you just don't know.

[Really Clark?]

absolutely and anyone who disagrees is in denial. one big difference between a bama 4 star and a MSU 4 star is that Bama gets commitments from kids that are already 4 stars. Where a lot of our 4 stars get their ranking after our site guy gives them a bump.

That's not always true at all. There are also a significant number of players that receive their ranking simply based on what teams are truly interested in them. BEFORE an offer even occurs from Bama the services are plugged in enough to know that such and such player is getting at lot of interest from elite schools so he must be a 4 or 5 star. A lot of this is just circular logic. What comes first? The ranking or the interest? The interest from the school precede the ranking and offer. This is not always the case with every player obviously but with a significant percentage of players this is what happens. With the advant of technology and tryout showcases things are moving at a faster rate and it seems that the schools are picking just from the recruiting sites but is not the case. And if you don't understand that then you are just in denial.

[cheewgumm]

If you disagree with me you are probably a NAZI !

[maroonmania]

there's a lot of good points in the thread all around...

as for me, I'll stick with "stars"...

I'd certainly rather get a 4 or 5* and develop/upgrade him than do the same with a 2 or 3*...

And I'd MUCH rather miss on a 4 or 5* (and him end up "just" being on ST, provide depth, and maybe start his SR year) than miss on a 2 or 3* and have a wasted skolly tied up for 4 years (or until he can be processed).

To be blount TUSK, on this particular topic, your perspective doesn't help much because IF you can have anybody you want from anywhere (which Bama, especially with Saban, is closer to being able to do that than any other school in the country) then of course you will stick with stars. That gives you the best chance to have elite players everywhere with the least risk. Our classes, unlike most Bama classes, are going to be normally AT BEST half and half between 3 and 4 stars and usually with many more 3 stars than 4 stars. So the question becomes do you take a 4 star over a 3 star sight unseen and that is a tougher proposition because there are a lot of high 3 stars and low 4 stars that are close in ratings anyway. If I can factor in things like how close is a player already to his ceiling, what kind of character does he have, what kind of work ethic does he have, etc., then there may certainly be cases where I want the 3 star over the 4 star even though it may lower my recruiting ranking.

[CadaverDawg]

Big difference between 3 and 4 star players, and 3 and 5 star players. There is a handful of 5 star players every year. Those are typically the cream of the crop and are well evaluated, and have all of the measurables. 3 and 4 stars are often interchangeable, and lack the evaluation that 5 star players get. When you are recruiting mostly 3 and 4 star players to fill your class, evaluation is much more difficult. Alabama is recruiting nothing but 4 and 5's, so they go after all the 5 star players and the best of the 4's....much easier to evaluate, and most of the work is done for them because sites spend more time on those kids.

That's how Ole Miss can end up with two 4 star QB's that can't compete for a starting job in their Junior season....Because they think the "4 star" means they're legit, when realistically Buchanan and Kincade are average 3 star players while guys like Dak are 4 star+. Freeze and company have shown zero ability to evaluate, but all the ability in the world to just throw offers at everyone rated 4 star and higher.

Look at these two borderline 3 and 4 star QB's Dan has gone after vs these two Freeze has gone after...

Dak - High 3 star
Dobbs - 4 star

Kincade - 4 star
Buchanan - 4 star

Now, who does it look like knows how to evaluate? All 4 stars aren't created the same. The fact that Dobbs and Dak were 3 star and 4 star, while Buchanan was a 4 star, tells me somebody in these recruiting sites is a lazy moron that is taking Yancy's word over doing their own evals.

[defiantdog]

Stars do matter to an extent. Alabama and LSU are loaded with stars, and they are the teams to beat every year. But on the other hand, Florida is loaded with star players, yet they suck. It's pretty apparent that you need a blend of star players and good coaching to be successful. One cannot be successful (win championships) without the other. The last time a team other than Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Florida, or Tennessee won the SEC was in 1963.

[CadaverDawg]

I would be interested to see what Alabama's Offensive Line was rated coming out of highschool. Theres and LSU's. I wonder how many of their starters were 5 star OL guys, versus 3 and 4 star? If I had to guess, I bet they have a mixture, and that they aren't all high 4 star and 5 star recruits. But I bet they each have a key cog on their lines that IS a 5 star guy....and that's what I think we need. There is no problem with our development on the OL, but we need to sprinkle in a few studs every now and then as well. Hopefully this recruiting class is going to provide that.

[maroonmania]

Big difference between 3 and 4 star players, and 3 and 5 star players. There is a handful of 5 star players every year. Those are typically the cream of the crop and are well evaluated, and have all of the measurables. 3 and 4 stars are often interchangeable, and lack the evaluation that 5 star players get. When you are recruiting mostly 3 and 4 star players to fill your class, evaluation is much more difficult. Alabama is recruiting nothing but 4 and 5's, so they go after all the 5 star players and the best of the 4's....much easier to evaluate, and most of the work is done for them because sites spend more time on those kids.

That's how Ole Miss can end up with two 4 star QB's that can't compete for a starting job in their Junior season....Because they think the "4 star" means they're legit, when realistically Buchanan and Kincade are average 3 star players while guys like Dak are 4 star+. Freeze and company have shown zero ability to evaluate, but all the ability in the world to just throw offers at everyone rated 4 star and higher.

Look at these two borderline 3 and 4 star QB's Dan has gone after vs these two Freeze has gone after...

Dak - High 3 star
Dobbs - 4 star

Kincade - 4 star
Buchanan - 4 star

Now, who does it look like knows how to evaluate? All 4 stars aren't created the same. The fact that Dobbs and Dak were 3 star and 4 star, while Buchanan was a 4 star, tells me somebody in these recruiting sites is a lazy moron that is taking Yancy's word over doing their own evals.

Totally agree with this especially if you are talking like the top third of 3 star players and the lower third of 4 star players. Fine line of difference in that group.

[CadaverDawg]

Totally agree with this especially if you are talking like the top third of 3 star players and the lower third of 4 star players. Fine line of difference in that group.

yep, I agree 100%

[sandwolf]

absolutely and anyone who disagrees is in denial.

Yea, I agree. People who still try to argue that stars don't mean anything will just never be convinced, because the evidence that is out there is pretty clear....not only are 4 and 5 star players drafted at a much, much higher rate every single year, but the vast majority of the perennial top 10 teams recruit at a very high level.


one big difference between a bama 4 star and a MSU 4 star is that Bama gets commitments from kids that are already 4 stars. Where a lot of our 4 stars get their ranking after our site guy gives them a bump.

What site does this happen on? I have always primarily followed Scout, and there definitely hasn't been 'a lot' of players that have gotten bumped up to 4 stars after committing to us.....Champion this year, Aries Williams last year, and Chris Jones doesn't really count since he was clearly a guy that just slipped through the cracks. Now if you are saying that Bama gets a lot more of the clear cut 4 star guys (the top 150ish recruits) while more of ours are guys that just barely make the cut, then I can agree with that.....but this is the first time I have ever heard someone say that recruits get a bump after committing to us.

[defiantdog]

I would be interested to see what Alabama's Offensive Line was rated coming out of highschool. Theres and LSU's. I wonder how many of their starters were 5 star OL guys, versus 3 and 4 star? If I had to guess, I bet they have a mixture, and that they aren't all high 4 star and 5 star recruits. But I bet they each have a key cog on their lines that IS a 5 star guy....and that's what I think we need. There is no problem with our development on the OL, but we need to sprinkle in a few studs every now and then as well. Hopefully this recruiting class is going to provide that.

Cam Robinson - 5*, Arie Kouandjio - 4* LG, Ryan Kelly - 4* C, Leon Brown - 4* RG, Austin Shepard - 3* RT..... I think I have that right. To be fair, Leon Brown is Juco guy.

[CadaverDawg]

Cam Robinson - 5*, Arie Kouandjio - 4* LG, Ryan Kelly - 4* C, Leon Brown - 4* RG, Austin Shepard - 3* RT..... I think I have that right. To be fair, Leon Brown is Juco guy.

