With three years of the College Football Playoff under our belt, the data shows what it really takes to contend for a title. Whether you subscribe to recruiting rankings or not, the evidence is conclusive: To win a national championship, your team must be an elite recruiter.
Gamecocks have their best recruiting class in 7 years. I’m happy with Boom.
“Those who have the ability to make a difference have the responsibility to do so.” Thomas Jefferson
Far from a gamecock fan, but they did sign a pretty good wideout from my alma mater. Watched him play a little over the last couple years. He’s a legit talent. Shi Smith will be one to watch. Was right there around number 100 on the Espn 300 list
Sea Pro sv2100/ Yamaha 150
I dont normally look at recruiting, but after the past few years, I wanted to know how the new coach would do. I read 6 of the top 8 players in SC. 7 four star recruits. somewhere around top 20 in recruiting class. Thats a pretty good class considering the past few years.
Final rankings are all over the place, most have Carolina in the upper teens, Clemson on the other hand is outside the top 20 in a few places but ranked 10th with ESPN.
’
Down here is where a signature goes but they can confuse and anger some people so I don’t have one.
The coots did good. Better than I thought they wood. The separation is still there b/c CU has been recruiting like this for a while now. Hence, while they are losing 4-5stars to the NFL, they have 4-5stars stepping up to play. Many having lot’s of snaps already under their belt. CU has redshirted 4stars ready to play this year. 4-5stars already committed for next year.
Boom had nowhere to go but up. Glad to see him moving forward and not backward.#5peatspursupneveragaingameon
quote:
Originally posted by Fishb8I dont normally look at recruiting, but after the past few years, I wanted to know how the new coach would do. I read 6 of the top 8 players in SC. 7 four star recruits. somewhere around top 20 in recruiting class. Thats a pretty good class considering the past few years.
Yes it was a good class considering and he is getting them back on track. Which is good it’s more fun when both teams are competitive.
quote:
Originally posted by CaptFritzFinal rankings are all over the place, most have Carolina in the upper teens, Clemson on the other hand is outside the top 20 in a few places but ranked 10th with ESPN.
Down here is where a signature goes but they can confuse and anger some people so I don’t have one.
Clemson had a better class though.
4th in star average only behind Bama, OSU and Stanford. Cocks were in the high 20’s.
Star average is my new favorite phrase.
’
Down here is where a signature goes but they can confuse and anger some people so I don’t have one.
quote:
Originally posted by CaptFritzStar average is my new favorite phrase.
’
Down here is where a signature goes but they can confuse and anger some people so I don’t have one.
It’s not new. It’s been used since recuritng rankings have come out. Clemson has had a top 5ish star average over the last 4 years.
Would you rather have a class that is 71% made up of either 4 or 5 star players (clemson this year) or 28% made up of 4 or 5 star guys (USC this year)?
It all depends on where you look. everyone and their brother has a different ranking. As I have said before, I dont care much for the stars because we have all seen 5 stars that do great and some that are a bust. we have all seen walk-on shine. So it really comes down to the character of the kid and the coaching staff ability to mold him. They all have talent…It’s how they use it that matters.
I’m glad to see USC is getting a good start for the Muschamp era. But it will take a few more good classes to dig out of the spurrier hole.
“Stars” are earned against high school competition. That’s like say you’re the tallest midget. No one knows how the talent translates until you take the field with comparable talent. I love how people talk about “Do you think such and such college team could beat such and such NFL team.” The REALISTIC answer is always going to be “no.” Regardless of how good a college team is, there are only a handful of players on that team that are “NFL-level” talent. EVERY player on an NFL team is “NFL-level” talent. I’ll take a NFL roster full of “NFL-level” talent over a college roster that may have 3-5 players (that’s being generous) of “NFL-level” talent every day and twice on Sundays.
Bottom line, don’t put too much faith into a “star rating” until that player gets a year or two under his belt of on the field experience against comparable talent. Only then will you be able to accurately comment on a player’s “quality.” Recruiting is a gamble. Always is, always has been. All of this “star rating” BS and ranking recruiting classes are nothing more than something for ESPN and Rivals (and similar organizations) to comment on and stay relevant after the season. It gives false hope to those looking for hope and it gives false bragging rights to those who love to brag about their team. Nothing more, nothing less. Sadly, some of these kids buy into their own hype and the minute they do anything that falls short of this false unproven hype, the same people that talked them up during recruiting are the first people to blast them in the media. These kids don’t know how to handle this adversity because they’re used to being the best player on the field (in high school) and the talk of the town and sometime this fall from false grace is a permanent one they never live up to the false hype generated by the media and the unrealistic/unknowing fan. To all of the recruiting hoopla BS and the unknowing fans that promote it and feed off of it I say, don’t tell me, show me. Tangible results are far more telling than any number of “stars.”
Bang and Fish. You guys are wrong. No other way to say it. Stars matter if you want to play for a NC.
Bangstick Did you read the article?
How are these tangible results for you?
The ranked players matter
When it comes to the playoffs, 13 is a lucky number. That is how many starters the last three national champions – Ohio State, Alabama and Clemson – had ranked in the ESPN 150/300 when they went through the recruiting process.
quote:
Originally posted by shevyBang and Fish. You guys are wrong. No other way to say it. Stars matter if you want to play for a NC.
Bangstick Did you read the article?
How are these tangible results for you?
The ranked players matter
When it comes to the playoffs, 13 is a lucky number. That is how many starters the last three national champions – Ohio State, Alabama and Clemson – had ranked in the ESPN 150/300 when they went through the recruiting process.
How many stars did Hunter Renfrow have when he walked on? Answer: 2
Kinda an insult to him by stating only the 4-5 star guys matter…
RBF
For every prediction (if you’re being honest, that’s all these “star ratings” are) of a high “star rating” that proved accurate, there are countless more examples of ones that didn’t prove accurate or pan out. That said, those instances of missed predictions get FAR less attention than the successes (unles the kid’s fall from grace involves criminal matters. Then it’s front page news). Let’s face it, it’s not good business for these “prognosticators” to high light their failures. Then no one would listen to them during the next recruiting crystal ball reading.
Shevy, I appreciate your opinion that some of us “wrong,” but don’t kid yourself into thinking it’s anything more than an opinion (just like my comments). You buy into the recruiting hype and you believe it to be accurate. Fans like you are the reason “national signing” day is a thing at all. More power to you, brother. We all look for different things in life to cling to. But in the end, it only matters how/if the talent manifests itself on the field, when it TRULY counts. How many “stars” did Hunter Renfro have coming out of high school? Conversely, how many “stars” did Stephen Garcia have coming out of high school? Granted, neither one is going to have a career in the NFL but which one was more impactful for their respective team? This isn’t the time to go all Clemson homer and turn this into a Garcia bashing session. I’m asking for you to be objective, if that’s possible. I’m sure there are many more examples of “no star” successes versus 4 or 5 “stars” failures out there but this came to mind first. Stars are based mainly on physical attributes. Football IQ only applies to certain positions (QB) and personal integrity gets overlooked the more “stars” a recruit gets. Hell, did you watch any of the “national signing day” hoopla??? Watching the playback on ESPN, some of these kids could barely put together a complete sentence…but they can run a 4.3 40 and have a 46" vertical jump an can bench press 225lbs 25 times. One Michigan State commit couldn’
Its not an opinion Bangstick. Facts and studies show that to compete for a NC you have to recruit at an elite level and an elite level means pulling in numerous 4 and 5 star recruits each year.
Of course you will find some 5 star busts and some 2 star guy that end up being elite. But OVERALL top recruiting classes directly translate to success at the highest levels.
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/174883892/predicting-best-nfl-draft-prospects-talent
Furthermore, 9 of the previous 10 national champions earned a top five recruiting class according to Rivals.com for the recruiting class immediately preceding their national championship season. Academic literature also supports a significant relationship between recruiting success and on-the-field success in college football (Langelett 2003; Caro 2012). Using data employed in this study, we find a statistically significant correlation between a team’s winning percentage and the ranking of its most recent recruiting class
Nothing is a sure thing, but to say star rankings don’t matter is just silly. Give even Saban nothing but three stars and he’ll never win another championship. I don’t get too hyped over NSD. As yall said, a lot aren’t going to make it for whatever reason.
To base your recruiting schedule around “stars” is equally as “silly,” if not more so. Hell, half the reporters and stat geeks driving these machines (Rivals and ESPN) haven’t even played football, let alone at the college or professional levels yet so many put blind faith in how they “rate” players and their talents. Now that’s silly.
I assure you Dabo, Saban, Meyer, Muschamp, Smart and any other reputable recruiter/coach is more focused more on what they see on tape and on the field from a recruit than how many stars Rivals or ESPN gives someone. To focus so much on a star rating system, one would wonder how coaches/recruiters ever did their jobs before such a “rating system” existed. Players have been recruited, performed successfully on the field, and have been drafted into the NFL LONG before someone came up with a “star rating” system. I’d be willing to bet the aforementioned coaches and recruiters would be more willing to trust their eyes before they’d trust someone from Rivals or ESPN and their “stars.” Take away these star rating systems and I’d still be confident the good coaches/recruiters are still going to be able to recruit the best talent.
Like I said, “stars” are fuel/fodder for NSD TV coverage and fan-based team/college websites/radio programs to talk about.
No matter how much it hurts, how dark it gets, or how far you fall…you are never out of the fight.
quote:
Originally posted by bangstickTo base your recruiting schedule around “stars” is equally as “silly,” if not more so. Hell, half the reporters and stat geeks driving these machines (Rivals and ESPN) haven’t even played football, let alone at the college or professional levels yet so many put blind faith in how they “rate” players and their talents. Now that’s silly.
I assure you Dabo, Saban, Meyer, Muschamp, Smart and any other reputable recruiter/coach is more focused more on what they see on tape and on the field from a recruit than how many stars Rivals or ESPN gives someone. To focus so much on a star rating system, one would wonder how coaches/recruiters ever did their jobs before such a “rating system” existed. Players have been recruited, performed successfully on the field, and have been drafted into the NFL LONG before someone came up with a “star rating” system. I’d be willing to bet the aforementioned coaches and recruiters would be more willing to trust their eyes before they’d trust someone from Rivals or ESPN and their “stars.” Take away these star rating systems and I’d still be confident the good coaches/recruiters are still going to be able to recruit the best talent.
Like I said, “stars” are fuel/fodder for NSD TV coverage and fan-based team/college websites/radio programs to talk about.
Of course coaches are going to trust their evaluatoins over a recurting ranking. But more often than not what the coaches see is close to what the ranking services see when it comes to the top players in each years class.
I will post these again.
Using data employed in this study, we find a statistically significant correlation between a team’s winning percentage and the ranking of its most recent recruiting class.
When it comes to the playoffs, 13 is a luc