A reminder for me and everyone...5 stars often don't pan out
- Thread starter Tulsa Tom_rivals17485
- Start date
Google that and every news outlet practically has a story on 5 star guys that never starred in college. One article head line states that not a single 5 star recruit is playing in the Super Bowl.
I'm still too busy recovering from you fluffing another posters position that Riley can't and won't make the hard decisions vis a vis the coaching staff.
He's too busy thinking about all the sprinkles he's going to have in retirement now that NU gave him a payday. You know, stuff like that.
He's too busy thinking about all the sprinkles he's going to have in retirement now that NU gave him a payday. You know, stuff like that.
Yep, we found out first hand 5 star guys don't aways pan out...our last 3 was Z Bowman (i think he did good and has had a good NFL career so far). A Jones...yea he was a starter but never lived up to what id expect from a 5 star CB and then theres Marlon Lucky, he was a solid RB but was never an elite RB like they claim 5 star players are suppose to be. Lucky was a better reciever then RB.
Bowman was a JUCO which is an entirely different animal than a high schooler.
Oh yea, my bad and great catch. BS had a solid a solid career but i honestly felt he should of stayed at OT where he was given his 5 star ranking for. He would of been a monster at OT.
Wasn't Jones as well? As I remember, he was here only 2 seasons. Gave up a bunch of TD's for a supposed 5 star. I thought he was a Memphis washout that went Juco.
Yes A Jones was a juco 5 star CB and i agree, he sure did get tourched a lot for a top tier 5 star CB.
yeah I'm pretty sure he was. Highly ranked JUCO's seem to have a better chance at success. I think he did play in the NFL for a while.
Go ahead and sign me up for as many 5 stars as possible. I'll take those bust risks.
I agree if for no other reason than that highly ranked recruits seem to attract more highly ranked (talented) recruits. The odds of busts no doubt go down as you move up the ladder
5 stars often don't pan out....Oh really? So more five stars are busts than not? I am calling bullspit.
Hang around here long enough (probably even today, maybe) and Tulsa will post a link to something that has nothing to do with anything proclaiming we need higher rated recruits if we're ever going to compete for championships again.
Let's have this stupidass conversation again. Do the math on how statistically likely success is by star rating.
Why don't you guys do this dumb **** with everything else. "You know, you guys, sometimes 28 point favorites don't cover the spread.....guess it's better to not be favored......"
Why don't you guys do this dumb **** with everything else. "You know, you guys, sometimes 28 point favorites don't cover the spread.....guess it's better to not be favored......"
Im with you guys, hell id take every 5 star there was if i could. Sure some won't pan out but then again some do. Blaine Gabbert is a 5 star we HAD but lost and i felt he panned out at Missouri. Out of all the 5 star guys we got, only one didn't really pan out A Jones. Everyone else had pretty good careers. Jones was a starter his 2 years here, so i guess he didn't suck either.
so wait does that mean Alabama is going down hill and that they should target 4 star players - I am confused
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...-numbers-why-the-sites-get-the-rankings-right
Recruits becoming an AA - 5 star 1 in 4 , 4 star 1 in 16, 3 star 1 in 56, and below three star 1 in 127
FBS signees
Recruits becoming an AA - 5 star 1 in 4 , 4 star 1 in 16, 3 star 1 in 56, and below three star 1 in 127
FBS signees
There are waaay more 3 and 4 star ranked players than 5 star. By percentage, 5 star players pan out more often.
Exactly, the point is there were 5 star players in the super bowl. Most 5 stars that don't lose composure play some time in the NFL
I guess then that Farniok doesn't have a very good chance (1 in 56) of becoming an AA since he is only a 3*. Riley however indicated that Farniok was very high on their get list since last January.
