Somehow schools like Georgia, TN, ND, Texas somehow are all schools that have been in that boat.... Georgia and TN lately have been just raking in high classes the last few years. Yet mediocrity is where they routinely finish the year...
Do stars matter? Pro-bowlers star rankings
- Thread starter proudhawkfan21
- Start date
Somehow schools like Georgia, TN, ND, Texas somehow are all schools that have been in that boat.... Georgia and TN lately have been just raking in high classes the last few years. Yet mediocrity is where they routinely finish the year...
I don't think anyone is under the impression that it is impossible to lose with good recruits. People think just because you can point to a few exceptions, it blows up a whole theory. It's like saying black people aren't faster than white people because Tim Dwight.
ND won 10 games last year. Georgia had a lot of recent success under Richt.
Stars matter - KF is the only coach who will try to spin it otherwise and a lot of Iowa fans have taken the bait of his 'great story' line when he continually references walk-ons who turned into starters. Fact is, if your walk-ons are starting that's just bad recruiting.
Our recruiting per * ratings and from a national ranking will improve when Kirk leaves.
Our recruiting per * ratings and from a national ranking will improve when Kirk leaves.
Fran also does it
Has recruiting changed since the advent of the 'star' system? Has there been a change from the 'blue bloods' still getting the best recruits? How did the AP and Coaches know how to rank teams prior to 10-15 yrs. ago without 'stars' to tell them who was better, lol. What were the Hawks 'Star ratings' when KF had his best teams in the early 2000's? How was the NFL able to pick a pro-bowl team in the 1980's (etc) without knowing the players HS star ratings? Lol. How did Michigan's 20 four and five star players lose to a team that only had 2 four 'stars'.....God, you sheep are unbelievable. I'll say it again, slowly, for you dense mindless grazers. The 'star' systems means nothing, has changed nothing. It was 'invented' to extract money from HS athletes (and their parents) through their 'camps' and 'services' and as a way to extract money from mindless sheep (with no lives) who will sign up on their 'recruiting fan sites' and argue year round about recruiting. KF is not the only coach that doesn't know what anyone's 'star' rating is, I have listed dozens in the past, but delusional grazers like yourself will cling to your delusions till the end. Have fun with your 'stars' halfwit, lol....Look how much it's changed the college football landscape, lol!
Your right ND was good last yr and put up 8-5 records mostly under Kelly. He's had 2 really good years out of 7. Georgia won 7 games this yr with a roster full of studs. but yes the previous 2 yrs GA had won 10 games under Richt. but prior to that they'd had a 6 win stinker of a year and another 8 win season. They can never get 'over the hump' with their fan base it seems like. But they do have a solid record if you go back 10-15 yrs that's for sure now that I look closer at it. One I only wish Iowa could say the same about but yet they do have better talent up and down their roster yr in and yr out. Kinda blowing up my previous argument here haha
ShockHawk22
Well-Known Member
I think Stars matter. The teams who consistent have the highest recruiting classes are usually in the upper tier of the success level. Are they everything? No, and I think KF does a good job of proving that. Sometimes high star guys miss, sometimes low star guys blow up, it happens. More often tho high star guys are successful and low star guys aren't.
That's why you pay coaches the big bucks. It's their job to find these low star guys and turn them into studs. Their job to determine if that 5 star runningback is a bust or the next Barry Sanders. And when they determine a player fits their needs, their job to reel them in.
That's why you pay coaches the big bucks. It's their job to find these low star guys and turn them into studs. Their job to determine if that 5 star runningback is a bust or the next Barry Sanders. And when they determine a player fits their needs, their job to reel them in.
Yes, since they beginning of recruiting the teams that get the 'better' recruits increases their chances of winning. Duh...What does 'stars' have to do with that and how did teams know before this stupid 'star' stuff? How can some of you be so stupid and gullible? Well, I know, because you're a bunch of brainwashed sheep that have no concept of rational thought or even how to think for yourselves......
ShockHawk22
Well-Known Member
Because the better players receive the higher amount of stars? I thought that was pretty obvious
LTG
Chickenlounge
Well-Known Member
60% of the time, the 5* recruit pans out every time.
People make the difference.........as in having some staff members that have strong recruiting skills. Kirk has missed on that front historically. Others recognize the need clearly in today's hiring practices..............
http://www.und.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/122716aab.html
Polian hired as much for his recruiting skills as his special team's experience.
http://www.und.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/122716aab.html
Polian hired as much for his recruiting skills as his special team's experience.
There's a reason Iowa was a 3 touchdown underdog. Nice how you chose an outlier and tried to pass it off as fact when it's nothing more than an aberration.
Rankings matter, that's why Alabama and Ohio State continue to dominate, did you think it was all about coaching?
Of course it's used to to sell magazines and create interest to make a profit, what isn't? That doesn't mean * rankings don't matter because they most definitely do.
There's still people that fall through the cracks of course. I'd take a team full of 5* every year over a team of 3* - if you would too, it proves * rankings matter, and if you wouldn't you're an idiot.
HawkeyeWalker
Well-Known Member
Sure, talent matters. Stars are a little to subjective after the 5star and high level 4 stars though.
