How do you guys think the kids get their rankings to begin with? Do you think that each of these sites have people who go evaluate the players individually and then assign them a ranking that aligns with what coaches say, or. . .
Do you think the major colleges evaluate players and give offers based on what they see, then the recruiting services note the players with the best offers and assign preliminary star rankings?
There is a reason that early classes do not have many 5-stars, if any at all. The recruiting services only give preliminary star rankings in the early stages of a class and those are based on evaluations done by various universities.
The point is, a kid who did not make it into the early evaluations has the deck stacked against him as far as star ratings go. This happens to a ton of recruits and many 3-stars would be 4* or higher if they had camped earlier or if their name had gotten out earlier otherwise.
Even when a player makes it to camp and outperforms many of the higher rated kids, recruiting services may find it difficult to bump them over other recruits who they have a longer history evaluating to that point.
Then there are the sheer numbers. There is no way any recruiting service can accurately evaluate all recruits. In many cases, they are unable to give any evaluation at all.
Sometimes a kid will get a late offer and then the recruiting services are forced to give a grade and it will be much higher than the generic grade they were originally given.
Of course the teams with the highest * rated players are going to have the most success. After-all, the star ratings of the kids are generated by the offers from those very same successful programs.
In other words; a successful program offers a kid, the recruiting service notices early offer from successful program and assigns high star rating, kid commits to the successful program, program's future success is correlated to kids with high star ratings.