Star rating for 2010 recruits

Donate To GopherHole
S

Stoodabaker

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
88
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Does anyone know when Rivals will assign star ratings to the 2010 class?
 

It might be more meaningful if they assign the 2010 ratings in 2015!
 

Exactly. They need to see who Florida, Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Ohio State and Notre Dame offer before they "assess” the “talent.”
 

We usually wait until the ratings come out before you boys attack them. Impressive.
 

i'll start

if henderson goes to OSU.....5 star

if he goes to Minnesota.......4 star
 


Goldteam said:
i'll start

if henderson goes to OSU.....5 star

if he goes to Minnesota.......4 star
Click to expand...

I agree with your thought in general but Rivals is pretty much locked in to giving him 5 stars because he is the leading candidate for #1 overall prospect in the country. If he commits to the Gophers they would probably just move him down to #5 overall instead of #1.
 


Stoodabaker said:
Does anyone know when Rivals will assign star ratings to the 2010 class?
Click to expand...

It will come in waves. First they will do the top 250. Then they will go state by state and do the top 10, 25, 50, 100, whatever. Then they will do all of the unranked players. Usually the ratings are pretty much done by June. I wouldn't expect our three guys to be ranked for at least another 6 weeks and more likely it'll be 8-10 weeks. I am excited though. Don't know if we have any 4 stars yet but Konrad and Jimmy may both make the grade. Don't know much about the other guy other than his limited offer list.
 

Handsome Pete said:
It will come in waves. First they will do the top 250. Then they will go state by state and do the top 10, 25, 50, 100, whatever. Then they will do all of the unranked players. Usually the ratings are pretty much done by June. I wouldn't expect our three guys to be ranked for at least another 6 weeks and more likely it'll be 8-10 weeks. I am excited though. Don't know if we have any 4 stars yet but Konrad and Jimmy may both make the grade. Don't know much about the other guy other than his limited offer list.
Click to expand...

It is a screw job if Jimmy is not a 4 star.
 




Has anyone ever looked at the All American team or All Pro team and averaged out their stars as recruits? I agree, if you go to one of the big name programs it moves your star up 1 or more.
 

Dr.Gopher said:
Has anyone ever looked at the All American team or All Pro team and averaged out their stars as recruits? I agree, if you go to one of the big name programs it moves your star up 1 or more.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly the average stars is just that ... fairly average. However, the best teams are the best because they bring is a lot of very good talent. I would say a five star player has a better chance to make a large impact in college than a four star, a four star better chance than a three star, etc.

Obviously the ranking aren't be-all-end-all, but you sorta hedge your bets by getting more of the higher rated guys.
 

Even a 90% sure thing misses 10% of the time. Even a 10% longshot hits once every ten times. As for me despite that they are both gambles, i'll take more of the ninety percenters.
 



Schnoodler said:
Even a 90% sure thing misses 10% of the time. Even a 10% longshot hits once every ten times. As for me despite that they are both gambles, i'll take more of the ninety percenters.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 

Knowing what you know about this kid Gjere, would you think any less of him if some website gave him a 2 star rating?
 

GVBadger said:
Knowing what you know about this kid Gjere, would you think any less of him if some website gave him a 2 star rating?
Click to expand...

Fair question. Although we all feel better when our guys have more stars, the more telling datapoint is who's recruiting him. When Ohio State and half the other Big Ten schools are recruiting a kid, he's probably pretty good. If the competition is Southwest North Dakota School of Mining and Northeast Idaho, he's probably not Big Ten material.

Obviously, we're all excited because a top-notch Minnesota player is staying home. We're also excited because we know how good he's reported to be -- on and off the field.
 

MilesTones said:
Fair question. Although we all feel better when our guys have more stars, the more telling datapoint is who's recruiting him. When Ohio State and half the other Big Ten schools are recruiting a kid, he's probably pretty good. If the competition is Southwest North Dakota School of Mining and Northeast Idaho, he's probably not Big Ten material.

Obviously, we're all excited because a top-notch Minnesota player is staying home. We're also excited because we know how good he's reported to be -- on and off the field.
Click to expand...

Exactly, and you should be excited. But whatever star rating he gets is meaningless in terms of what type of player he is going to be.
 

