Adding to the discussion - 5 star recruits

[moett88]

There's a great discussion thread going on over on orangebloods about 5 star recruits (after THEIR aftermath :lol. Thought I'd share.

"I know this is basically another pile on thread on our recruiting misfortunes of late, but we seem to have a particular problem when it comes to guys who are rated as 5 stars coming out of high school. Here is a list of our 5* guys in the last 10 classes:

2011: Malcolm Brown
2010: Jordan Hicks, Jackson Jeffcoat
2009: Garrett Gilbert, Mason Walters, Alex Okafor
2008: None
2007: Tray Allen, Curtis Brown
2006: Sergio Kindle, Eddie Jones
2005: None
2004: Franklin Okam
2003: Tony Hills
2002: Justin Blalock, Vincent Young, Rod Wright, Bryan Pickryl, Edorian McCullough, Marquis Johnson

So that is 18 guys who were rated 5 stars in the last 10 classes. I will exclude Malcolm Brown from the discussion since it is too early to judge him one way or another, but how many of the remaining 17 lived up to their 5 star billing?

I would say only 3 really did (Vince, Blalock and Sergio). Some were solid, some got hurt, etc., but a 3 for 17 hit rate on 5 star guys including really only 1 hit since 2002 is really head scratching.

What the hell are we doing wrong?"

It's funny how puzzled they are.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

Jeffcoat has some potential. You're right on this moett88, Texas is where 4 and 5 star players go to die.

 

[Darth Snow]

haha. This is what you get when you recruit solely on Junior seasons and before where a lot of the success comes from being more developed than the other kids. Mack got lazy in recruiting and didn't do his homework. Fact. the "Mack Brown Curse" extends to UT as well :lol:

 

[moett88]

Jeffcoat has some potential. You're right on this moett88, Texas is where 4 and 5 star players go to die.

Classic!:lol::lol::nod::lol::lol:

 

[moett88]

haha. This is what you get when you recruit solely on Junior seasons and before where a lot of the success comes from being more developed than the other kids. Mack got lazy in recruiting and didn't do his homework. Fact. the "Mack Brown Curse" extends to UT as well :lol:

Will be interesting to see if this theory carries over to A&M from last year's class and this year's. In trying to keep up with UT they pretty much filled up their classes in the summer before the senior season started. Now they don't have any 5s and only a few 4s. So if they do well over the next few years as these 2 classes filter thru.......will be great support on the argument. Maybe 5 stars should be given until after senior season is over.

 

[Buffnik]

Will be interesting to see if this theory carries over to A&M from last year's class and this year's. In trying to keep up with UT they pretty much filled up their classes in the summer before the senior season started. Now they don't have any 5s and only a few 4s. So if they do well over the next few years as these 2 classes filter thru.......will be great support on the argument. Maybe 5 stars should be given until after senior season is over.

I've talked to some of the folks at the premium sites on the topic of ratings. They completely acknowledge that the big difficulty with the ratings is that they're largely based on how good someone is as a 16 year old junior and then the major adjustment comes with how they perform at the summer camps prior to the senior season. This heavily skews the ratings toward guys who develop early, don't have an injury or get stuck behind a blue chip prospect as a junior, or don't have the resources to attend a lot of camps. What most of them will acknowledge is that unless you're one of the elite programs that can lock down a top class in the spring, it makes a lot more sense for a program to wait until after the senior year to bring in the bulk of their recruiting classes.

In fact, I think it would make a ton of sense to have an early signing period for football. Maybe in August. Increase the number of Official Visits to 6 and allow them to be taken during the summer or held for later. That way, I think we'd see more focus on re-ranking unsigned players based off their senior year performance and get a clearer picture of the prospects who are out there.

 

[RK]

They still have a better percentage at 3-17 then we do at 0-1

 

[66BUFF]

They still have a better percentage at 3-17 then we do at 0-1

but if we get one 5 star to perform we smoke their average :thumbsup:

 

[prime teets]

miller was a five star. i give him 1/2 points for being ok. we batting at 25% baby.

 

[MtnBuff]

I've talked to some of the folks at the premium sites on the topic of ratings. They completely acknowledge that the big difficulty with the ratings is that they're largely based on how good someone is as a 16 year old junior and then the major adjustment comes with how they perform at the summer camps prior to the senior season. This heavily skews the ratings toward guys who develop early, don't have an injury or get stuck behind a blue chip prospect as a junior, or don't have the resources to attend a lot of camps. What most of them will acknowledge is that unless you're one of the elite programs that can lock down a top class in the spring, it makes a lot more sense for a program to wait until after the senior year to bring in the bulk of their recruiting classes.