Thanks. One Elite guy, 2 more highly rated high school guys, a 3 star development guy, and a nice JUCO. We can, and should, be able to recruit a line closer to this. Hopefully this year is a springboard if we can get Rankin and our current commits to sign.

[sandwolf]

It's pretty apparent that you need a blend of star players and good coaching to be successful. One cannot be successful (win championships) without the other. The last time a team other than Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Georgia, Florida, or Tennessee won the SEC was in 1963.

This all day.

[Really Clark?]

Thanks. One Elite guy, 2 more highly rated high school guys, a 3 star development guy, and a nice JUCO. We can, and should, be able to recruit a line closer to this. Hopefully this year is a springboard if we can get Rankin and our current commits to sign.

I think the problem is getting a very highly rated OL. You usually only have probably 3-4 5 star guys each class, some less. The mid to upper 4 star guys are more plentiful but again your only talking about 60 total 4 star OL and up in the entire country. Hopefully our recruiting will be more closely like the last two years and build on that to pull a few more really good OL.

[Really Clark?]

Yea, I agree. People who still try to argue that stars don't mean anything will just never be convinced, because the evidence that is out there is pretty clear....not only are 4 and 5 star players drafted at a much, much higher rate every single year, but the vast majority of the perennial top 10 teams recruit at a very high level.



What site does this happen on? I have always primarily followed Scout, and there definitely hasn't been 'a lot' of players that have gotten bumped up to 4 stars after committing to us.....Champion this year, Aries Williams last year, and Chris Jones doesn't really count since he was clearly a guy that just slipped through the cracks. Now if you are saying that Bama gets a lot more of the clear cut 4 star guys (the top 150ish recruits) while more of ours are guys that just barely make the cut, then I can agree with that.....but this is the first time I have ever heard someone say that recruits get a bump after committing to us.

I think what a lot of people disagree on is how the players are ranked and when. It's circular. The really elite schools get great players and can target higher profile athletes. The problem is the belief that they just sit around waiting for the recruiting sites to publish a list and go recruiting off of that. A majority of the players have been scouted and charted for a number of years by the schools prior to a ranking.

[Johnson85]

there's a lot of good points in the thread all around...

as for me, I'll stick with "stars"...



But Saban doesn't even agree with this. I suspect Saban could have had his pick from quite a few player with more stars than Arenas (or whatever the CBs name was) when he offered him. Granted I think Arenas was one of the last players he offered, but I'm sure there were still some high 3 stars or low four stars still available at the time (or that would have decommitted for a Bama offer). Luckily for Saban, Crooms could see that Arenas clearly wasn't worth a scholarship.

[SheltonChoked]

I agree Cadaver.

Here are my thoughts.

Star's matter. Especially in huge markets/ and or high profile teams. If we have a rated guy from MC, Prep, a big Memphis school, a Houston, TX school, etc., he's got the ability to play early. If he's got his head on straight, probably play well too.

Where Dan has made his hay is the small town, out of position athlete. There, stars are not worth the electrons.

The NFL hall of fame has 8 people born in Mississippi in it. Here's the list:

Lem Barney - Gulfport JSU Pre-integration
Willie Brown - Yazoo City Grambling Pre-integration
Frank (Bruiser) Kinard - Pelahatchie Ole Miss Pre-integration
Walter Payton - Columbia JSU Pre-integration
Jerry Rice - Starkville Valley HUGE MISS
Billy Shaw - Natchez GA Tech Pre-integration
Jackie Slater - Jackson JSU
Jackie Smith - Columbia Pre-integration

Only three of these guys are from arguably large towns in Mississippi. And I'd bet Dan would have been on all of them if they were around now. Would they have signed with MSU, maybe, maybe not. This staff has proven to me that they have an eye for what talent can be.

The problem with recruiting sites is that the people evaluating the players are not good at player development or scouting. You know how I know that? Their job. If they were really good, I think the NFL, NBA, and MLB have scouting and player personnel departments. I bet they pay more than scout.com.

