# For the fans of the 3* recruiting classes........



## Gold Ranger (Feb 1, 2017)

The 7-step case to proving National Signing Day rankings matter a whole lot......



> 1. They matter at the player level. Blue chips are almost 1,000 percent more likely to be drafted in the first round. You can see the star ratings drop throughout the NFL Draft. And five-stars are about 33 times as likely to be All-Americans as two-stars are.



http://www.sbnation.com/college-foo...6/national-signing-day-rankings-ncaa-football


----------



## BrotherBadger (Feb 1, 2017)

Star rankings *DO* matter. A 4 star recruit is more talented than a 2 star at the time of their rankings. That's obvious. However, you can always take a 3 star recruit and over the course of 4 years, turn him into something equal/better than the 4 star recruit. That's where good coaching(especially S&C coaches) comes into play.

Another thing to consider is the fit in the system. If you have a kid who is a 3 star who fits in your system a bit better than a 4 star recruit, that 3 star will theoretically do better over the course of his time in the program.

Great examples of both of these points are guys like JJ Watt, Monte Ball, Travis Fredrick, Chris Borland, etc. That being said, those types of players either are diamonds in the rough, did not receive a major offer(which can affect star rankings) or commit so early into their HS careers(Monte ball suffered from a low ranking because he committed the summer before his Jr year) that they weren't really given much of a look.

That being said, you will have MUCH higher odds of those kids succeeding if they are 4/5 Star recruits. Those kids are just more likely to succeed because on the whole, they are more talented. The higher your recruiting class, the better your chances of winning at the championship level are. Unless you are getting waves of 4 and 5 star kids in ever year, your chances of winning the National Championship are pretty slim.

And I say that completely knowing that my team will never be a team to get a ton of 4 and 5 star kids. Our recruiting classes are, at best, considered mediocre year in and year out.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Feb 1, 2017)

And the Vols are LOADED with the 3 stars... 

They do have the most signees so I guess they'll have some depth for all those injuries..


----------



## CamoDawg85 (Feb 1, 2017)

Browning Slayer said:


> They do have the most signees so I guess they'll have some depth for all those injuries..



What injuries?


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 2, 2017)

BrotherBadger said:


> Star rankings *DO* matter. A 4 star recruit is more talented than a 2 star at the time of their rankings. That's obvious. However, you can always take a 3 star recruit and over the course of 4 years, turn him into something equal/better than the 4 star recruit. That's where good coaching(especially S&C coaches) comes into play.
> 
> Another thing to consider is the fit in the system. If you have a kid who is a 3 star who fits in your system a bit better than a 4 star recruit, that 3 star will theoretically do better over the course of his time in the program.
> 
> ...



The hit rate on 3 stars are also much lower.  It's easy to cherry pick the ones that exceeded expectations because there are so many more of them than there are 4 and 5 star recruits.  You CAN win a raffle with 1000 other people, but I'll take my chances playing the one with more winning tickets and only about 50 sold.


----------



## westcobbdog (Feb 2, 2017)

It would be interesting to see a list of Super Bowl participants star rankings entering college. Plenty of 3 stars are ballers, too.


----------



## JonathanG2013 (Feb 2, 2017)

westcobbdog said:


> It would be interesting to see a list of Super Bowl participants star rankings entering college. Plenty of 3 stars are ballers, too.



http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/2017-super-bowl-how-falcons-patriots-starters-were-rated-as-high-school-recruits/

Here is your star rankings.


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 2, 2017)

westcobbdog said:


> Plenty of 3 stars are ballers, too.



Because there are so many of them.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Feb 2, 2017)

westcobbdog said:


> It would be interesting to see a list of Super Bowl participants star rankings entering college. Plenty of 3 stars are ballers, too.



In college you can ride the coat tail of a 5 star player to a title. 



Gold Ranger said:


> Because there are so many of them.



^^This^^


----------



## BrotherBadger (Feb 2, 2017)

Gold Ranger said:


> The hit rate on 3 stars are also much lower.  It's easy to cherry pick the ones that exceeded expectations because there are so many more of them than there are 4 and 5 star recruits.  You CAN win a raffle with 1000 other people, but I'll take my chances playing the one with more winning tickets and only about 50 sold.



agreed 100%.


----------



## BuckNasty83 (Feb 2, 2017)

BrotherBadger said:


> Star rankings *DO* matter. A 4 star recruit is more talented than a 2 star at the time of their rankings. That's obvious. However, you can always take a 3 star recruit and over the course of 4 years, turn him into something equal/better than the 4 star recruit. That's where good coaching(especially S&C coaches) comes into play.
> 
> Another thing to consider is the fit in the system. If you have a kid who is a 3 star who fits in your system a bit better than a 4 star recruit, that 3 star will theoretically do better over the course of his time in the program.
> 
> ...




