Printable View
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by bulldawg28
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheewgumm
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.
Can we please put to bed that our team this year didn't have "stars".Quote:
Originally Posted by cheewgumm
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.
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.
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.
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.
Cox was a five star and I'd say only adequate at safety.Quote:
Originally Posted by Interpolation_Dawg_EX
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.
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 offersQuote:
Originally Posted by EAVdog
Good thoughts. AgreeQuote:
Originally Posted by CadaverDawg
Mathers & Walton > JRob.
got it. Should've went with the stars.***
Kincade > DakQuote:
Originally Posted by Political Hack
#WhatTheStarzSay
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheewgumm
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.
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by CadaverDawg
Not only do stars matter, so also does, size. Good Luck. :)
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by TUSK
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopsDawg