Recruiting Question

[Mean'n'Green07]

Ok, we got two first team all state players from the area to verbal commitments. This is great, but I don't understand why rivals/scouts rates them so low. They made the all state team in the most competitive football region in the best football state, doesn't that merit a better ranking?

I understand that they might think Padron is undersized, but what about Breece Johnson? This kid is a stud. Why isn't this guy one of the top rated recruits? Also, how is this class shaping up compared to DD's recruiting classes from the past few years?

[good_ken]

Ok, we got two first team all state players from the area to verbal commitments. This is great, but I don't understand why rivals/scouts rates them so low. They made the all state team in the most competitive football region in the best football state, doesn't that merit a better ranking?

I understand that they might think Padron is undersized, but what about Breece Johnson? This kid is a stud. Why isn't this guy one of the top rated recruits? Also, how is this class shaping up compared to DD's recruiting classes from the past few years?

Rivals has always shown a big school bias. This was proven, WRT to UNT, a couple of years ago when we were chasing a 3-star QB named Zac Taylor. Once signing with Nebraska, he "became" a 4-star QB.

The year before that, Jamario Thomas lost points (lower rating) when he commited to UNT. Their logic being that if he came to UNT, then he must not be as good.

Rivals sells subscriptions: to folks like me and you, and also to schools. It is in their best interest to ensure that the recruits of schools like UT are ranked highly.

Go search Texags, some of their postes have studied hwo biased Rivals is.

[gangrene]

Ok, we got two first team all state players from the area to verbal commitments. This is great, but I don't understand why rivals/scouts rates them so low. They made the all state team in the most competitive football region in the best football state, doesn't that merit a better ranking?

I understand that they might think Padron is undersized, but what about Breece Johnson? This kid is a stud. Why isn't this guy one of the top rated recruits? Also, how is this class shaping up compared to DD's recruiting classes from the past few years?

I'm not sure I understand Rivals either. I was looking at the National Top 100 and the State Top 100 lists (both of which were compiled by Rivals) in yesterday's DMN. I zoned in on a couple of UT commits (mainly because one of them, listed as an "athlete", played WR in an All-Star game but vows he'll play QB at Texas). Anyway, Curtis Brown, a DB from Gilmer, is listed as the state's #4 overall recruit, whereas John Chiles, "athlete" from Mansfield Summit, is listed as the #3 overall recruit in Texas. Compare that to Brown being ranked #9 in the NATION and Chiles falls to #16 nationally. How does that make sense???

[marc_moffitt]

I agree with this theory and the bias that is shown to certain schools.

I will bet that if we loose a recruit to a larger school, that their ranking will immediately shoot up.

It has happened before I am sure.

Also, keep in mind, that a "Statewide" ranked recruit is nothing when it comes to a "national" ranking. and thus, a "Area" ranking is not going to be as strong as a "Satewide" ranking

[Green Mean]

I dont doubt that there may be a bias towards favorting the bcs conferences and big schools and etc. I guess i'm going to give everyone the benefit of the doubt that there are so many players and people evaluating that i think there will be some sort of confusion and weird rankings of all these players. I think a lot of this evaluating is just done by blind faith....if you dominate in the hs ranks then automatically you will star in college but afcourse thats not that case. As in Breece's case i dont know how he fell through the cracks if he's that much of a stud. I realize he may have liked unt even before dodge and maybe wanted to stay in the area but i'm surprised tcu or smu didnt recruit him hard as tcu is consistently in the top 25 nationally and smu is on the rise with a young and stud of a qb in justin willis. What do you guys think?

[GrandGreen]

Not much to add, but rivals is in the business to make money. They have a very limited staff to evaluate players nationwide so they base most of their ratings on the power colleges' recruiting. I can assure you that if Johnson and Patron were committed to Texas with their credentials they would be immediately four star players.

