Grade the 2022 Recruiting Class

[SINKRATZ]

Where exactly did I say that?

Are you serious?

 

[bigbang2]

I am not really sure I follow. I don't think anyone disagrees that a 2-star player can become a great contributor. However, the evidence (yes, there is plenty of evidence) says that the recruiting sites that give players their star ratings proves that a player in the 87-89 range will outperform a 82-84 player (production on the field). This is not debatable because there is evidence of this being true. CU needs to live in the 86-88 range for half to slightly more than half of its class. Living in that 82-84 range will almost never get you a consistently winning program.

But you cant automatically assume every 2 star player is less talented which is what was implied earlier. Obviouslly there are guys that run 4.3 and have a cannon of an arm that are can't miss prospects that are 5 star rated. But there are a lot of guys that are rated 3 stars that outperform the so called 5 star recruits and are currently playing in the NFL.

 

[bigbang2]

Are you serious?

Yes I am serious, show me.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

But you cant automatically assume every 2 star player is less talented which is what was implied earlier. Obviouslly there are guys that run 4.3 and have a cannon of an arm that are can't miss prospects that are 5 star rated. But there are a lot of guys that are rated 3 stars that outperform the so called 5 star recruits and are currently playing in the NFL.

That’s fine, but unless you have a crystal ball and can tell everyone which of the 2/3* recruits will outperform the 5* recruits, it’s all pretty meaningless.

 

[bigbang2]

That’s fine, but unless you have a crystal ball and can tell everyone which of the 2/3* recruits will outperform the 5* recruits, it’s all pretty meaningless.

That is why I don't believe in the rating system. I am a traditionalist eye test guy. Picture the guy that brings a old school stop watch to test players.

 

[patebuff]

But you cant automatically assume every 2 star player is less talented which is what was implied earlier. Obviouslly there are guys that run 4.3 and have a cannon of an arm that are can't miss prospects that are 5 star rated. But there are a lot of guys that are rated 3 stars that outperform the so called 5 star recruits and are currently playing in the NFL.

Nobody is debating this. Everyone agrees that a 2 or 3 star can outperform their rating and every once in a while, outperform a 5 star. The issue at hand is that this happens at a very small rate. Just saying "we need to wait and see how these 2 star players perform" is really just saying I know you guys are right, and the evidence shows you are right, but I want to see it. There is no point in having this board and discussing anything then.

 

[bigbang2]

Nobody is debating this. Everyone agrees that a 2 or 3 star can outperform their rating and every once in a while, outperform a 5 star. The issue at hand is that this happens at a very small rate. Just saying "we need to wait and see how these 2 star players perform" is really just saying I know you guys are right, and the evidence shows you are right, but I want to see it. There is no point in having this board and discussing anything then.

Wouldn't say nobody. Some one responded in this forum implying just becasue some one is a 2 star athlete, that player is automatically is less talented. Carson Wells is type casted to be a less talented player.

 

[Bliff Cranch]

That is why I don't believe in the rating system. I am a tradionalist eye test guy. Picture the guy that brings a old school stop watch to test players.

You’d be a perfect fit CUs recruiting coordinator. Send them your resume and don’t forget to include a cover letter outlining your philosophy.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Yes I am serious, show me.

You’re arguing against 5* players because CU has a bad track record and going out of your way to talk up 2* and underrated guys. You seriously don’t see this?

I’ll ask you again - how much bigger of a sample size do you need (25 years? 30 years?) to see before recognizing that this level of recruiting doesn’t produce winning football?

 

[Bliff Cranch]

Wouldn't say nobody. Some one responded in this forum implying just becasue some one is a 2 star athlete, that player is automatically is less talented. Carson Wells is type casted to be a less talented player.

Yes, Carson Wells fits your narrative.

But I can almost guarantee that during his recruitment CUs coaches had much higher rated prospects that they had offered and had one of those much higher rated prospects accepted CUs offer, Wells probably would have had his offer rescinded.

 

[bigbang2]

You’re arguing against 5* players because CU has a bad track record and going out of your way to talk up 2* and underrated guys. You seriously don’t see this?

I’ll ask you again - how much bigger of a sample size do you need (25 years? 30 years?) to see before recognizing that this level of recruiting doesn’t produce winning football?

CU should load up on good players that have good character and fit the system. I want fast, athletic players. Doesn't matter if you are a 4 star or 1 star or 2 star.

 

[Duff Man]

Even with three star players, it is usually pretty easy to tell the highly rated three stars from the lowly rated three stars.

 

[SINKRATZ]

CU should load up on good players that have good character and fit the system. I want fast, athletic players. Doesn't matter if you are a 4 star or 1 star or 2 star.

I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that athleticism and speed are factors in the rating systems.

I also think you (and the other recruiting apologists) focus too much on 5* players as if that’s what people upset about recruiting want or expect. This program could be light years better than it is now without ever getting another 5* again.

 

[bigbang2]

How many guys actually get the 5 star rating? The vast majority are 3 stars. Personally player rating is not the first thing I look for.

 

[SINKRATZ]

How many guys actually get the 5 star rating? The vast majority are 3 stars. Personally player rating is not the first thing I look for.

Stop talking about 5* players - no one else is worried about lack of 5*.

 

[ahoelsken]

3rd ranked class in the pac 12 is a D ?

I wouldnt want you as a teacher.

Who has it 3rd, Karl?

 

[ahoelsken]

How many guys actually get the 5 star rating? The vast majority are 3 stars. Personally player rating is not the first thing I look for.

No you want Cody Hawkins. 2* kid from some football powerhouse state like Idaho. He might suck, but he tries hard!

 

[GawainBuff]

Some of the most impactful players over the last 15 years have been under recruited guys. Landman, Chido, Phil, Bahk, Spruce, Brous, Solder, Dizon...

I agree. But I also think that's why we would have a few really good players on the field at a time as starters, but then absolutely no quality depth behind them. Occasionally, the guys who got no respect out of high school will turn out to be great, but the percentage of those players doing so does not create an overall depth in the program.
We've been completely snake-bitten with the few 5 stars that have made it to campus. We have so few 4 stars in our program, that we have to rely on a bunch of 3 stars turning out to be surprisingly great.

 

[patebuff]

Wouldn't say nobody. Some one responded in this forum implying just becasue some one is a 2 star athlete, that player is automatically is less talented. Carson Wells is type casted to be a less talented player.

I have no problem taking a chance on guys like Wells who show the athleticism and size you want. However, that should be 2 or less players per class.

Would you agree that CU should be living in that 86-88 range for more than half its class? I think that is more than fair

 

[Buffnik]

How many guys actually get the 5 star rating? The vast majority are 3 stars. Personally player rating is not the first thing I look for.

It's all relative. Recruiting will never be an exact science. Ratings are basically a consensus of opinion. They certainly can't predict how a 17 year old's body will mature over the next several years.

The way to look at it is that the higher the rating, the more the guy is the pick of the litter. It's really a rating of how much a guy is wanted by competitor programs.

So, ratings matter. Stars matter. They basically tell you whether you got the 1st, 25th, 50th or 100th pick at a position. And it's much better to have 1st & 2nd round talent filling your roster than 6th & 7th round talent. To continue the NFL draft metaphor, some organizations draft better than others. Some late round picks become HOFers. But the rule holds that those early round picks are much, much more likely to contribute or become stars. They are deservedly more valued.

I'm taking the time to explain this, because you must not understand as it's not something you can disagree with.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

It's all relative. Recruiting will never be an exact science. Ratings are basically a consensus of opinion. They certainly can't predict how a 17 year old's body will mature over the next several years.

The way to look at it is that the higher the rating, the more the guy is the pick of the litter. It's really a rating of how much a guy is wanted by competitor programs.

So, ratings matter. Stars matter. They basically tell you whether you got the 1st, 25th, 50th or 100th pick at a position. And it's much better to have 1st & 2nd round talent filling your roster than 6th & 7th round talent. To continue the NFL draft metaphor, some organizations draft better than others. Some late round picks become HOFers. But the rule holds those early round picks are much, much more likely to contribute or become stars. They are deservedly more valued.

I'm taking the time to explain this, because you must not understand as it's not something you can disagree with.

Yes he can. He’s the guy that shows up with his own eye balls and a stop watch

 

[Tatanka™]

I find that it’s best to imagine bigbang2 looking and sounding like Matt Foley when reading his brilliance.


I don’t think anything could get me to un-mute the politics forum, but finding out if he is sharing his wisdom there tempts me.

 

[patebuff]

Pac-12 football: Recruiting class rankings for the 2022 cycle

...

247sports.com

5. Colorado

Class size: 25

Total points: 186.91

At 25 signees, Colorado's 2022 signing class is the largest in the Pac-12, and 23 of those signees that Karl Dorrell managed to sign are three-star prospects. Pearland (Texas) safety Dylan Dixson is the highest-rated player in the crop. Dixson ranks the No. 52 player at his position nationally and as a top 100 player in the state of Texas, regardless of position, per the 247Sports Composite Player Rankings. The Buffaloes will hope that Dixson and his fellow signees will eventually be able to give Colorado a jolt after a disappointing 4-8 finish in 2021.

 

[Ruckus]

That is why I don't believe in the rating system. I am a traditionalist eye test guy. Picture the guy that brings a old school stop watch to test players.

The eye test, by recruiters and recruiting experts, is a meaningful component of how players get their star rating. Also, a stopwatch isn’t an eye test. So what the **** are you talking about.

 

[GoBuffs08]

247 says Alabama has 19 4* recruits in the 2022 class. Would anyone on here not swap any of those players for any of CU's 23 3* recruits?

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

247 says Alabama has 19 4* recruits in the 2022 class. Would anyone on here not swap any of those players for any of CU's 23 3* recruits?

Bb2 would need to see them with his stop watch before making a decision

 

[BuffsRising]

How many guys actually get the 5 star rating? The vast majority are 3 stars. Personally player rating is not the first thing I look for.

Yeah, cause the vast majority of players are average. Thats what average means. And average will get its ass kicked by exceptional the overwhelming majority of the time.

 

[72grad]

If memory serves, the last two 5 stars we got were complete busts.

 

[Preston Slaughter]

I can't believe this discussion is still going.

How can you repeatedly misunderstand averages, anecdotal data, the definition of the word most, small sample sizes, outliers in large sample sizes, and basically everything related to statistical analysis?

 

[bigbang2]

247 says Alabama has 19 4* recruits in the 2022 class. Would anyone on here not swap any of those players for any of CU's 23 3* recruits?

Depends on if the player can actually play or is a good fit for Colorado. Would you swap a 4 star that will flunk out of school or have other character issues for a 3 star?