In fact, I think it would make a ton of sense to have an early signing period for football. Maybe in August. Increase the number of Official Visits to 6 and allow them to be taken during the summer or held for later. That way, I think we'd see more focus on re-ranking unsigned players based off their senior year performance and get a clearer picture of the prospects who are out there.

It would be very interesting to do a late summer/early fall signing period but with a limit of say 5-10 LOIs. This would let some kids know if they really are "our number one target" or if the recruiters are just blowing smoke. I think it would even out the talent more than it is now. Does a kid take an offer to be one of the early signings at a middle of the conference school or does he wait for February for that offer from USC, Texas, Notre Dame, etc.

 

[White_Rabbit]

I think what we have now is best. Fill half the class early then finish it up and sprinkle in some late risers.

 

[Hank]

Marcus may have been a 5 star as well.

 

[JimmyBuff]

Maybe Mack and his staff are ****** at developing players.

 

[Burrito]

Maybe Mack and his staff are ****** at developing players.

So it's the x's & o's?

 

[moett88]

i've talked to some of the folks at the premium sites on the topic of ratings. They completely acknowledge that the big difficulty with the ratings is that they're largely based on how good someone is as a 16 year old junior and then the major adjustment comes with how they perform at the summer camps prior to the senior season. This heavily skews the ratings toward guys who develop early, don't have an injury or get stuck behind a blue chip prospect as a junior, or don't have the resources to attend a lot of camps. What most of them will acknowledge is that unless you're one of the elite programs that can lock down a top class in the spring, it makes a lot more sense for a program to wait until after the senior year to bring in the bulk of their recruiting classes.

In fact, i think it would make a ton of sense to have an early signing period for football. Maybe in august. Increase the number of official visits to 6 and allow them to be taken during the summer or held for later. That way, i think we'd see more focus on re-ranking unsigned players based off their senior year performance and get a clearer picture of the prospects who are out there.

good stuff!

 

[moett88]

It would be very interesting to do a late summer/early fall signing period but with a limit of say 5-10 LOIs. This would let some kids know if they really are "our number one target" or if the recruiters are just blowing smoke. I think it would even out the talent more than it is now. Does a kid take an offer to be one of the early signings at a middle of the conference school or does he wait for February for that offer from USC, Texas, Notre Dame, etc.

Very true! Wonder if it would slow down the wave of commit/decommit trend that's been happening too.

 

[BuffUp]

I've talked to some of the folks at the premium sites on the topic of ratings. They completely acknowledge that the big difficulty with the ratings is that they're largely based on how good someone is as a 16 year old junior and then the major adjustment comes with how they perform at the summer camps prior to the senior season. This heavily skews the ratings toward guys who develop early, don't have an injury or get stuck behind a blue chip prospect as a junior, or don't have the resources to attend a lot of camps. What most of them will acknowledge is that unless you're one of the elite programs that can lock down a top class in the spring, it makes a lot more sense for a program to wait until after the senior year to bring in the bulk of their recruiting classes.

In fact, I think it would make a ton of sense to have an early signing period for football. Maybe in August. Increase the number of Official Visits to 6 and allow them to be taken during the summer or held for later. That way, I think we'd see more focus on re-ranking unsigned players based off their senior year performance and get a clearer picture of the prospects who are out there.

yep - and if they are on a really bad team, small school, bad league or nepotism sometimes overrates a kid while a better kid doesn't get spotted, etc.

 

[moett88]

yep - and if they are on a really bad team, small school, bad league or nepotism sometimes overrates a kid while a better kid doesn't get spotted, etc.

Ain't that the truth!

 

[Wyo Buff]

there's a great discussion thread going on over on orangebloods about 5 star recruits (after their aftermath :lol. Thought i'd share.

"i know this is basically another pile on thread on our recruiting misfortunes of late, but we seem to have a particular problem when it comes to guys who are rated as 5 stars coming out of high school. Here is a list of our 5* guys in the last 10 classes:

2011: Malcolm brown
2010: Jordan hicks, jackson jeffcoat
2009: Garrett gilbert, mason walters, alex okafor
2008: None
2007: Tray allen, curtis brown
2006: Sergio kindle, eddie jones
2005: None
2004: Franklin okam
2003: Tony hills
2002: Justin blalock, vincent young, rod wright, bryan pickryl, edorian mccullough, marquis johnson

so that is 18 guys who were rated 5 stars in the last 10 classes. I will exclude malcolm brown from the discussion since it is too early to judge him one way or another, but how many of the remaining 17 lived up to their 5 star billing?

