"The fans should realize the stars are the most bogus thing ever. I'm one of the guys who helped start that stuff" From a interview this week. What .ole Tom doesn't even believe in it just the sucker fans who shell out money to buy the latest mag with the poll that shows old Hogwash State is ranked #1 . P.T. Barnum is alive and well.
Tom Lemming
- Thread starter Marine 1
- Start date
Except Hogwash State typically isnt at the top. Its normally a bunch of teams that are in the national title hunt. And the guys who get higher rankings seem to show up at a disproportionate high rate in the NFL draft.
They probably arent indicative of anything though
They probably arent indicative of anything though
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
That looks like it's ripped from its context. Either that or Lemming owes us an explanation. Stars are not the most bogus thing ever, unless analyzing, scouting, and ranking high school football players is utterly without merit. I don't think it is, and neither does Lemming, I'm willing to bet.
A
anon_umk0ifu6vj6zi
Guest
I am so relieved. So many teams with bad recruiting ratings are always winning championships
So coaches know more about player potential than guys writing on message boards? Who would have thunk it?
No out of context I repreated exactly what he said . He also said in his opinion Minnesota,Iowa and Michigan state were the best in the B1G in developing talent. My opinion when your roster is loaded with 4* ( OSU,Mich and PSU ) developing talent is a wee bit easier. Consider that THE OSU has probably the best 3 QBs in the B1G. Life is not fair neither is football parity.
He owes you something? No, he doesn't. He helped create a system like they did for rating movies...
He won, good for him. I wish I would have thought of it!
He won, good for him. I wish I would have thought of it!
Stars or no stars I for one would be ecstatic to see one of our recruits with 5 yellow starts next to his/her name.
Ussually the more stars the more offers from major schools. The mistakes are usually the 2 & 3 stars that turn out great. Pipkins, Mi, 5 star from Kansas, hasn't done a thing at Mi & is mad JH wants him to take a med and get his free degree because he hasn't contrib anything the lst 3 yrs.
Why is it that some husker fans feel like they need to disprove the star rankings? You never seem to hear a Bama or USC guy do that. Never seem to hear anyone say, "he's a 5-star with a ton of offers but I'd rather have the 3 star 5.5 ranking guy over Mr. 6.1"
I wonder, if Riley starts landing a ton of 4's & 5's, will this "stars don't matter talk" go away?
I wonder, if Riley starts landing a ton of 4's & 5's, will this "stars don't matter talk" go away?
Yeah, he owes an explanation as to why he helped create a system of rankings that he now purports do not correspond to reality whatsoever. That's bogus. He now apparently thinks people who offer evaluations are just making wild guesses, and they're not, certainly not in every instance. Stars correspond to various things that can be seen on a recruit's tape, and his list of offers, and perhaps other factors, which when combined give you a more accurate representation of the athlete's potential than a completely random one. That's why a Rivals ranking would turn out, on average, to be far more accurate than merely assigning 5 stars to all players whose last names begin with the letter A.
Is it flawed? Obviously. If that was his point, then he overstated his case. I can tell you one of "the most bogus things ever": astrology. Why? Because it's false, utterly false. It makes no contact with reality at any point.
Analogous to star rankings, when someone like Roger Ebert comes up with criteria for ranking movies, they aren't merely based on just on his subjective tastes. He provides reasons for thinking a film was good or bad. And when he acknowledges that his reaction to a film may not be your reaction, saying things like, "This movie didn't resonate with me, but it might with younger audiences," if he thinks the movie is bad, he doesn't say things like this as if to point out that the younger audience's reaction to the film can make it good. If the movie has an incoherent plot structure, is shot poorly, has terrible pacing, etc..., he is providing you with reasons for thinking the movie is bad, not merely an expression of his opinion.
Ummmmm, okay then. I will take the bogus 4/5 stars over the bogus 2/3 stars please
Found the article on hawkcentral. Lemming's point, star ratings so prevalent/misused/misleading. Says others base rating on offers. My read on the article, he is trying to pump up Iowa fans that don't have highly ranked players. Lemming thinks the iowa qb recruit should be 4* not 3*. HOLD THE BUS, Lemming thinks stars are "bogus", yet he is still talking "stars". Makes me wonder if iowa is paying for Lemming's services.
While a system that rates players on a scale of 1 to 5 probably does lack sufficient nuance I think it is fair to acknowledge 2 things: 1. Most the people following this stuff are not the best thinkers in the world. 2. Rivals came out with their "Rivals Ranking" to better differentiate the 2, 3, and 4 star players.
And how many championships has that "developing talent" ribbon gotten Iowa and Minnesota lately? And Mich state for that matter on the national state.
Well coach TO said way back when; that many factors led to many top 50 players being basically rated, that N wouldn't offer - it does happen. N ran its own board on top talent; that and speed worked out well. We are at it again. HCMR is stating top ranked classes are more probable to lead to top ranked teams and we are going there.