January 19, 201610 yr Just read that Kash Daniel and Drake Jackson also earned an extra star, both were bumped up to 4* status. Not that they magically got better over the past week or two, they have been elite players all along. There are tons of players that the recruiting agencies miss the boat on, I'm glad to see these guys get the recognition they deserve.
January 19, 201610 yr I would venture to bet that they miss almost as much as they get it right. Just look at the kid that played at Clemson.
January 19, 201610 yr I would venture to bet that they miss almost as much as they get it right. Just look at the kid that played at Clemson. Define "miss."
January 19, 201610 yr A 5 star does not turn out to be a dominant college player or a kid not even "starred" ends up having a great college career. I realize that a lot of these rankings are dependent on the parent traveling the camp circuit and spending their money in hopes of landing their kid a college offer or offers. There are many many stereotypes that are placed on what type of player in high school makes a successful college player, however each and every year we hear of numerous kids that are/were walk-ons that turn out to be pretty good football players even though they do not meet the "eye candy" test. Just curious what Drew Barker's star ranking was out of high school? We then hear grumblings all year about how he should have been the QB at Kentucky. He finally does get a few starts and still has 3 years to play, yet we hear how great the guy they just recruited is and that he will compete this year for playing time. Question is was Drew over or under evaluated or is it simply that Kentucky has not developed him like many of the other supposed 3, 4 and 5 star recruits that they have signed. An even better example would be the Elam kid from John Hardin. All these stars and Alabama is a final choice and he has yet to be a dominant player at the collegiate level after two years.
January 19, 201610 yr A 5 star does not turn out to be a dominant college player or a kid not even "starred" ends up having a great college career. I realize that a lot of these rankings are dependent on the parent traveling the camp circuit and spending their money in hopes of landing their kid a college offer or offers. There are many many stereotypes that are placed on what type of player in high school makes a successful college player' date=' however each and every year we hear of numerous kids that are/were walk-ons that turn out to be pretty good football players even though they do not meet the "eye candy" test. Just curious what Drew Barker's star ranking was out of high school? We then hear grumblings all year about how he should have been the QB at Kentucky. He finally does get a few starts and still has 3 years to play, yet we hear how great the guy they just recruited is and that he will compete this year for playing time. Question is was Drew over or under evaluated or is it simply that Kentucky has not developed him like many of the other supposed 3, 4 and 5 star recruits that they have signed. An even better example would be the Elam kid from John Hardin. All these stars and Alabama is a final choice and he has yet to be a dominant player at the collegiate level after two years.[/quote'] Barker was a solid 4 star, not a high or low.
January 19, 201610 yr A 5 star does not turn out to be a dominant college player or a kid not even "starred" ends up having a great college career. I realize that a lot of these rankings are dependent on the parent traveling the camp circuit and spending their money in hopes of landing their kid a college offer or offers. There are many many stereotypes that are placed on what type of player in high school makes a successful college player' date=' however each and every year we hear of numerous kids that are/were walk-ons that turn out to be pretty good football players even though they do not meet the "eye candy" test. Just curious what Drew Barker's star ranking was out of high school? We then hear grumblings all year about how he should have been the QB at Kentucky. He finally does get a few starts and still has 3 years to play, yet we hear how great the guy they just recruited is and that he will compete this year for playing time. Question is was Drew over or under evaluated or is it simply that Kentucky has not developed him like many of the other supposed 3, 4 and 5 star recruits that they have signed. An even better example would be the Elam kid from John Hardin. All these stars and Alabama is a final choice and he has yet to be a dominant player at the collegiate level after two years.[/quote'] Drew and Pat were both 4 stars. Why are we theorizing on a player who has two career starts?
January 19, 201610 yr Drew and Pat were both 4 stars. Why are we theorizing on a player who has two career starts? I am theorizing on what I have seen involving college recruiting over numerous years. It has gotten even worse in the last 10 years or so IMO.
January 19, 201610 yr I am theorizing on what I have seen involving college recruiting over numerous years. It has gotten even worse in the last 10 years or so IMO. I'd argue it's gotten better. It's much easier for a college to actually see tape of a player now. In the old days you had to get out on the road and see them which was difficult to do during the season. Now you can watch multiple kids online and get an idea of who fits and who doesn't and then start getting more info on those kids.
January 19, 201610 yr I am theorizing on what I have seen involving college recruiting over numerous years. It has gotten even worse in the last 10 years or so IMO. Elam was a low 4 star recruit, one service full of UK followers gave him a 5.
January 19, 201610 yr I think you can get a more realistic read on a player is he is rated a consensus 4 or 5 star. Consensus meaning.........was he a 4 or 5 at Rivals, Scout, 247 and ESPN? Or was he a 2 at one, 3 at another and maybe 4 at two others. The consensus guys usually pan out. Can't just take one or two service ratings and run with them.
January 19, 201610 yr I think you can get a more realistic read on a player is he is rated a consensus 4 or 5 star. Consensus meaning.........was he a 4 or 5 at Rivals, Scout, 247 and ESPN? Or was he a 2 at one, 3 at another and maybe 4 at two others. The consensus guys usually pan out. Can't just take one or two service ratings and run with them. Now that makes more sense to me. I do agree with Clyde to a certain extent, however game tape does not show me how the kid does live. Realize time is money, but just think tape can sometimes make a kid look better than he might actually be. Also hard to measure the intangibles without seeing them play in person at least once or twice.
January 20, 201610 yr Charles Reeves has decommited' date=' don't let him end up at Michigan Stoops![/quote'] Not looking good. Only kid I can remember in the Stoops era to decommit and then later recommit and sign is Denzel Ware. His deal was a little different because Stoops had just got there and Ware committed off the excitement and buzz before even visiting campus. He decommited to let the recruiting process play out, took his visit to Lexington and was reassured that's where he wanted to be. Some had thought he was going to be a Florida Gator or possibly sign with FSU if they showed serious interest. Don't see that happening very often.
.thumb.jpeg.8d2472ffe992a9c5c22b4582f4881eab.jpeg)
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.