Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Sure, but I'd rather have 5*s than 3*s.  And yes, plenty of 3s do quite well, but there are plenty of 3s.

It doesn't happen to Georgia, but often times when non-helmet signs guys, the recruiting sites drop them.  It has nothing to do with player evaluation.  It's stupid.

"Complete" is probably an overstatement.

They are decidedly not exact, and tend to have some problematic back-end politics. But somehow those politics don't do THAT much to dampen their overall usefulness.

(I'd love to see someone round up data on the "they dropped because they picked my team" guys. Even just stories)

Well, AAA has one such story, just a couple posts above.  I see it from other teams all the time.  It rarely happens to Texas, if anything it tends to go the other way.

These guys haven't played any games in 9 months, so what other reasons are there to drop them?  Especially en masse?

Your list of reasons doesn't include anything about actual game play.

Which is why I refer to it as a crock of shit.

You can certainly hold a differing opinion.  Lots of people are okay with being wrong.

There are far fewer 5* than 4* so on a percentage basis even one bust is more impactful.  That's not proof of anything, just an aside.

What difference is there in a high 4* and a 5*?

What difference is there in a high 3* and a 4*?

Unless there's a statistical analysis performed that isolates for variables like program stability, program consistency, and probably a dozen others I haven't named, then it really doesn't mean much.

Ohio State does well with its 5 stars?  Really?  No shit?  You mean the most consistent, most stable, most high-achieving program of all time, tends to get 5 stars and they tend to perform pretty well?  That's shocking, I tell you!

Oh, the past decade looks the same for Alabama, too?  I'm shocked, just flabbergasted, that such a thing could happen!

I don’t even mean this to be rude, but if you’re telling me the measure of a talent is only discernible by what happens between the lines 9-16 times in the fall, then you are very likely in that latter tribe.

But if you’re ok with it, that certainly counts for something.

Lulz.

I don't mean this to be rude, but this is a pretty weak response.  I typically expect better of you.

Yes, of course the most important things that happen related to player rating, are the things that happen between the lines 10-16 times in the Fall.  By far.  Nothing else even comes close.

And any major movement of that rating occurring during the offseason, is something I suspect of agendas and ulterior motives.  One or two players here or there, moving because of an injury or a character issue, would be understandable. Movements for a large number of recruits, when no games have happened for 9 months?  Yeah, no.

I mean, you realize these services are all monetized by subscribers, or click-generated ad revenue, or both.  Right?  What better way to generate more clicks, or keep subscribers locked in, than by making unexpected and unnecessary changes to player ratings, in the middle of the summer when nothing is happening?

Come on.

If you looks at star ratings based on NFL rosters, there is a very solid correlation, better than I would have suspected.  I think we all agree there are shennigans, but to say ratings are complete BS is in my view an over reaction, or hyperbole.  And besides, I like "best of" lists.


So, I think it's worth more than a grain of salt, and I also think players who sign with "Michigan State" may get derated, and vice versa.

I mean, we know players that sign with Michigan State get derated.  And Oklahoma State. And Oregon State. What we can only speculate, is why.

Complete BS might be hyperbole.  Garbage not worth discussing is probably more like it, so I'll go ahead and take my own advice and stop discussing it.

In reality I don't worry about recruiting rankings and player star ratings.  I only ever hope that my coaches find players that fit the team's needs, fit the coaches' schemes, and can be developed over time.  And then of course, I hope my coaches actual DO develop them.

Lulz.

I don't mean this to be rude, but this is a pretty weak response.  I typically expect better of you.

Yes, of course the most important things that happen related to player rating, are the things that happen between the lines 10-16 times in the Fall.  By far.  Nothing else even comes close.

And any major movement of that rating occurring during the offseason, is something I suspect of agendas and ulterior motives.  One or two players here or there, moving because of an injury or a character issue, would be understandable. Movements for a large number of recruits, when no games have happened for 9 months?  Yeah, no.

I mean, you realize these services are all monetized by subscribers, or click-generated ad revenue, or both.  Right?  What better way to generate more clicks, or keep subscribers locked in, than by making unexpected and unnecessary changes to player ratings, in the middle of the summer when nothing is happening?

Come on.

It's alright. Expecting a lot from me is the first mistake (and I was on my phone and should've been working).

Maybe I've been too close to all that, but HS football, which is great, is often a very weird way to measure kids. Competition is uneven. Matchups are hard to get (if a 5-star DE and 5-star OT match up, the defense is probably just moving the end elsewhere. Like, the second and third leading rushers in Texas are going D-III and nowhere. They're 2,800-yard backs, and they're not FCS guys. 

So yeah, a rating that tries to roughly include on-field stuff, but also factors like size, speed, work against top-competition in non-game settings, basically stuff coaches look at. Also they use info from coaches, both the public kinds and behind the scenes goodies. Recruiting never stops. Offers and evals go out beyond the season, so recruiting coverage follows that. 

That actually touches on the revenue part. The random shifts aren't keeping folks locked in. That's free and caters to a tiny group of nerds. They get subscribers and revenue from either breaking news or getting insider info, generated by reporting, talking to kids and leaking coach propaganda and info. I've no doubt some ranking movement helps, but I guess I would say there are modest reasons you could move a guy now.

Anywho, I understand the disinterest in a system that can't be precise, and no system in CFB will be precise in that way, so is what it is. I begrudgingly came to see it's effective in a certain ways. It's not perfect, and the inputs are oft fuzzy, but also probably based on more logical things than the high-end skeptics would admit.