What's all the excitement about?

#26
#26
Vol423 said:
...which would more than likely place UT somewhere between 5th and 7th in the SEC in recruiting. That's precisely my point. We're consistently losing ground.
Click to expand...

UT will only lose ground on the field... not in some subjective beauty contest.

I'm not saying talent isn't important. It is vital. But the difference between a 3* and 4* isn't quite as certain as many seem to believe.
 
#27
#27
Vol423 said:
Are you seriously using 2008 as the measuring stick of a solid recruiting class?
Click to expand...

No. There was nothing in that post to suggest that I was. It will be solid or not solid based on how well they perform on the field. In fact, I'm saying that it almost couldn't have been worse. Of the highly rated players they pursued, they only won A-W without help from other factors.

Right now however, Poole and Johnson at the very least seem to have been underrated.
 
#28
#28
sjt18 said:
UT will only lose ground on the field... not in some subjective beauty contest.

I'm not saying talent isn't important. It is vital. But the difference between a 3* and 4* isn't quite as certain as many seem to believe.
Click to expand...

Really? The article that I linked above does seem to indicate a significant difference. It indicates that a 4-star recruit is basically three times as likely to be drafted into the NFL than a 3-star recruit. You might want to read it.
 
#29
#29
Vol423, that article actually confirms the point that some of us have made here. The recruiting svcs do pretty good at giving the great players they find high ratings... they just don't find all of the great players.

IOW's, they seldom overrate players (in part by limiting the % in higher ratings). However, they do underrate players. Even that article shows that 4* are more likely to be a top 10 draft choice than 5*. If the ratings were truly relevant... that shouldn't be. The 5* players should absolutely dominate the first round. More than 40% should be drafted for sure since 5* recruits are supposedly "can't miss".

You might say they cover almost the whole draft with 3-5* however they rate most players with BCS team attention 3*. That can hardly be claimed as redemption for them.

I think the ratings are valid for what they're intended to do. I think they're relevant. I also think there's more to building a winning football team than the opinions of the recruiting svcs.
 
#30
#30
VolunteerHillbilly said:
I think they are doing exactly what they should be doing insofar as they have not accepted a commit from anyone less than 3* rated other than linemen, which are an area of desperate need as we all know. I would like to see them hold out for a bit more elite athletes at the skill positions than some of the guys that they have accepted this early in the game, but there is still time.

sjt, you should just accept my correctness and get on board the train to happytown. Your constant negativity towards my posts is going to give you an ulcer if you don't watch it.
Click to expand...

Jarvis Giles, Thigpen, Stokes, and Oliver aren't elite athletes? Oliver might have been a 3 star, but look at his offer list. Dominique Allen is one of the highest rated FBs.
 
#31
#31
Vol423 said:
Really? The article that I linked above does seem to indicate a significant difference. It indicates that a 4-star recruit is basically three times as likely to be drafted into the NFL than a 3-star recruit. You might want to read it.
Click to expand...

Six of the top 10 players taken didn't play in a BCS bowl or win their conference.

Draft position btw doesn't translate automatically to NFL success.

Also think about it for awhile. If they were really THAT accurate at evaluating talent to the degree you guys are giving them credit... there should never be more 2* guys in the first three rounds than 5* guys even with the much smaller pool of 5* guys. That means they've really, really missed on some guys.
 
#32
#32
sjt18 said:
Also think about it for awhile. If they were really THAT accurate at evaluating talent to the degree you guys are giving them credit... there should never be more 2* guys in the first three rounds than 5* guys even with the much smaller pool of 5* guys. That means they've really, really missed on some guys.
Click to expand...

You obviously missed the part where they stated that approximately 50% of the 5-star guys get drafted, while less than 1% of the 2-star guys get drafted. You don't call that significant?

Yes. About half of the 5-star guys go undrafted. UT hasn't helped that statistic of late.
 
#33
#33
I call it significant that they completely whiffed on more guys drafted in the first three rounds than they hit on. It gets much worse for them if you think they're indicating a big difference between a 3* and 5* recruit.

Like I said, they do well predicting the guys they rate highly... but they miss alot of players with just as much talent... quite obviously.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top