1st-Round NFL Draft Picks Then and Now

Donate To GopherHole

Jimmi Ward is a fine example that the stars don't necessarily matter and perhaps what matters most is a coach's ability to recognize and develop talent. I think we are fortunate to have Kill & Co!

Go Gophers!
 

love how pretty much every guy going to a small school is 2 stars
 

upnorthkid said:
love how pretty much every guy going to a small school is 2 stars
Click to expand...

Not sure what you're trying to say. They went to a small school because they were two stars not the other way around.

Also, half the first round were 4/5 stars. Say there are 100 of those per HS class that means approximately they make up 1/20 of the entire class but make up 50% of the first round. People that say stars make no difference like to look at the micro level (individual) when the preponderance of evidence shows the hit rate on high stars is significantly higher.
 

maroonedinCA said:
Not sure what you're trying to say. They went to a small school because they were two stars not the other way around.

Also, half the first round were 4/5 stars. Say there are 100 of those per HS class that means approximately they make up 1/20 of the entire class but make up 50% of the first round. People that say stars make no difference like to look at the micro level (individual) when the preponderance of evidence shows the hit rate on high stars is significantly higher.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, the link did not include the entire first round.
 


There are about 20 five stars every year. Over 300 four stars, over 1,000 three stars and over 2,000 two stars every year. The odds are definitely in the 3 stars favors.
 

maroonedinCA said:
Not sure what you're trying to say. They went to a small school because they were two stars not the other way around.

Also, half the first round were 4/5 stars. Say there are 100 of those per HS class that means approximately they make up 1/20 of the entire class but make up 50% of the first round. People that say stars make no difference like to look at the micro level (individual) when the preponderance of evidence shows the hit rate on high stars is significantly higher.
Click to expand...

That concept doesn't really make sense. We've discussed it ad naseum here so I don't want to restart it but you're going to get evaluated and offered on a coaches opinion of tape, not your star rating. I'm sayin I love it because it shows that the guys going to small schools, who probably don't get evaluated by the services on the same level as the high profile guys going to USC, despite the fact that they may have equal skill and are often found as diamonds in the rough by lower tier coaches, can still pan out to be 1st rounders with coaching and development.

What I'm getting at is, you don't see any (or hardly any) 2 star guys going to USC (I'm not here to start a rankings debate) and becoming first rounders. I'm just getting at that there is an exposure discrepancy for plenty of these guys even though the talent may be there, but they don't let that hold them back. That's it.
 

GophersInIowa said:
Just to be clear, the link did not include the entire first round.
Click to expand...

http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsport...-were-recruits-2014s-first-round-draft-picks/

there's the breakdown this year. 4 5 stars. 13 4 stars. 12 3 stars. 3 2 stars.

Rivals had 33 5 stars, 339 4 stars, 1194 3 stars, and 2000 2 stars. Given that the classes on average are similar to this, % wise, the 5 stars pan out more. The interesting part is if you look at it on a position type breakdown. They really seem to miss on guys at QB (scrolling through most of the 4 and 5 star guys, many of them you never heard of in college even), and how hard it is to project offensive lineman and defensive backs. Just cool to look at.
 

I would like a recap of the Texas roster of 5 star players. None were drafted.
 



As I understand it, the star rating indicates how players rank at that point in time - as HS players. It is not an absolute predictor of future performance.

Some players peak as HS Srs - others continue to develop through college. Some players are more receptive to coaching - others are not. Some players simply work harder than others. Some players get caught up in booze, drugs, women and other distractions.

Yes, all things being equal, a 5* player probably has a better chance of a long career than a 2* player, but there will always be exceptions. 5* players flame out, and 2* players go on to shine. That part of the fun of following sports.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
As I understand it, the star rating indicates how players rank at that point in time - as HS players. It is not an absolute predictor of future performance.

Some players peak as HS Srs - others continue to develop through college. Some players are more receptive to coaching - others are not. Some players simply work harder than others. Some players get caught up in booze, drugs, women and other distractions.

Yes, all things being equal, a 5* player probably has a better chance of a long career than a 2* player, but there will always be exceptions. 5* players flame out, and 2* players go on to shine. That part of the fun of following sports.
Click to expand...

I think it's a combination of the two. There are some guys who are rated high because of potential, not necessarily because they dominated in High School. There are also guys who absolutely dominate in HS, yet aren't rated that high.
 


No wonder Coach Brown was shown the door. if Charlie Strong coaches 'em up, they should be a top 5 team every year. Right now the are barely in the Top 5 in Texas.
 



GophersInIowa said:
I think it's a combination of the two. There are some guys who are rated high because of potential, not necessarily because they dominated in High School. There are also guys who absolutely dominate in HS, yet aren't rated that high.
Click to expand...

Also, specific to Mack Brown at Texas, there was a big to do, about how Mack was getting his commits early (Junior year). To paraphrase, he wasn't letting them take visits and had to be committed before their senior year. I think this was recent to 2010. Thus, he was by necessity making final judgments earlier than everyone else. Every recruit then becomes more of a projection, introducing more risk. And of course recruiting rankings are not going to waste time researching these guys after they lock in with Texas. Thus, the rankings are out of date when they arrive at UT. However, people still have those five star expectations. All that was necessary to tip the balance towards decline was a couple misjudged, huge recruits.

Has spillover affects on rest of squad. Players are given too much opportunity, others not enough. Guys who would develop don't, etc. A classic positive feedback loop. Strange, but it's not that difficult to tank a whole program when policy is based on an improper rhetorical argument.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom