Are you serious?
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!
Grade the 2022 Recruiting Class
- Thread starter BatBuff
- Start date
bigbang2
blindslighted
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
blindslighted
Yes I am serious, show me.
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
blindslighted
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.
Last edited:
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
blindslighted
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
Well-Known Member
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.
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
Well-Known Member
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
blindslighted
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.
Stop talking about 5* players - no one else is worried about lack of 5*.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Who has it 3rd, Karl?
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
No you want Cody Hawkins. 2* kid from some football powerhouse state like Idaho. He might suck, but he tries hard!
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.
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
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.
Last edited:
Yes he can. He’s the guy that shows up with his own eye balls and a stop watch
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.
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.
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.
Bb2 would need to see them with his stop watch before making a decision
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.
Preston Slaughter
Well-Known Member
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?
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
blindslighted
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?