Some good points in there,  but UNGa just signed their best class ever!  So your good points won't matter and Bama recruits top classes year in and year out and have been dominate so that throws it all out the window. 

But never mind that Clemson just beat them with an avg. 13th ranked class, LSU had the 12th and Auburn 16th. How about Washington in the playoffs. They are probably 50th. Oregon was never very high either.

Let's not forget that PITTSBURGH beat Clemsom, NC State took them to OT, they was lucky to escape with a won from Louisville, TROY and Auburn was a 1 score game too.


Did those teams win a NC? No,  but the point is, that lowly rated recruiting schools CAN compete with the best and even beat the so called best.  

And just for kicks.  Since Bama is the standarnd these days. Every team in the west has beaten Bama lately, except  Arkansas.

The blue chips are nice,  but my coaching and playing nature says it's all about match ups,  scheme fit, and player development and evaluation.


Now factor in all these great athletes that don't even get to camp. A lot of these kids are from poverty. They can't afford camps, much less to travel and everything that goes along with.  So it's not that they aren't good,  they just don't get the exposure. Think of all those poor ghetto kids that are freak athletes.  There's A TON. These are the one's who get over looked by recruiting services.  

And for those counting stars, Tennessee still has a class that Avg. 9th over the past 4 years according to composite.  33 4*s and 2 5* still on the roster and the #1 dual threat QB from last year and the #4 ranked class will be filling this roster out. So by yalls standards, we should be in the playoffs for 2017 right?


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 3, 2017)

NO TEAM THAT HAS FEWER THAN 50% BLUE CHIP RECRUITS OVER THE LAST 4 CYCLES HAS EVER WON A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.

Yes good teams can lose a game to a worse team, but the best teams always end up with a better season.

What had you Vols rather have, a roster full of blue chip athletes and a shot at a National Title or a roster full of three star athletes and a Championship of Life?


----------



## BuckNasty83 (Feb 3, 2017)

Gold Ranger said:


> NO TEAM THAT HAS FEWER THAN 50% BLUE CHIP RECRUITS OVER THE LAST 4 CYCLES HAS EVER WON A NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.
> 
> Yes good teams can lose a game to a worse team, but the best teams always end up with a better season.
> 
> What had you Vols rather have, a roster full of blue chip athletes and a shot at a National Title or a roster full of three star athletes and a Championship of Life?





They might be on the roster,  but what's the percentage of the starters,  or actual contributors? What's the percentage of 3*'s in the super bowl? I don't have time to do it,  but,  just for fun,  I'd like to know.  Maybe this weekend


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 3, 2017)

BuckNasty83 said:


> They might be on the roster,  but what's the percentage of the starters,  or actual contributors? What's the percentage of 3*'s in the super bowl? I don't have time to do it,  but,  just for fun,  I'd like to know.  Maybe this weekend



What's the percentage of 3*'s in the National Championship game?  That's what matters.

Go ahead and keep trying to spin that extremely mediocre 10rc class into something elite.  There will be a couple of those 3*'s that pan out, but there will be MANY more that just ride the pine or contribute on special teams.


----------



## BuckNasty83 (Feb 3, 2017)

Gold Ranger said:


> What's the percentage of 3*'s in the National Championship game?  That's what matters.
> 
> Go ahead and keep trying to spin that extremely mediocre 10rc class into something elite.  There will be a couple of those 3*'s that pan out, but there will be MANY more that just ride the pine or contribute on special teams.



I'm not trying to spin it.  I just don't put all the stock into rankings like you and many others.  I've given many examples of them ranking's far exceeding their rankings. 

Technically,  Pitt could have won the NC. That's a spin


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 3, 2017)

BuckNasty83 said:


> I'm not trying to spin it.  I just don't put all the stock into rankings like you and many others.  I've given many examples of them ranking's far exceeding their rankings.
> 
> Technically,  Pitt could have won the NC. That's a spin



You use Clemson's average ranking as your proof that rankings don't matter.  Well, here's Clemson's starting lineup.....

WR Hunter Renrow – Walk On
WR Artvis Scott – 4 star
WR Mike Williams – 4 star
OL Mitch Hyatt – 5 star
OL Taylor Hearn – 3 star
OL Jay Guillermo 3 star
OL Tyrone Crowder – 4 star
OL Sean Pollard – 4 star
TE Jordan Leggett – 3 star
QB DeShaun Watson – 4 star
RB Wayne Gallman – 4 star

DE Christian Wilkins – 5 star
DT Carlos Watkins – 4 star
DT Dexter Lawrence – 5 star
DE Clelin Ferrell  - 4 star
LB Dorian O'Daniel – 4 star
LB Kendall Joseph – 3 star
LB Ben Boulware – 4 star
CB Ryan Carter – 2 star
SS Jadar Johnson – 3 star
FS Van Smith – 4 star
CB Cordrea  Tankersley – 3 star


That's 14 Blue Chip recruits vs 8 non blue chip for a percentage of 64%.


