http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footba...-you-shouldn-t-dismiss-recru?urn=ncaaf,216887
Dr. Saturday sums it up pretty well.
Dr. Saturday sums it up pretty well.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Why you shouldn't dismiss recruiting Rankings...
- Thread starter Darth Snow
- Start date
BlackNGold
Club Member
Good info. Thanks for digging this up.
the snark is strong with this one
I am not surprised by the results, but I am surprised at how consistent the rate of being named an All-American diminishes as the number of stars diminishes. A 5-star is about three times more likely to be named an All-American than a 4-star. Similarly, a 4-star is about 3 times more likely to be named an All-American than a 3-star. This tends to show that, at least for this sample, the recruiting rankings were extremely accurate. Common sense dictates that there is a correlation between All-Americans and stars, but I am surprised at how tight the correlation is.
this isn't surprising at all, altho i'd argue that there is a bit more too it than rankings from services. i bet if you did a similar analysis, but you used the number and quality of offers that a recruit received as the measuring stick, you'd get similar results. the services manage to protect themselves from this phenomenon to an extent by adding stars to players once they've gotten big time offers.
regardless, the message is clear. you need elite guys to have sustained long term success.
regardless, the message is clear. you need elite guys to have sustained long term success.
These stats also need to control for media/service bias. If you go to Notre Dame, you are automatically a three-star. If you play QB at Notre Dame and throw more TDs than INTs you are automatically a Heisman front runner and All-American. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying stars are irrelevant or not useful. But, I'd bet that the exact same biases go into how stars are assigned as well as how players get hyped and eventually named to All-American teams.
class01
Well-Known Member
This recruiting class will be a success if we hit on one of the QBs and develop a couple of decent starters. The probability of one of two 3 star QBs panning out is significantly less than that of one 4 star QB - but you have to factor in the lower probablity of both getting injured, ineligible or leaving. I'm not talking all-american either just 'all-big12 north'. All the other postions aren't going to fall apart because of this one class, but a decent QB here can make the next coach look like a genius (barring Hawk and Hansen don't pull off a miracle next year).
Last edited:
77buff
Well-Known Member
During Mac's gravy years he had very righly ranked recruiting classes - he wasn't winning with a 57th rated recruiting class. You might win in the MAC or WAC with that kind of class, but it ain't going to happen in the Big 12.
walk
Member
The higher ranked players go to higher ranked schools, play with other better players and get a stage to showcase their skills. I don't know if I buy into the fact that 4 stars or so much better than 3 stars, but the stage helps. If a 3 star goes to USC, they have as good a chance as a 4 star.
Buffnik -What other intangibles besides "Heart" would squew those statistics?
77buff
Well-Known Member
Read the full series on recruiting at
www.tulsaworld.com/starsearch
The top 25 metro areas producing recruits per capita:
Metro area Boys 15-19
Recruits Per 1,000
1
Honolulu, HI 29,366 135 4.6
2
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA 43,760 142 3.24
3
Birmingham-Hoover, AL 38,348 112 2.92
4
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 224,679 649 2.89
5
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 180,033 519 2.88
6
Jacksonville, FL 47,185 132 2.8
7
Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA 19,814 52 2.62
8
Baton Rouge, LA 30,390 75 2.47
9
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 192,695 459 2.38
10
Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL 19,099 43 2.25
11
Dayton, OH 31,313 70 2.24
12
Memphis, TN-MS-AR 50,959 113 2.22
13
13
Tulsa, OK 32,507 71 2.18
14
14
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX 210,997 453 2.15
15
Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL 18,519 39 2.11
16
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH 74,101 153 2.06
17
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 85,346 176 2.06
18
Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN 80,223 164 2.04
19
Columbus, OH 63,794 125 1.96
20
Pittsburgh, PA 80,799 145 1.79
21
Orlando-Kissimmee, FL 70,871 127 1.79
22
Salt Lake City, UT 42,057 73 1.74
23
Knoxville, TN 23,451 39 1.66
24
Nashville-Davidson--Murfreesboro--Franklin, TN 54,155 90 1.66
25
25
Oklahoma City, OK 42,780 71 1.66
TheEvilBeak
Member
I hear you but have NO idea what you are saying....Do you mean skew? If that is what you mean, there can be all kinds of things. Character, ability to perform under pressure, ability to pick up the schemes or even the ability to adjust to college life, etc. There is much more than just measurables BUT you need a decent combination of all of them to succeed.
I could have all the talent in the world but if I don't have the grades I won't have anything...or, I could have the mental aspects down but if I am too small, slow or slight of build, I just won't be able to compete.
Good answer! Character & Mental approach would be a huge part of it. However, I doubt any of those 4 & 5 star recruits that eventually become considered or chosen as All American fall into the too small, slow, or slight of build category. And yes, "skew" was correct. I'm occasionally dyslexic this time of day.
My post about the ratings not measuring heart and desire to be a Buff was a joke.
But if you were asking in a general way:
Recruiting directors / scouts for the services are not immune to hype. They're also not immune to being influenced by which fan base has the most subscriptions and shouts the loudest. Also, some positions are simply harder to scout (I trust a DT rating much more than a CB rating, for example). Next, there are a ton of players and it's not an even playing field as far as getting scouted. Some play for powerhouse programs and don't get to start until their senior years so they don't have much film to send until a lot of recruiting is already done. Some don't have coaches that do a very good job of getting film out at all. Some have the money to professionally produce tapes and travel to a bunch of camps, others don't. And some simply don't develop until their senior year such as a couple guys we got (Alex Lewis was a 5'11" OG as a junior and a 6'6" OT as a senior / Justin Torres was a 5'10" 190 lb nobody as a junior & a 6'1" 230 lb league mvp as a senior).
All you have to do is look at the NFL combine invites and who gets selected on draft day and it's very apparent that a lot of guys are missed every year. Those guys are just the cream of the crop, but there are a lot of guys playing in the MAC, C-USA, Sun Belt, WAC, MWC and lower divisions who could start on a good BCS team. The problem is finding them and knowing the difference between the standard prospects those guys get and the ones who become DeMarcus Ware or Ryan Clady. In general, the star system is a good indicator. It's well correlated to individual and team success. But it's certainly not the final word. Just like getting a bunch of big names and kudos from Kiper and McShay doesn't necessarily mean you had a good draft day in the NFL. It's just that the odds are really stacked against what was thought of as a middling class ending up as championship caliber.
But specific to this CU class: What if, for instance, Nick Hirschman at QB and Tony Jones at RB end up being All-Big 12? Those positions are so key that if that happens along with a guy or two on the defense being really good and pulling a few more solid starters... we would look back on this class and think it was damn good. Would our odds be better if our QB was Jake Heaps and our RB was Michael Dyer? Absolutely. I'd be flippin' giddy if we had landed those guys. But nothing's set in stone and a number of players we are landing look good on film and have a lot of potential... especially the QB and RB I mentioned.