I would say only 3 really did (vince, blalock and sergio). Some were solid, some got hurt, etc., but a 3 for 17 hit rate on 5 star guys including really only 1 hit since 2002 is really head scratching.

What the hell are we doing wrong?"

it's funny how puzzled they are.

i actually take some comfort in this. To me, it confirms my suspicion that coaching, system andpost-high school development matter as much or more than getting a bunch of 5-stars. Physically, there is little difference between many 3 and 5 stars. It is also difficult if not impossible to adjust for talent or physical development upside. What that means to me, is that a program like Colorado can recruit kids for need and grow and develope them within a system. What it requires is discipline, coaching and continuity. I like our chances.

 

[moett88]

i actually take some comfort in this. To me, it confirms my suspicion that coaching, system andpost-high school development matter as much or more than getting a bunch of 5-stars. Physically, there is little difference between many 3 and 5 stars. It is also difficult if not impossible to adjust for talent or physical development upside. What that means to me, is that a program like Colorado can recruit kids for need and grow and develope them within a system. What it requires is discipline, coaching and continuity. I like our chances.

WELL SAID! I'm still struggling with the hybrid athlete thing that is becoming popular in high school these days. The husband and I were talking about it this morning and how much is it putting HS kids under the 8 ball when they go to the next level. I mean if you will need development to transisition from high school to college in a position that you are trained for, how many can be successful if you do not keep a position at the high school level. I know there are always exceptions with kids that can do it all, but are we setting kids up to fail or sit on the bench for 3 years before they really get a chance to get playing time. Reason I bring this up is because rankings and ratings are starting to favor more kids that can play more positions in high school. But are they translating when they get to college. Gonna do more research on this!

 

[BUFFset]

Marqueesha may have been a 5 star as well.

fify

 

[Wyo Buff]

WELL SAID! I'm still struggling with the hybrid athlete thing that is becoming popular in high school these days. The husband and I were talking about it this morning and how much is it putting HS kids under the 8 ball when they go to the next level. I mean if you will need development to transisition from high school to college in a position that you are trained for, how many can be successful if you do not keep a position at the high school level. I know there are always exceptions with kids that can do it all, but are we setting kids up to fail or sit on the bench for 3 years before they really get a chance to get playing time. Reason I bring this up is because rankings and ratings are starting to favor more kids that can play more positions in high school. But are they translating when they get to college. Gonna do more research on this!

I think this is a good question but I think that the better rounded a recruit is athletically, the better they will become. Especially on the line. I know there are good line coaches at some high schools. That said, I think they are the exception more than the rule. Especially on the O-line, the highly successful programs are junior-senior (some 3rd year sophmore) heavy on their starters. That says to me that we should be recruiting athletic lineman with good frames, quick feet and flexible hips and then putting on the necessary beef while we are training them in the fundamentals for a couple of years. I think this probably holds true to lesser degree at every position. When you have a a two-deep that is loaded with 1st and 2nd year players it really is an indictment on the lack of talent in the upper classes. I believe that is a major element in the diffficulties the Buffs are having this year. Football is a game of maturity, the more you practice in a particular system and position, the more instinctive it becomes and the more effective you become. In addition, there is a great deal of difference between a 20 year old who has been in a D-1 offseason program for two years and in an 18 year old who has been lifting with his high-school buddies for a few years.

 

[96 Buff]

I think this is a good question but I think that the better rounded a recruit is athletically, the better they will become. Especially on the line. I know there are good line coaches at some high schools. That said, I think they are the exception more than the rule. Especially on the O-line, the highly successful programs are junior-senior (some 3rd year sophmore) heavy on their starters. That says to me that we should be recruiting athletic lineman with good frames, quick feet and flexible hips and then putting on the necessary beef while we are training them in the fundamentals for a couple of years. I think this probably holds true to lesser degree at every position. When you have a a two-deep that is loaded with 1st and 2nd year players it really is an indictment on the lack of talent in the upper classes. I believe that is a major element in the diffficulties the Buffs are having this year. Football is a game of maturity, the more you practice in a particular system and position, the more instinctive it becomes and the more effective you become. In addition, there is a great deal of difference between a 20 year old who has been in a D-1 offseason program for two years and in an 18 year old who has been lifting with his high-school buddies for a few years.

This should be added to Stoudtpedia somewhere.

