'22 TN WR Cameron Miller (Tennessee signee)

[VolsAgainstTheWorld15]

Make this make sense. This is Miller’s ranking history on rivals. Mind you, he did not play his junior year due to covid. So his rankings rose in the winter and then again in March, in spite of not playing. And then, for some inexplicable reason, it got to the summer (when he became a Vol lean) and his ranking drops tremendously. Explain that

View attachment 380948

Do we know if he camped anywhere? I know he wanted to camp at Alabama but a hamstring injury kept him from going. Missing Alabama's camp would be a stupid reason to drop him in the rankings, but it wouldn't surprise me if that's why.

Edit: you answered my question

 

[T2P_Priceless]

I don't how anyone can properly gauge that.

Monetarily it's certainly successful haha.

But the amount of misses from the Top 300 high schoolers translating to the NFL or even college leaves less than a reliable product imo. Are they even at 50 percent of 4 stars and above making it into the NFL?

The most important and accurate measurement is the total ranking of roster translating to wins/winning programs. So they’re not always right recruit to recruit but if you load up on the higher ranked recruits you have a better chance of winning. Data reflects as much

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

I don't how anyone can properly gauge that.

Monetarily it's certainly successful haha.

But the amount of misses from the Top 300 high schoolers translating to the NFL or even college leaves less than a reliable product imo. Are they even at 50 percent of 4 stars and above making it into the NFL?

NFL has zero to do with it. That’s where you miss the point.

 

[LittleVol]

The most important and accurate measurement is the total ranking of roster translating to wins/winning programs. So they’re not always right recruit to recruit but if you load up on the higher ranked recruits you have a better chance of winning. Data reflects as much

Is data accounting for development?
Bama and Clemson have sent 2 and 3 stars to the league as well.

Development is everything. I think people are putting way to much stock in what the recruit is ranked VS where he is getting developed.

 

[LittleVol]

NFL has zero to do with it. That’s where you miss the point.

No. bot.
It hs EVERYTHING to do with the NFL.

Ive said this before.
For whatever reason people haven't picked up on it.
- Just read the talent description of the 3 star, 4 star and 5 star. Then tell me the NFL doesn't have anything to do with it.
- Count how many 4 stars and above there are each year, and then count how many spots there are in the NFL draft. They're close enough to the same number- accounting for missed evals even. Whether its 247, rivals, ESPN... between 250-300 players are 4 star or better. They cap it around there, because whats 7 x 32 (picks per round). Accounting for misses, they rank that amount of kids based on the who they could drafted 3 - 5 years later.


But again...Coaching matters. Development and Gameday decision making are what separate the big programs...not just having more 5 stars.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

No. bot.
It hs EVERYTHING to do with the NFL.

Ive said this before.
For whatever reason people haven't picked up on it.
- Just read the talent description of the 3 star, 4 star and 5 star. Then tell me the NFL doesn't have anything to do with it.
- Count how many 4 stars and above there are each year, and then count how many spots there are in the NFL draft. They're close enough to the same number- accounting for missed evals even. Whether its 247, rivals, ESPN... between 250-300 players are 4 star or better. They cap it around there, because whats 7 x 32 (picks per round). Accounting for misses, they rank that amount of kids based on the who they could drafted 3 - 5 years later.


But again...Coaching matters. Development and Gameday decision making are what separate the big programs...not just having more 5 stars.

There are always gonna be misses. But the ranking system gets it right more often than not. That’s not really up for debate.

The biggest and best programs are that way because they get the most 5 and highly ranked 4 stars. Gary Patterson is a very good football coach. Does he really win at a high level? Not really. Why? He doesn’t recruit at a high level.

Some like to think that stars really don’t matter and like you say because they miss they can’t be trusted. That’s not the case in college. Usually the higher ranked guys play much better than the lower ranked ones.

 

[T2P_Priceless]

Is data accounting for development?
Bama and Clemson have sent 2 and 3 stars to the league as well.

Development is everything. I think people are putting way to much stock in what the recruit is ranked VS where he is getting developed.

I’m sure that’s part of it and part of the reason those programs get the higher rated prospects. It’s a self-perpetuating cycle

 

[LittleVol]

There are always gonna be misses. But the ranking system gets it right more often than not. That’s not really up for debate.

The biggest and best programs are that way because they get the most 5 and highly ranked 4 stars. Gary Patterson is a very good football coach. Does he really win at a high level? Not really. Why? He doesn’t recruit at a high level.

Some like to think that stars really don’t matter and like you say because they miss they can’t be trusted. That’s not the case in college. Usually the higher ranked guys play much better than the lower ranked ones.

Because of the sheer amount of missed evaluations, whether it's 1 percent or 50 percent, you have to look into why.
Is the star ranking system built on a solid database of information and is it logical.
I would say "not enough "

For example: Are there REALLY 30 guys in America EVERY season that are "5 star"?

