id sure take a 4 star player out of california, texas, or florida before id take a 4 star player out of another state.
the competition is far better in those states than others
Until there's a playoff between the best teams of all 50 states to back it up, I say that's crap. When someone can prove to me that the state championship team of California is better than the state championship team of, say, North Dakota or Minnesota, I'll stick with 3-star recruits from the Midwest over 4 or 5 star kids from California or Florida any day...better attitudes and work ethics. Just because the "press" doesn't get to Bismark...or the people there aren't as inclined to flood the net with press releases and hype, doesn't mean the players there aren't as good as the players on the east or west coast...just not as promoted, probably due to the fact that the people from the midwest are not as pretentious as those coastal clowns.
--Let me start by saying, worst opinion ever.
Bet against CA teams against midwestern teams and you will lose a lot. Are you going to sit there and honestly tell me you would rather take the NoDak high school football team over De La Salle High in Concord CA that did not lose for 6 years? Or Helix High in San Diego when Reggie Bush was RB and Alex Smith was QB? Its well accepted that one of the reasons of USC's dominance is that Carroll was able to reopen the recruiting pipline in his own backyard that other schools were taking from USC.
By the way, nothing against the midwestern boys. Certainly there are many many great athletes there. But, numbers and stats do not lie. California has a bigger pool to draw from, creating better competition. If all it took was better attitudes to win over talent, then Illinois could have rallied to victory in the Rose Bowl after that clown did a flip into the end zone.