What are star rankings based upon, recruiting-wise?

[PMWinSTP]

Finally a thread on this topic

Right? How in the world has this not happened until now?

 

[btowngopher]

You missed my point completely. If you think being able to identify 5-Star player over a 3-star player and that tOSU beating Akron proves rankings work then there really is nothing left to discuss. Buy a subscription to 247 and you know all that needs to be known.

I am missing your point I guess. "It is when you start trying to separate those teams in the 20-50 range where you are comparing 3* players out to 4 decimal places that shows the crapshoot that rankings are." Doesn't this just support the idea that ratings do work to some degree since there isn't much difference in the ratings of the players in that range?

 

[Spoofin]

I am missing your point I guess. "It is when you start trying to separate those teams in the 20-50 range where you are comparing 3* players out to 4 decimal places that shows the crapshoot that rankings are." Doesn't this just support the idea that ratings do work to some degree since there isn't much difference in the ratings of the players in that range?

Saying classes ranked between 20-50 are a crapshoot supports that rankings work? OK.

 

[btowngopher]

Saying classes ranked between 20-50 are a crapshoot supports that rankings work? OK.

I didn’t say they are a crapshoot, you did. I think their is a definite difference personally. But even if it is a crap shoot, 20-50 is only like 23 percent of FBS teams. I think you can still say the ratings “work” to some degree without them pinpointing exactly how that small portion of teams should stack up to each other.

 

[MplsGopher]

Right? How in the world has this not happened until now?

Thank goodness you'll be here to post in the thread, though, instead of just skipping over it. Amiright??

It's not GH if someone can't rain on someone else's parade.