 

[somebody]

I've talked to some of the folks at the premium sites on the topic of ratings. They completely acknowledge that the big difficulty with the ratings is that they're largely based on how good someone is as a 16 year old junior and then the major adjustment comes with how they perform at the summer camps prior to the senior season. This heavily skews the ratings toward guys who develop early, don't have an injury or get stuck behind a blue chip prospect as a junior, or don't have the resources to attend a lot of camps. What most of them will acknowledge is that unless you're one of the elite programs that can lock down a top class in the spring, it makes a lot more sense for a program to wait until after the senior year to bring in the bulk of their recruiting classes.

In fact, I think it would make a ton of sense to have an early signing period for football. Maybe in August. Increase the number of Official Visits to 6 and allow them to be taken during the summer or held for later. That way, I think we'd see more focus on re-ranking unsigned players based off their senior year performance and get a clearer picture of the prospects who are out there.

Do they acknowledge that the programs/offer lists contribute to the star ratings? My point being, of course, that maybe many of these kids weren't properly independently evaluated by the rating systems and weren't 5 star talent to begin with.

 

[moett88]

Do they acknowledge that the programs/offer lists contribute to the star ratings? My point being, of course, that maybe many of these kids weren't properly independently evaluated by the rating systems and weren't 5 star talent to begin with.

Good question!

 

[moett88]

I think this is a good question but I think that the better rounded a recruit is athletically, the better they will become. Especially on the line. I know there are good line coaches at some high schools. That said, I think they are the exception more than the rule. Especially on the O-line, the highly successful programs are junior-senior (some 3rd year sophmore) heavy on their starters. That says to me that we should be recruiting athletic lineman with good frames, quick feet and flexible hips and then putting on the necessary beef while we are training them in the fundamentals for a couple of years. I think this probably holds true to lesser degree at every position. When you have a a two-deep that is loaded with 1st and 2nd year players it really is an indictment on the lack of talent in the upper classes. I believe that is a major element in the diffficulties the Buffs are having this year. Football is a game of maturity, the more you practice in a particular system and position, the more instinctive it becomes and the more effective you become. In addition, there is a great deal of difference between a 20 year old who has been in a D-1 offseason program for two years and in an 18 year old who has been lifting with his high-school buddies for a few years.

Good stuff! Now because I'm new to some of the positions... if you have an athletic linebacker that has the traits you are talking about but can add size to his frame, is that possible? Or are lineman an exception and only have the flexibility from O to D?

 

[Buffnik]

Do they acknowledge that the programs/offer lists contribute to the star ratings? My point being, of course, that maybe many of these kids weren't properly independently evaluated by the rating systems and weren't 5 star talent to begin with.

Other than the obligatory 2* they give to anyone who commits to a BCS program, not really. I'm not sure this is as prevalent as people think, either. I go through and do updates on everyone in our database pretty regularly and I often see guys downgraded even though they have committed to a "name" program. I do see ratings get adjusted up, but not based on a single program gaining a commitment. It's more a matter of them having a middling rating on a guy, seeing offers from a bunch of top programs, and then giving a bump. That seems fair to me, though. I think it gives a clearer picture of what a prospect's thought of if the offer list influences it rather than it being a pure opinion of a few guys who aren't even employed by college football programs giving their opinion in a vacuum.

 

[Wyo Buff]

Good stuff! Now because I'm new to some of the positions... if you have an athletic linebacker that has the traits you are talking about but can add size to his frame, is that possible? Or are lineman an exception and only have the flexibility from O to D?

You don't hear about too many linebackers going to the line. That would be what we would call "eating your way to a 3-point stance!" Generally, what you see is D-lineman going over to offense. When I was playing we pulled and trapped quite a bit from both guard and tackle. I lettered as a 5 technique tackle in a 3-4 as a redshirt freshman at CU and then made the transition to O-line where I started at LT one year and Left Guard the next. My first year on the O-line I backed up all of the positions except for Center. The spring during the transition was very very difficult from a pass blocking perspective but my athleticism allowed me to muddle through until the techniques became more instinctual. That said, I always felt that I would have been much much better overall if I had started out on O and kept with it all 4 years. No complaints here though. I think you take your best athletes and try to make sure they are on the field.

 

[DBT]

How have CU's four and five star guys faired? Not well. Hawkin's '06 class was going to lead us to the promised land. :rofl2:

 

[Buffnik]

How have CU's four and five star guys faired? Not well. Hawkin's '06 class was going to lead us to the promised land. :rofl2:

If we still had the better guys from the good 07, 08 and 09 classes, we'd be in much better shape. Katoa, Scott, Max, Givens, Nuckols, etc.