Regardless of talent differentiation from class to class....the top 30 will ALWAYS be 5 star. That's not realistic. Not at all.

Instead of actually understanding what makes a true elite "5 star" they just fill out the Top 30 people they think are the best AS 5 stars. When in reality there maybe only 6 guys that are true elites for that class. Maybe there are 20 in the previous class, but you best believe there will be 10 other guys ranked as equal. To fit their model. And is that truly a reliable method??

I'm actually a fan of the star system, because it gives the kids something to compete for.

 

[T Dog]

Is data accounting for development?
Bama and Clemson have sent 2 and 3 stars to the league as well.

Development is everything. I think people are putting way to much stock in what the recruit is ranked VS where he is getting developed.

I'm with you, development is key. We have to have this same argument every year. Past 3 coaches sucked at development, firing strength coachs, DL coaches, ect. Its a new day in TN the guys are getting taught 1st to be a family and play for your brother not just as an individual. It is about to be Live with all these points about to be put up, can't wait!

 

[gainesvol82]

I say we just recruit Rose Bertram for offense and put her in one of those old Lingerie Bowl uniforms. Opposing defenses won't have a clue what the rest of the offense is doing because they will all either be staring or trying to gang tackle her.

Then again a majority of the fans will only be watching her too so nobody will know what's going on. Props to @drvenner for introducing me to one of my new top 3....she might even rival Shakira and Salma to take over the top spot.

 

[gainesvol82]

No. bot.
It hs EVERYTHING to do with the NFL.

Ive said this before.
For whatever reason people haven't picked up on it.
- Just read the talent description of the 3 star, 4 star and 5 star. Then tell me the NFL doesn't have anything to do with it.
- Count how many 4 stars and above there are each year, and then count how many spots there are in the NFL draft. They're close enough to the same number- accounting for missed evals even. Whether its 247, rivals, ESPN... between 250-300 players are 4 star or better. They cap it around there, because whats 7 x 32 (picks per round). Accounting for misses, they rank that amount of kids based on the who they could drafted 3 - 5 years later.


But again...Coaching matters. Development and Gameday decision making are what separate the big programs...not just having more 5 stars.

What the star system will never be able to account for is maturity...both physical and mental. 17 year olds are still physically changing and nobody knows what they will be in 1-2 years. Also difficult to tell how most will deal with college life mentally.

The star system can never be very accurate because it is only a measure of potential and unrealized potential happens all the time in all walks of life. It's not the evaluators, the players or even the coaches fault if people following recruiting don't understand this and think that any evaluation is surefire. There are very seldom recruits who are a sure thing.

Saban wins consistently because he is such a dictator that you don't play if you don't reach your potential. Most good coaches are like that but, like Belichik, he is the best to ever do it at this level. He demands more, so he gets more out of his players and assistants and therefore he gets most of the recruits he wants and those he recruits are ranked higher because evaluators know he is more likely than anyone to force recruits to meet their potential.

 

[bigl3327]

No. bot.
It hs EVERYTHING to do with the NFL.

Ive said this before.
For whatever reason people haven't picked up on it.
- Just read the talent description of the 3 star, 4 star and 5 star. Then tell me the NFL doesn't have anything to do with it.
- Count how many 4 stars and above there are each year, and then count how many spots there are in the NFL draft. They're close enough to the same number- accounting for missed evals even. Whether its 247, rivals, ESPN... between 250-300 players are 4 star or better. They cap it around there, because whats 7 x 32 (picks per round). Accounting for misses, they rank that amount of kids based on the who they could drafted 3 - 5 years later.


But again...Coaching matters. Development and Gameday decision making are what separate the big programs...not just having more 5 stars.

Rankings are fun for fans. 5 stars are easy to pick out. Most of us here could do it. They are almost, always bigger, stronger, faster naturally than everyone else. You are right. Player development and coaching are still ultimately, the greatest factor. People get upset about the Alabama bump that their recruits get. The bump is largely because development is factored into that equation now for Bama commits. It's been proven that these kids are likely to reach their full potential under Saban. The competition alone helps separate the wheat from the chaff. In reality though, the first day you step onto a college campus, your high school rating means nothing. Almost everyone (including most walk-ons) was a star in high school to some degree. This is where all the intangibles come into play. Things like coaching, nutrition, strength and conditioning, etc. Then there are the hardest factors to determine. These have to do with the players as individuals. Things like work ethic, maturity, drive, accountability, football IQ, is a player coachable, sleeping habits, locker room presence, mental health, etc. Recruiting is not an exact science, and recruiting services don't attempt to account for most of these factors. The NFL spends millions to determine many of these additional factors, and still get it wrong a lot.

 

[gnm53108]

Rankings are fun for fans. 5 stars are easy to pick out. Most of us here could do it. They are almost, always bigger, stronger, faster naturally than everyone else. You are right. Player development and coaching are still ultimately, the greatest factor. People get upset about the Alabama bump that their recruits get. The bump is largely because development is factored into that equation now for Bama commits. It's been proven that these kids are likely to reach their full potential under Saban. The competition alone helps separate the wheat from the chaff. In reality though, the first day you step onto a college campus, your high school rating means nothing. Almost everyone (including most walk-ons) was a star in high school to some degree. This is where all the intangibles come into play. Things like coaching, nutrition, strength and conditioning, etc. Then there are the hardest factors to determine. These have to do with the players as individuals. Things like work ethic, maturity, drive, accountability, football IQ, is a player coachable, sleeping habits, locker room presence, mental health, etc. Recruiting is not an exact science, and recruiting services don't attempt to account for most of these factors. The NFL spends millions to determine many of these additional factors, and still get it wrong a lot.

You left out the most important factor of all. College girls.

 

[bigl3327]

You left out the most important factor of all. College girls.

That is a major factor. You never know what might happen with a kid the first time he gets him a little bit. It can make a good kid stupid in a hurry.

 

[KPT_VFL]

Beast. Don’t care if his ratings drop. 1000 yard receiver SOON.

 

[drvenner]

I say we just recruit Rose Bertram for offense and put her in one of those old Lingerie Bowl uniforms. Opposing defenses won't have a clue what the rest of the offense is doing because they will all either be staring or trying to gang tackle her.

Then again a majority of the fans will only be watching her too so nobody will know what's going on. Props to @drvenner for introducing me to one of my new top 3....she might even rival Shakira and Salma to take over the top spot.

She is um, pretty incredible

 

[LittleVol]

Rankings are fun for fans. 5 stars are easy to pick out. Most of us here could do it. They are almost, always bigger, stronger, faster naturally than everyone else. You are right. Player development and coaching are still ultimately, the greatest factor. People get upset about the Alabama bump that their recruits get. The bump is largely because development is factored into that equation now for Bama commits. It's been proven that these kids are likely to reach their full potential under Saban. The competition alone helps separate the wheat from the chaff. In reality though, the first day you step onto a college campus, your high school rating means nothing. Almost everyone (including most walk-ons) was a star in high school to some degree. This is where all the intangibles come into play. Things like coaching, nutrition, strength and conditioning, etc. Then there are the hardest factors to determine. These have to do with the players as individuals. Things like work ethic, maturity, drive, accountability, football IQ, is a player coachable, sleeping habits, locker room presence, mental health, etc. Recruiting is not an exact science, and recruiting services don't attempt to account for most of these factors. The NFL spends millions to determine many of these additional factors, and still get it wrong a lot.

Well said!

 

[LouderVol]

No. bot.
It hs EVERYTHING to do with the NFL.

Ive said this before.
For whatever reason people haven't picked up on it.
- Just read the talent description of the 3 star, 4 star and 5 star. Then tell me the NFL doesn't have anything to do with it.
- Count how many 4 stars and above there are each year, and then count how many spots there are in the NFL draft. They're close enough to the same number- accounting for missed evals even. Whether its 247, rivals, ESPN... between 250-300 players are 4 star or better. They cap it around there, because whats 7 x 32 (picks per round). Accounting for misses, they rank that amount of kids based on the who they could drafted 3 - 5 years later.


But again...Coaching matters. Development and Gameday decision making are what separate the big programs...not just having more 5 stars.

Lol. The number of four stars+ varies from year to year, and service to service.

247 does a top 247, the reason seems obvious. But they dont stop their 4 stars there.

ESPN is a top 300, they also market a top 100 as well. But their 4 stars go beyond that.

Rivals seems to change theirs but usually it's a top 250. But as you guessed it, they dont stop their 4 stars there.

Considering the draft numbers dont change and the closest is 10% off; while not actually addressing the actual number of 4 stars which ranges well over 300 most years.

Your logic here is stretched to the extreme.

 

[SweetasSoda]

 

[SweetasSoda]

 

[LittleVol]

Lol. The number of four stars+ varies from year to year, and service to service.

247 does a top 247, the reason seems obvious. But they dont stop their 4 stars there.

ESPN is a top 300, they also market a top 100 as well. But their 4 stars go beyond that.

Rivals seems to change theirs but usually it's a top 250. But as you guessed it, they dont stop their 4 stars there.

Considering the draft numbers dont change and the closest is 10% off; while not actually addressing the actual number of 4 stars which ranges well over 300 most years.

Your logic here is stretched to the extreme.

No it's not. In the description of 3, 4, and 5 stars are the literal chances of being drafted into the NFL. check on Rivals since they were doing before 247.
It's not like it's "hidden" knowledge...smh

 

[Bassmaster_Vol]

3 star

dude is top 3 in state

 

[JRVOL11]

Dude can ball

 

[devol]

We scrimmaged his team last week and Mr. Miller was clearly a different level athlete. He may not have great stats this year as 25 players on the team and they basically had no time to throw deep.

 

[T2P_Priceless]

3 star

dude is top 3 in state

I can see him getting a huge bump this year