STrib: Four stars or three? Recruit rating system views are mixed

[BleedGopher]

per Chip:

The star system has become so ingrained in the business of college recruiting over the past decade that it’s gained mainstream acceptance among fans and media. Diehard fans devour recruiting news year-round, and the star system helps feed that machine.

But as recruits revel in their ratings and fans obsess about the quality of teams’ recruiting classes, others, including some who feed the rankings, dismiss them as marketing tools devised from nebulous processes that are subject to influence even by coaches who publicly disavow the ratings.

Recruiting analysts categorize recruits on their potential as college players and assign them stars — two through five (elite). Recruiting websites rank the top players by state and also nationally. College teams then are ranked based on the combined star power of their signees.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/290447181.html?page=all&prepage=1&c=y#continue

Go Gophers!!

 

[hungan1]

Are there any regional or other biases in how players are rated? Some speculation about what colleges give offers to Kid A versus Kid B can influence the star rankings?

If it was very accurate, how come there aren't as many 5 Star players starting in the super bowl versus 4, 3, and 2 Stars as someone has posted earlier?

I like the idea that Jerry Kill rely primarily on their own evaluation & scouting on their recruits and how they fit into their system.

 

[btowngopher]

Are there any regional or other biases in how players are rated? Some speculation about what colleges give offers to Kid A versus Kid B can influence the star rankings?

If it was very accurate, how come there aren't as many 5 Star players starting in the super bowl versus 4, 3, and 2 Stars as someone has posted earlier?

I like the idea that Jerry Kill rely primarily on their own evaluation & scouting on their recruits and how they fit into their system.

Because there are only around 30 five star ratings given each year. Where as there are around 2500 kids signed by fbs teams each year. 5 star kids get drafted at over a 40% clip, which is extremely high considering they have to avoid injuries, getting in trouble, grades, and other obstacles before even becoming draft eligible. It's just an odd coincidence that there are no 5 star guys in the Super Bowl this year.

 

[die hard gopher]

Because there are only around 30 five star ratings given each year. Where as there are around 2500 kids signed by fbs teams each year. 5 star kids get drafted at over a 40% clip, which is extremely high considering they have to avoid injuries, getting in trouble, grades, and other obstacles before even becoming draft eligible. It's just an odd coincidence that there are no 5 star guys in the Super Bowl this year.

And in some years espn has as few has 12-18 5 star players where even the #1 player at a certain position isn't even a 5 star.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Are there any regional or other biases in how players are rated? Some speculation about what colleges give offers to Kid A versus Kid B can influence the star rankings?

If it was very accurate, how come there aren't as many 5 Star players starting in the super bowl versus 4, 3, and 2 Stars as someone has posted earlier?

I like the idea that Jerry Kill rely primarily on their own evaluation & scouting on their recruits and how they fit into their system.

This is what nearly all coaching staffs do. Recruiting sites exist and are as popular for one reason and one reason alone, the fans that obsess about the recruits and are willing to pay money to get all the "inside" details about them and their future. Coaches use scouting services to get film and databases of recruits and while they may use the rankings and evaluations as a guideline they would be foolish to base their recruiting on the quick evaluation of a scouting site.

Services like Rivals, Scout, 247, ESPN....they are 99% for the fans and 1% for the coaches. In spite of all of that the recruiting sites do tend to be somewhat accurate in projecting recruits as can be witnessed by the fact that teams that typically finish high in recruiting rankings also tend to finish high in their conferences. They are going to be wrong on a lot of guys (2 star players that become stars) but they are surprisingly accurate considering the number of players they evaluate each year.

 

[mnsportsgeek]

Are there any regional or other biases in how players are rated? Some speculation about what colleges give offers to Kid A versus Kid B can influence the star rankings?

If it was very accurate, how come there aren't as many 5 Star players starting in the super bowl versus 4, 3, and 2 Stars as someone has posted earlier?

I like the idea that Jerry Kill rely primarily on their own evaluation & scouting on their recruits and how they fit into their system.

Because they aren't rating people based on how they'll do in the NFL. They're rating kids on their ability to succeed in college.

Why aren't Tim Tebow or Troy Smith hall of fame NFL QBs? Clearly the best college players should be studs in the NFL.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Because they aren't rating people based on how they'll do in the NFL. They're rating kids on their ability to succeed in college.

Why aren't Tim Tebow or Troy Smith hall of fame NFL QBs? Clearly the best college players should be studs in the NFL.

Very good point. There are plenty of stories of great college players that can't make it in the NFL just as there are plenty of stories of average to unknown college players being very successful pros (Marcus Sherels for one, Jimmy Wyrick was another).