Universities have scouting directors and coaches. I'll bet they pay more than 247.

[sandwolf]

I think what a lot of people disagree on is how the players are ranked and when. It's circular. The really elite schools get great players and can target higher profile athletes. The problem is the belief that they just sit around waiting for the recruiting sites to publish a list and go recruiting off of that. A majority of the players have been scouted and charted for a number of years by the schools prior to a ranking.

I am definitely not trying to make the case that guys like Steve and Paul are spending their days dissecting film of thousands of recruits and identifying these players on their own. Anybody who thinks that is definitely a dumbass. There is no doubt that the recruiting services begin their "evaluation process" by paying attention to which players are being recruited and which programs are recruiting them. If a bunch of SEC schools, USC, Oregon, Ohio State, etc. are recruiting the shit out of a rising junior, well that guy is probably one of the top players in the country, so the recruiting gurus put a star by his name. And with all the gurus all over the country doing that for the kids in their region, they develop a top group of prospects. Then they keep tabs on those guys and see who all continues to recruit who and that pretty much allows them to develop the initial tiers. And then they come up with their own rankings based on those tiers. So its not like they have to be brilliant football minds......they just network well and pay attention to what is going on, and that is why their ratings pan out.

[Coach34]

there's a lot of good points in the thread all around...

as for me, I'll stick with "stars"...

I'd certainly rather get a 4 or 5* and develop/upgrade him than do the same with a 2 or 3*...

And I'd MUCH rather miss on a 4 or 5* (and him end up "just" being on ST, provide depth, and maybe start his SR year) than miss on a 2 or 3* and have a wasted skolly tied up for 4 years (or until he can be processed).

Here's the flaw in that:

Alabama gets the top rated guys at each position. More no-brainers. But as you go down that list-kids are harder and harder to project- there are simply fewer busts in the top 5 at each position because they are obvious. On down that list- evaluation by the services are more of a crapshoot

[ShotgunDawg]

Tusk,

It's embarrassing that Bama ever loses a game. How good would an NFL team be if they got the 1st 25 picks of the draft each year?

[defiantdog]

Speaking of stars..... I still can't believe how different McKinney was from high school till now.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgZgmhalkpY


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCGgo1OszsQ

[TUSK]

But Saban doesn't even agree with this. I suspect Saban could have had his pick from quite a few player with more stars than Arenas (or whatever the CBs name was) when he offered him. Granted I think Arenas was one of the last players he offered, but I'm sure there were still some high 3 stars or low four stars still available at the time (or that would have decommitted for a Bama offer). Luckily for Saban, Crooms could see that Arenas clearly wasn't worth a scholarship.

I don't know... perhaps 5* athletes recruit Saban; or he recruits them.... dunno...

I do know that he's signed some (+<3*) I didn't agree with like Sunseri and Holombe... and I was proven incorrect...

but, until they suck, I'll defer to My Dark Lord...

[TUSK]

Tusk,

It's embarrassing that Bama ever loses a game. How good would an NFL team be if they got the 1st 25 picks of the draft each year?

this is correct.

however, I can't imagine how difficult it is to keep these guys focused for the ~36 months they are a part of The Process.

My Dark Lord has (IMO) done his best coaching this year... He had no QB, a poor OL, a young DL and no CBs.. yet he managed to get Bammer in a decent situation come year's end...

I'll take an NC shot on a "down year", any, day....

[TUSK]

Here's the flaw in that:

Alabama gets the top rated guys at each position. More no-brainers. But as you go down that list-kids are harder and harder to project- there are simply fewer busts in the top 5 at each position because they are obvious. On down that list- evaluation by the services are more of a crapshoot

I kinda thought that's what I said, Coach...

anyway, per usual, we concur...

[Political Hack]

he had 2 QBs and one that damn near becNe a Heisman candidate along with the best WR the SEC has seen in 10+ years , if not ever. Think about it this way.. Saban was given an offense to go along with Smart and the D.