Nice post from 'X'

#26
#26
Volt said:
on Rivals you can have the same amount of players with the same average stars and have a different overall ranking- this is most likelyh attributed to the weight they give various positions. Someone please weigh in
Click to expand...

I don't understand it fully but they don't calculate the stars at all. It is easy and convenient for us but they use their overall ranking and their numerical rating.

When ranking classes, they also have a point where they don't give an equal number of points just because a team adds a signee. IOW's, a 3* 5.6 recruit added to a class with 21 players would give more points than the same player added to a class with 31.
 
#27
#27
Won't all the CDD haters have a field day if he finally addresses our line problems (unlike the last two coaches) but doesn't have a highly ranked class...
 
#28
#28
We said the exact same thing this time last year - THE EXACT same thing about 2010 class.

I'm not buying it.
 
#29
#29
I could just be ignorant, but I'm not as overly concerned about the OL as most. I think the Sullins twins set a domino effect that's got Volnation so worked up about the OL. We've got Aaron Douglas at LT, who'll be a good one at the most important position on the OL. Then we landed Schoefield last year, and picked up JaWuan James and James Stone this year. Plus, the lesser rated guys underneath them. The only thing I'm worried about is Center.

I'm much more concerned with the DL, most notably DT.
 
#30
#30
sjt18 said:
Raw numbers of 4* and 5* players by offensive position not counting "athletes" who usually end up at WR, RB, or DB.

QB- 26
RB- 36
FB-3
WR- 47
TE- 15
OL- 49

Number of Rivals 4* and 5* ratios vs positions filled (one QB, one RB, 2 WR's, one TE, one FB, and 5 OL's).

QB- 26:1 = 26
RB- 36:1 = 36
FB- 3:1 = 3
WR- 47:2 = 23.5
TE- 15:1 = 15
OL- 49:5 = 9.9

IOW's, if you are HS TE you are more likely to be a 4* or 5* player than if you are an OL. Only the lowly FB has a lower chance. A RB has almost 400% better odds of being highly rated. A WR has more than double the chance while a QB has almost 3 times better odds.

Coupled with these facts, the recruiting svcs have the most difficulty predicting success for OL's and DT's. Almost none of those recruits will come into college ready to play like they are. There are huge physical transformations for these guys. Some who look almost ready out of HS may have just about tapped out their potential while some run of the mill 2* or 3* kid develops into a monster after being on a training table and S&C program for a year or two.


In short, NO, there aren't plenty of 4* and 5* OL's in any given class. And even if there were, you could easily sign 4 or 5 four star players and end up with a worse OL than if you'd signed all 3* guys.

Thankfully, I doubt Dooley is hung up on the subjective rankings Rivals and Scout put out on linemen.
Click to expand...

You aren't even making sense. Your numbers prove my point more than yours...and your numbers aren't even accurate. There are more 4 and 5 star D lineman than any other position...90. 2nd place...you guessed it O Line 61(not including TE's). And to your comment about athletes...many are in between TE's and DE's like Delvin Jones or LB/DE tweeners.
 
#31
#31
Until those "stars" start judging heart and passion for the game, I think I will get more caught up in actual results as opposed to who has four and five stars.
 
#34
#34
DismantleVol said:
Exactly, you are just giving him what he wants by talking about him nonstop
Click to expand...
If you'll read the original post and subsequent replies (and not just the thread title), you'll see that the 'X' to whom I refer actually adds to our subject matter, instead of depleting us of 14 months we'll never get back and creating what will be known as a "dark" season for those who actually choose to remember it....Anyway, GO VOLS!
 
#35
#35
The star rankings are somewhat subjective, but do have merit when judging a team's recruiting rankings over a 4 - 5 year time span vs. the games won. However, a good coaching staff can take a group of mostly 3 stars (especially if they have heart and desire to excel), and beat a great recruiting staff with mostly 4 stars, but with lesser coaching ability. The pro and con posters regarding coach Dooley and staff are only opinions, some well formed, and others not so much. So here's mine. I like the way he and his staff have represented Tennessee, held a good recruiting class together, and feel they will continue to do so. We really won't know if this was a good or bad choice until 2 -3 years from now. For now, I fully support the hires, and want to give them every benefit of the doubt for now. If we go 6 & 6 next year, (7 & 6 with a minor bowl win) especially with our tough schedule, I will consider it a success. Just as I did last year's regular season 7 & 5 (7 & 6 with the bowl loss). A lot of mature talent from last year is gone. The difference this time is that the same staff, or most of it, will be back for 2011. They need a minimum of 3 years with high staff continuity to prove themselves a good or bad hire. Go Vols!!
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top