Keep in mind that "stars" are directly related to sales. Whether it is a website or magazine. Take a close look at subscriptions, or retail sales of the magazine. There are more subscribers, followers, and buyers of the "stars" in Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Oklahoma, Ohio, Michigan and Notre Dame, therefore to get more readers you give a player more stars. What does it hurt? Nothing. But realize Stars don't tackle, they don't block, in fact they don't score. What does it help? Sales. So to boost sales, feature a blurb about player committment and give him stars. If school x has 20 5 stars, and 2 4stars are they going to win a National Championship?
 

GVBadger said:
Exactly, and you should be excited. But whatever star rating he gets is meaningless in terms of what type of player he is going to be.
Click to expand...

He should be the #2 rated recruit in the state of Minnesota this year and his rating should be 4-stars. If he's not I will just laugh at Scout and/or Rivals because they got it wrong.
 

husker70 said:
Keep in mind that "stars" are directly related to sales. Whether it is a website or magazine. Take a close look at subscriptions, or retail sales of the magazine. There are more subscribers, followers, and buyers of the "stars" in Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Oklahoma, Ohio, Michigan and Notre Dame, therefore to get more readers you give a player more stars. What does it hurt? Nothing. But realize Stars don't tackle, they don't block, in fact they don't score. What does it help? Sales. So to boost sales, feature a blurb about player committment and give him stars. If school x has 20 5 stars, and 2 4stars are they going to win a National Championship?
Click to expand...

Your argument is flawed because it doesn't take into account other factors. The schools you mentioned have the largest fanbases in the country with the most tradition. A site like Rivals is always going to have a huge number of subscribers from those fan bases. It would actually be more beneficial for them to overate players going to schools like MN, big schools with fairly small fanbases who love a winner. GI has grown exponentially since Brewster took over and recruiting has improved, yet people still accuse Rivals of underrating MN commits. That doesn't make sense for Rivals to do since overrating those guys would give us higher rated classes and bring in even more subscribers.

The truth is that the top programs bring in more top players. That is why they're the top programs. Sure offers do play a role into the rankings but they should. The truth is that most of the guys we complain about being underrated weren't really underrated coming out of HS. Eric Decker was the one guy I thought was vastly underrated but most others were about right. Nobody in the country thought MBIII would be even an above average player other than Mason, all the 2 linemen people like point to as being underrated were small and undersized in high school and excelled in our system. This past year I thought guys like Hageman, Alipate and Garin could've been 4 stars but all have serious questions. Hageman seemed dirt slow in the UA game, Alipate is extremely raw and Garin is a tweener.
 

Here is the All BT First Team voted by the coaches and their Rivals rating. Are you ready for this?

OFFENSE
QB-Clark-PSU-3
RB-Green-Iowa-2 Offensive Player of Year
RB-Ringer-MSU-3
WR-Decker-MN-2
WR-Williams-PSU-5
C-Shipley-PSU-4 OL POY
G-Olsen-Iowa-3
T-Ohmberger-PSU-2
T-Boone-OSU-5
TE-Meyers-Iowa-2
K-Kelly-PSU-2
AVG: 2.75

DEFENSE
DL-King-Iowa-3 DL POY
DL-Wootton-NU-3
DL-Maybin-PSU-4
DL-Odrick-PSU-4
LB-Jones-MSU-3
LB-Laurinaitis-OSU-3 D POY
LB-Bowman-PSU-4
DB-Davis-Illini-3
DB-Wiley-MSU-3
DB-Jenkins-OSU-3
DB-Scirrotto-PSU-3
K-Mesko-3
AVG: 3.25
 

So an average of 3? I guess that puts them roughly about the 25th to 30th class ranks. And you thought recruit stars didn't matter.

coincidently thats about where the gophers finished the last two years. Good times ahead. Amen.
 

Bayfieldgopher said:
Here is the All BT First Team voted by the coaches and their Rivals rating. Are you ready for this?

OFFENSE
QB-Clark-PSU-3
RB-Green-Iowa-2 Offensive Player of Year
RB-Ringer-MSU-3
WR-Decker-MN-2
WR-Williams-PSU-5
C-Shipley-PSU-4 OL POY
G-Olsen-Iowa-3
T-Ohmberger-PSU-2
T-Boone-OSU-5
TE-Meyers-Iowa-2
K-Kelly-PSU-2
AVG: 2.75

DEFENSE
DL-King-Iowa-3 DL POY
DL-Wootton-NU-3
DL-Maybin-PSU-4
DL-Odrick-PSU-4
LB-Jones-MSU-3
LB-Laurinaitis-OSU-3 D POY
LB-Bowman-PSU-4
DB-Davis-Illini-3
DB-Wiley-MSU-3
DB-Jenkins-OSU-3
DB-Scirrotto-PSU-3
K-Mesko-3
AVG: 3.25
Click to expand...

Interesting that not a single 2-star made 1st team on D. I've always said athleticism on defense matters more because offense dictates and defense must react to what is dictated. The ratings seem to agree with that.
 

Beau Allen might be the number 2 in state, but Gjere would for sure round out the top 3 I would think. As far as evaluating stars...I wouldn't look at how many 2 stars make the nfl or how many 5 stars make it. You should look at the % of 5 stars that make it and the % of 2 stars that make the nfl. Obviously there are many many more 2 stars being given out, but I am pretty sure the % of 5 stars making it is greater then the % of 2 stars.
 

btowngopher said:
Beau Allen might be the number 2 in state, but Gjere would for sure round out the top 3 I would think.
Click to expand...

We'll have to wait for the official ratings to come out but I wouldn't be surprised to see Allen fall down to the #4 spot in the state. The state of Minnesota has a really good class this year.
 

The second part of the equation would be to do a comparison of the frequency of each. for instance there are fewer 5 star athletes than 4 star and fewer 3 than four and so on. And then get a percentage of those and compare it against the frequency of appearance on the BT first team. Then we can see. If we compare the curves we can start drawing opinions.

so far we know that out of 23 spots:

2/23 (8.6%)are 5*
4/23 (17.4%)are 4*
12/23 (52%)are 3*
5/23 (21.7%)are 2*

So i took a short cut and just counted up the 2009 committments to get a distribution. To be more accurate we'd probably want the three oldest of the last four, but this diestribution should be close enough and it's a lot faster to count up.

Out of 231 Commits

5* 3/231 or 1.3%
4* 64/231 or 27.7%
3* 106/231 or 45.9%
2* 58/231 or 25.1%

Step three well put first team frequecy (%) over 2009 total recruit (%) and see if there is an over achieving group or an under achieving group.

5* 8.6/1.3 = 662 With 100 being expected we can say a 562% over achievement for that group
4* 17.4/27.7 = 62.8 so we can say a 31.2% under achievement
3* 52/45.9% = 113.2 or a 13.2% over
2* 21.7/25.1 = 86.4 or a 13.6% under

So you could easily say that a 5* based on this crass analysis has a 500% better chance of being a first teamer than any of the rest.

It would be cool to do this as a time study using a larger sample size like the last four years for both the 1st teams and the total recruits.

With such a limited amount of 5*'s I wouldn't be surprised to find out a 5* has about a 20% chance of being a 1st team B10 selection at some point in his career.
 

Yeah, there are only about 30 5* players per year.
 

Thanks for looking this stuff up and doing the math. It looks like a team full of 3 stars that are well coached and motivated on the field and in the classroom should be enough to compete for a Big 10 championship.
 

Dr.Gopher said:
Thanks for looking this stuff up and doing the math. It looks like a team full of 3 stars that are well coached and motivated on the field and in the classroom should be enough to compete for a Big 10 championship.
Click to expand...

Agree in principle, but the best teams usually have a couple of (at least) four-star guys at the skilled positions. If you get motivated and well-schooled guys with the requisite amount of physical ability to do the grunt work and add a couple of dazzlers, it usually spells success.
 

Persnally, I think the 4 star recruits are the best! On the other hand, even 4 star recruits need very good coaching and also need to have coaches that will design their offense and defense to the strengths of their players. Then you will see 2 star recruits playing like 3 and 4 star recruits as long as they play as a unit. The ability of the coaches to do the right things on game day Saturdays matters a lot. The ability of the coaches to asses the strengths and liabilities of their players and then play schemes to maximize the strengths and minimize the weakness of their players can make a building team more competetive and can put the players in a position to have a chance to win.

Like I said though, I like 4 star recruits the best!
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom