It's not all about stars

BigRedBuster

BigRedBuster

International Man of Mystery
I found this interesting since this has been discussed here.

LINK

To give you a sense of how important development of talent is to unlocking true potential, I give you the Rivals star rating for each of the seven Big Ten players appearing in ESPN NFL draft analyst Todd McShay's Top 32 2015 prospects as of Jan. 15. The following is their star rating out high school:

No. 4 Randy Gregory, Nebraska defensive end: Three stars

No. 7 Brandon Scherff, Iowa offensive tackle: Three stars
No. 15 Melvin Gordon, Wisconsin running back: Four stars
No. 19 Devin Funchess, Michigan wideout: Three stars
No. 20 Maxx Williams, Minnesota tight end: Three stars
No. 24 Devin Smith, Ohio State wideout: Three stars
No. 26 Trae Waynes, Michigan State cornerback: Two stars
Click to expand...
 
That's great for individual players and all, but check the star rankings of the last 15 national championship teams.

 
I don't think the article implies that a team with 4-5 star players across the board isn't going to be more talented than one that doesn't (on average). What I get from it is that there are a lot of 3 star players (and even a 2 star here and there) out there that the "experts" just simply miss on. Sometimes that's because they didn't go to a certain camp or they play football in an area that isn't considered to have a lot of talent...etc.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Your link points back to this thread so I can't see the whole article other than what you've quoted.

People talk about college football recruiting rankings like this is the only sport and level where that happens. The NFL has plenty of stars who weren't 1st round picks, as does the NBA, MLB, college basketball, college baseball, and so on. Tom Brady, 6th round draft pick, for example, is a super star while first rounders JaMarcus Russell and Ryan Leaf are busts. But I'd still rather take my chances on 1st rounders and 5* players. Of course the odds are that some of those guys will flop, and some lower ranked guys will succeed. I don't think that means much other than law of averages, unless you have a coach who consistently exceeds with lower ranked talent. That indicates either exceptional development of players, or the ability to spot a gem in the rough, or both. The top two guys on that list are from Nebraska and Iowa. Are we to infer that Bo and Ferentz are tremendous talent developers, or did they luck into one guy (or two, since Ameer was a 3* also) who was going to come in and work his tail off wherever he went?

 
Landlord of Memorial Stadium said:
That's great for individual players and all, but check the star rankings of the last 15 national championship teams.
Click to expand...
exactly

Dave Bartoo (spelling) was on 1620 yesterday. he's gone back the past 16 years and adjusted the recruiting rankings based solely on AVERAGE PLAYER RANKING. Class size and the actual rankings were not taken into accout. It was based solely on regarded talent of the players. And what was incommon between 31 of the 32 National championship game competitors? Every single one had strung together 4 consecutive top 15 recruiting classes based on his parameters of average rank only. The only exception was Virginia Tech in 1999. But think about that. Every one had 4 straight top 15 classes. And he made it clear, you wanna compete for nattys? Better shoot for top 15 talent. it's that simple.

So yes, while there are numerous cases every year that supposedly stars dont matter, when generalizing the talent of particuluar teams and their direction, it actually does.

 
I think that has more to say about the quality of the QBs in this draft class because I don't remember this being a very strong QB class.

 
jaws said:
I think that has more to say about the quality of the QBs in this draft class because I don't remember this being a very strong QB class.
Click to expand...
That is probably part of it but I'm sure there were several other five starts and a bunch of four stars in those classes as well.

 
dylan said:
Check the star rankings of the two Super Bowl teams.
Click to expand...
Doesn't help Nebraska win championships. Some players are better in the college game, other players aren't stars in college but blossom in the NFL... it just depends on the guy and system he's in.

But I can't help but point out that the number #1 overall pick, probably Winston, was regarded as a high 4* or 5* player coming out of high school. Clowney, last years 1st pick, was considered the #1 player in the country coming out of high school. Recruiting rankings aren't a science and they're not a guarantee. But you have to string together multiple top classes in order to contend for championships.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRedBuster said:
jaws said:
Mavric said:
https://twitter.com/JHopkins247/status/580785849073209344
Click to expand...
I think that has more to say about the quality of the QBs in this draft class because I don't remember this being a very strong QB class.
Click to expand...
It might not be s deep QB class but it does include two Heisnan winners.
Click to expand...
Are you trying to make my point? How many heisman winners become great pro QBs? Manziel, Griffin, Newton, Bradford, Tebow, Smith, Leinart, White, Palmer, Crouch, Weinke, Wuerffel, Ward, Torretta, Detmer, and Ware were QBs that won it in the last 25 years. A couple had nice careers in the NFL but most didn't pan out or haven't yet.

 
Some kids develop and peak at 16-18 and flame out. Some between 19-22 and don't quite adjust to NFL. The rest bloom when they get into the NFL.

Stars don't mean crap in the NFL. But if you want to win a national title in college you better have a top 15 class. Only texas has won it with an average class ranking near 12, according to rivals. The year before their title they were like 19 I believe. (They had the lowest 4 year stretch)

Oregon is the only school to have played IN the title game without the top 15 average too.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top