Stars matter

[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.

[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...