----------



## Browning Slayer (Feb 3, 2017)

Gold Ranger said:


> You use Clemson's average ranking as your proof that rankings don't matter.  Well, here's Clemson's starting lineup.....
> 
> WR Hunter Renrow – Walk On
> WR Artvis Scott – 4 star
> ...




It doesn't matter how right you are Bucky will spin it... It's hard not to sit back and laugh at him cause he ACTUALLY thinks he's right and everyone else knows he's wrong.. He's not the sharpest knife in the drawer..


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 3, 2017)

Browning Slayer said:


> It doesn't matter how right you are Bucky will spin it... It's hard not to sit back and laugh at him cause he ACTUALLY thinks he's right and everyone else knows he's wrong.. He's not the sharpest knife in the drawer..



I'm waiting on him to point out Renfrow as a walk on, and think that 22 Renfrows will win you a championship.


----------



## westcobbdog (Feb 4, 2017)

JonathanG2013 said:


> http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/2017-super-bowl-how-falcons-patriots-starters-were-rated-as-high-school-recruits/
> 
> Here is your star rankings.



Thanks, interesting read. Wish they woulda ranked the cheater Brady. Matty Ice a 3 star.


----------



## BuckNasty83 (Feb 5, 2017)

Gold Ranger said:


> You use Clemson's average ranking as your proof that rankings don't matter.  Well, here's Clemson's starting lineup.....
> 
> WR Hunter Renrow – Walk On
> WR Artvis Scott – 4 star
> ...



Point is,  you don't have to be a blue chip to be an impact player,  or have a class full of blue chips. 

You also have to consider what set they are playing in and go into a 2 deep roster to get a better avg. Your examples don't cover every set.  Especially on d. They aren't going to be in a 4-3 every snap.  Same with offense. They aren't going to be in 3wr, 1rb, 1te every down.

It may still average out to be more blue chips. Either way it don't matter. All this is brought up for everyone dogging UT for their 3*s. It's not like it's all we'll put on the field. Then again,  I don't care about the star system.  It's fun for publicity and bragging and I guess even something for folks to look forward to. 

But ask yourself this.  What comes first,  the offer,  or the ranking? And if these ranking services were all they are cracked up to be,  why aren't they working schools as recruiting coordinators, or scouts for the league? They follow the trend like I said.  They see Bama, Ohio and other big coaches show interest and they bump their ratings cause they think just cause those guys want them,  they are higher caliber.  All kids can't be evaluated by these services the same, they can't cover every high school athlete,  and all kids can't camp. So they suffer in rankings.

To make it short, cause I've covered it in depth many times here.  I'm not saying blue chips don't matter,  but not all blue chips are gong to play like their rankings and all 3*'s are not garbage and I'm pretty sure they can only give so many players a certain ranking,  but I may be wrong.  ( so many can only be 5*, 4*)

Will all of our 3*s be diamonds?  No,  but Butch has proven to be a great evaluator of talent. No will everyone's blue chips be studs.

If your a coach that's recruiting for your system,  your not going to take a guy just because he is rated higher.  If your running a 3-4 and all you can get is a 5*DT, or DE, when you need a true nose guard,  are you going to take the blue chips for their ranking over the 3* nose guard who fits your system? If you run a triple option are you going to take a pocket qb because he's a 5*? Not unless your Saban and keep taking guys just to keep them away from rivals lol


----------



## MudDucker (Feb 5, 2017)

westcobbdog said:


> It would be interesting to see a list of Super Bowl participants star rankings entering college. Plenty of 3 stars are ballers, too.



Somebody got to play special teams and bench warming!  

The stars out of high school are not as important as their performance in college.


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 7, 2017)

MudDucker said:


> Somebody got to play special teams and bench warming!
> 
> The stars out of high school are not as important as their performance in college.



But the stars are a pretty good predictor of their college performance.


----------



## BuckNasty83 (Feb 7, 2017)

Stars are used to gauge how early they will contribute.


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 8, 2017)

BuckNasty83 said:


> Stars are used to gauge how early they will contribute.



Are you really this dense or are you just pulling my leg?


----------



## Browning Slayer (Feb 8, 2017)

Gold Ranger said:


> Are you really this dense or are you just pulling my leg?



Oh no... He's really that dense! 

Not his fault.. I blame the Tennessee blood line..


----------



## Gold Ranger (Feb 8, 2017)

westcobbdog said:


> It would be interesting to see a list of Super Bowl participants star rankings entering college. Plenty of 3 stars are ballers, too.



Here's how the star rankings get drafted?

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/174883892/predicting-best-nfl-draft-prospects-talent


----------

