Okay...so what EXACTLY do Stars mean?

#1
Stevorino

Stevorino

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2007
Messages
2,490
Likes
465
#1
I was in a discussion with a friend about what exactly a star rating for a recruit means.

Anyone have a link that really explains it in depth. The argument was does the star rating = the player's potential, immediate impact, or something else?

Obviously it's not an exact science and it's a measure of quality to some degree, but we're just trying to exactly see what the difference between a 5, 4, and 3 star really is.
 
#2
#2
I would say the stars compare players to the rest of the players in their class. For instance, a 5-star recruit would be considered one of the best players at that position on a high school level. JMO.
 
#3
#3
I'll try to find a link, but I don't think it honestly means much in the grand scheme of things. Scouts go out and decide what the rankings of the big time players are and rank them in order. So they churn out their top 300 or whatever and rank them accordingly from 1-300. Then they usually have "arbitrary" star cut-offs. So they say something like "only the top 25 players should get 5 stars." Then, player #26, while not that different than player #25, is a 4 star as opposed to a 5 star.

Plus, the top 100-200 prospects are the ones who get the most attention anyway, so it's hard to believe rankings outside of that group. You often hear about players who "flew under the radar" etc. This is oftentimes because he wasn't considered a top 200 prospect initially and thus not nearly as much attention was paid to him.
 
#5
#5
Star ratings are very subjective.

The hardest part is to determine where they will play in college. At the high school level the best players sometimes play way ouf of postion.

Al Wilson was a star running back in high school. May be a 2-3 star RB turned in to a heck of linebacker.
 
#8
#8
Honestly, I'd say the number rating (6.1, 6.0, ..etc) rating is a little better to judge players on than stars. It seems to be a little more telling most of the time.
 
#10
#10
I always think of it as

5- Star= The website and teams think this player will step in as a freshman and contribute
4 Star= Kid could possibly see time as a fresh, but will be a very good player as a sophomore, maybe junior
3 star= Wait untill he has time to develop so he will be good Late Junior/Earyl senior year
2/1 Star= Probably won't see the field on top 25 programs unless it is special teams, or if he has really been coached properly he will play senior year.

IDK if thats right or not, that is just what I have always gone by and it has pretty much worked....except for Coker, and Slick Shielly.
 
#11
#11
Slick didn't get a shot for some ridiculous unknown reason.

He did very well at Tulsa this year. Would've been nice to hang onto.
 
#12
#12
kotheb said:
Slick didn't get a shot for some ridiculous unknown reason.

He did very well at Tulsa this year. Would've been nice to hang onto.
Click to expand...

Slick was lazy and slow. He got what he put in during his time here at Tennessee.
 
#14
#14
jaxvol said:
Star ratings are very subjective.

The hardest part is to determine where they will play in college. At the high school level the best players sometimes play way ouf of postion.

Al Wilson was a star running back in high school. May be a 2-3 star RB turned in to a heck of linebacker.
Click to expand...

T.J. Duckett was a better LB in high school than tail back.
 
#15
#15
kotheb said:
If that's true then it makes sense.

I've always heard that wasn't the case, but I'm sure there are plenty of stories to go around.
Click to expand...

Slick's stats at Tulsa are inflated as well.

Put any WR in that offense and they will have decent numbers.
 
#16
#16
Ratings are just that ratings, they don't really mean much. If you can get a player who is coachable, and learns you will have a great player. For example, look at Ryan Perriloux i think was a 4 or 5 star and now he's playing for some college that we will not see on TV unless it's the Bayou Classic this is because he was a moron off the field.
 
#19
#19
Blake25p said:
i would rather have 5 5* than 5 1*
Click to expand...

:blink: Am I reading this wrong, or are you saying you would rather have five 5-star recruits than five 1-star recruits? That seems pretty obvious to me. Maybe I'm retarded.
 
#20
#20
justingroves said:
Slick was lazy and slow. He got what he put in during his time here at Tennessee.
Click to expand...

I'm gonna disagree with you here, Justin. I don't do it often. I think that Slick was slow to catch on and in a very crowded group of talented wide receivers and figured he'd never get a shot because he was buried on the depth chart. He may not be Robert Meachem, but he's a better wide receiver than some on our roster. He was never known for his speed FWIW.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top