I think that it comes down to coaches evaluating players instead of relying on Rivals rankings to determine how well a team has done in recruiting. If Riley is as good an evaluator of talent as other people and other rival coaches have said, then Farniok should have probably been graded at least a 4* or better. I don't think that it always comes down to "coaching players up" if they become great players. Sometimes a players ranking is skewed to begin with because of the level of competition that they have played against and how much exposure that they have received. I think that being from SD had something to do with the 3* ranking of Farniok and he could very well become 1 of the 56 3* to eventually be an AA .
Suh was a 4* out of HS and was ranked the 6th best DT by Rivals. The 5* tackles that year were Demarcus Granger, Callahan Bright and Jerrell Powe. The only 5* from those 3 currently on an NFL roster is Powe who was drafted in the 6th round. The top two 5* tackles were never drafted by the NFL. Suh was 1 out of 16 (4*) to make AA. Obviously, I think that he should have been ranked a 5* in retrospect. Recruiting him that year came down to a coaches evaluation of his talent.
Well depending on what recruitinf site you go by, Farniok is a 3 star on rivals and Scout but a 4 star on Huskersillustrated and ESPN. Same as Q Alexander. Suh was a 6.0 4 star, just barely missed his 5 star ranking. He was clearly a 5 star.
Manning was considered the top QB in the country coming out of high school. Had the star system been in place back then, I'm sure he would have been a 5-star.
Don't use Suh as an example of how stars don't matter. Suh was considered elite and could have gone anywhere out of high school. You do realize the only reason he wasn't a 5 star is because they only give so many five stars no matter how great some guys are. Many 5 star talents don't get that 5 star because of this.
Well the one's that got it didn't do so great. No picks in the draft except one 6th round pick.
Also the other two that were ranked ahead of Suh didn't exactly distinguish themselves either. It comes down to coaches evaluating the players and deciding who to go after. You said that Suh could have gone anywhere. I guess that means that other coaches saw what Nebraska saw when they were recruiting him.
So was pretty much everyone on the CAR offense. Stewart was the #1 RB in Marlon Lucky's year, Greg Olsen was the #1 TE his year & obviously Ohr was one of the highest recruited o-lineman of all time
Michael Oher was listed as the #7 Offensive Tackle out of HS and was a 4* recruit according to Rivals. Players ranked ahead of him were Eugene Monroe 5* (playing and drafted in 1st round), Reginald Youngblood 5* (undrafted and not playing), Alex Boone 5* (undrafted but playing and starting with San Francisco), Dan Doering 5* (undrafted and not playing), Matt Hardwick 4* (playing and drafted in the 3rd round), and Aleksey Lanis 4* (not drafted and not playing).
Michael Oher was recruited to Ole Miss by Ed Orgeron. If Oher was one of the highest recruited O-lineman of all time then Rivals got it wrong with 5 that they rated higher than him. 3 of these were 5* recruits that were never drafted by the NFL.
Well there are going to be some kids like Malik Collins whi didn't make Rival camps or many camps at all and got a low ranking. Collins had a 3 star ranking but if he made the camps or more camps theres no way they screw up on him and not have him a 4 star or 5 star. He was also a state wrestling champ too.
So its possible some kids got low rankings just because they didn't make it to any camps. Collins is a great example.
So its possible some kids got low rankings just because they didn't make it to any camps. Collins is a great example.
I will take 5 star recruits all day but I could not agree with about needing to focus on the Nebraska kids. Look at how many Nebraska kids are in the NFL and only a handful played at Nebraska. Nebraska will always have to be a program that recruits nation wide but the foundation has to start with the Nebraska kid who will always be underrated by the recruiting service's
the age old argument - Stars do not matter because of this player or that player - the point is that the higher the star rating the better chance of getting a great football player. It is not an absolute but the averages are very well established
Really? So you'd rather roll the dice on a bunch of 3-stars than a bunch of 5-stars?
Offers mean so much to me. When Iowa and MSU among others want Farniok so bad, that makes a difference. Someone compiled the data on RSS and our new class has way more and higher quaility power 5 offers than most of Bo's did.