Other than the elite kids who can play, contribute, and excel right away (who I would argue in some cases are simply farther along in physical development). I would say the difference between, say a 4.1 and a 3.3, after a year of college development, when all else is equal (attitude, effort, etc, etc) is pretty close if not the same. Same goes for the mid 3 star and high 2 star.
Unless you can stockpile "elite" talent, redshirting, development, minimizing attrition, and identifying diamonds will remain important.
Kids can have massive physical and mentality changes from 17-21, especially with college facilities and development programs...some kids way more than others.
Basically, in many but not all cases, I would bet a lot of the 5 and high 4's have simply developed quicker, and are closer to their peak.
By the time a low 3 star with upside and 5 star, at same position and similar variables, reach their junior/senior year, I'll bet the gap isn't much, if any...
Sure, getting more ready made talent helps...it helps depth, competition, etc.
One thing that doesnt get mentioned much though is the Position of the player, in respect to the Star ranking....oline, dline, lb, TE...Iowa's strengths most good years...positions that in my view can be "developed" moreso than RB, wr, cb, s, qb...where inherent speed, skill, instincts can be recruited but Iess so developed
Other than the elite kids who can play, contribute, and excel right away (who I would argue in some cases are simply farther along in physical development). I would say the difference between, say a 4.1 and a 3.3, after a year of college development, when all else is equal (attitude, effort, etc, etc) is pretty close if not the same. Same goes for the mid 3 star and high 2 star.
Unless you can stockpile "elite" talent, redshirting, development, minimizing attrition, and identifying diamonds will remain important.
Kids can have massive physical and mentality changes from 17-21, especially with college facilities and development programs...some kids way more than others.
Basically, in many but not all cases, I would bet a lot of the 5 and high 4's have simply developed quicker, and are closer to their peak.
By the time a low 3 star with upside and 5 star, at same position and similar variables, reach their junior/senior year, I'll bet the gap isn't much, if any...
Sure, getting more ready made talent helps...it helps depth, competition, etc.
One thing that doesnt get mentioned much though is the Position of the player, in respect to the Star ranking....oline, dline, lb, TE...Iowa's strengths most good years...positions that in my view can be "developed" moreso than RB, wr, cb, s, qb...where inherent speed, skill, instincts can be recruited but Iess so developed
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
With or without the star ranking I could name 10 of the top 20 recruiting classes every year by naming off 15 teams. It has been that way forever. They are the best teams because they get the best recruits.
That said teams consistently underperform their rankings, it is no slam dunk at all that teams will win just because they get a lot of studs. ND for instance, Michigan pre Harbaugh, Texas, Florida, Miami, lots of teams have been consistently underperforming the talent they bring in.
About the only highly consistent ones these days are OSU and Bama, maybe Clemson, but that is a short run let's see how they hold up. Sure LSU is good, but not what they should be according to recruiting rankings. Same with USC, or Oregon, or Tennessee, or Georgia, or Nebraska, or several others.
That said teams consistently underperform their rankings, it is no slam dunk at all that teams will win just because they get a lot of studs. ND for instance, Michigan pre Harbaugh, Texas, Florida, Miami, lots of teams have been consistently underperforming the talent they bring in.
About the only highly consistent ones these days are OSU and Bama, maybe Clemson, but that is a short run let's see how they hold up. Sure LSU is good, but not what they should be according to recruiting rankings. Same with USC, or Oregon, or Tennessee, or Georgia, or Nebraska, or several others.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Way to choose two outliers yourself in OSU and Bama. Those two are the biggest outliers for sustained success for those teams recruiting at really high levels. Teams that have been consistently successful in the recruiting rankings, but not the final rankings: ND, Michigan, USC, Texas, Florida, Miami, Tenn., Georgia, even an LSU for a decade.
Those teams that recruit at really high levels have higher lows (for the most part than an Iowa). The bar is set higher, but for all the talent those teams get, you would think they would succeed at an elite level with more consistency.
You're so effing stupid you don't understand the word 'prove'. ...You didn't 'prove' anything. Seriously, how do some of you get dressed and through a day with little or no ability to comprehend anything....
You'd take 3* over 5* - got it.
What's your overall point? Rivals and 247 make money off talent scouts by supplying a ranking? You just now came to that conclusion...
Sorry I didn't feel like naming all the schools who recruit well and play well, it would be rather long.
All those schools you listed play pretty well to their recruiting level so I'm not sure what your point is. Not to mention they're all more talented than Iowa. Coaching and schedule is going to impact results. Outside of maybe Texas and Miami those teams all play a much more difficult schedule than Iowa and have more pro players.
Stars matter and Kirk isn't a great recruiter.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Who said I want a 3* over a 5*? I want the kid that everyone else wants. The problem is when a kid has the choice to go to Bama, OSU, Michigan, Florida, Texas, ND, USC and Iowa, we aren't going to get them 98% of the time. It is what it is.
I don't care that they make money. I just think it is funny that people think these services are actually "accurate" or not. I mean they just spit out the top 300 kids, because of teams that offers, or that any idiot can see is heads and shoulder above the other kids. When people shout, ***** matter, I just laugh, it only means something to idiot joe blow fan really.