As far as comparison between TD's recruiting and DD's there is not any. TD has two commitments both 5a all state first team selections. DD's last recruiting class was a disaster even for him. Not that some of the players don't have promise but DD and staff's recruiting effort was almost comical. DD does not sign a QB until giving walk on Tune a ship after practice began. His targeted QB chose to walk on at Kansas. NT did not sign a running back losing out to the MUTS no less in signing Tanner a good local player. DD's most lauded recruits were a 2th team juco all American that did not last through spring training and a defensive lineman out of a Tulsa HS who lost a hundred pounds and decided he did not want to play for NT. NT ballyhooed an all state player signing but in actuality he was only honorable mention. DD did recruit Owassu-Heming who looked very good in the Texas all star game but I am not sure he is even now on the team.

[Guest GrayEagleOne]

My observation is that yes, Rivals does get a lot of their confirming information from some of the larger schools recruiting lists. Then they get videos, reports, etc. and rate the recruits. This is done usually in their junior year. Those were rated long before all-district, all-area and all-state teams came out. Once the recruit has been signed, the recruit will be re-evaluated. Most will receive two stars, unless they feel that the recruit is really a reach. On a few rare occasions, the recruit may receive a three-star rating. I've never seen a recruit jump from no stars to 4-stars.

[PlummMeanGreen]

But what Rivals, Max Emfinger, Hunky-Dory Recruiting Services, etc, etc, etc, cannot do are rank what the heart of these kids are. Give me a 2 star recruit with lots of heart and you might think you have a 3 star and up talent on your hands.

Would love to get a list of how many of Boise State's recruits over the last 4-5 years were actually 3 stars and up type recruits.

Of course, Coach Boomer (Barry) made it explicitly clear that OU had not recruited any of BSU's players before BSU handed his Sooners a rather sizeable goose-bump on their crimson and cream noggins'.

[Eagle-96]

But what Rivals, Max Emfinger, Hunky-Dory Recruiting Services, etc, etc, etc, cannot do are rank what the heart of these kids are. Give me a 2 star recruit with lots of heart and you might think you have a 3 star and up talent on your hands.

Would love to get a list of how many of Boise State's recruits over the last 4-5 years were actually 3 stars and up type recruits.

Of course, Coach Boomer (Barry) made it explicitly clear that OU had not recruited any of BSU's players before BSU handed his Sooners a rather sizeable goose-bump on their crimson and cream noggins'.

Here is the breakdown of three-star atheletes for Boise State by year:

2007: 3

2006: 3

2005: 5(and one 4-Star recruit)

2004: 2

2003: 2

2002: 0

Edited January 8, 2007 by Eagle-96

[PlummMeanGreen]

Here is the breakdown of three-star atheletes for Boise State by year:

2007: 3

2006: 3

2005: 5(and one 4-Star recruit)

2004: 2

2003: 2

2002: 0

Wow! Instant service on that one! Thanks for this "quick" info, Eagle-96.

Let me add this one small thought, though:

The one key thing that a non-BCS school needs to recruit no matter how many stars Rivals has given each of their recruits is good overall speed; and any D1-A program needs that for any annual recruiting haul because as we've all heard forever from both coaches and commentators alike: "You cannot coach speed."

Edited January 8, 2007 by PlummMeanGreen

[football fan]

But what Rivals, Max Emfinger, Hunky-Dory Recruiting Services, etc, etc, etc, cannot do are rank what the heart of these kids are. Give me a 2 star recruit with lots of heart and you might think you have a 3 star and up talent on your hands.

Amen to that PMG! Totally agree with you. I think this will be our experience until we start winning and beating some higher profile teams. Then the more glamorous recruits will start to come.

[GrandGreen]

My observation is that yes, Rivals does get a lot of their confirming information from some of the larger schools recruiting lists. Then they get videos, reports, etc. and rate the recruits. This is done usually in their junior year. Those were rated long before all-district, all-area and all-state teams came out. Once the recruit has been signed, the recruit will be re-evaluated. Most will receive two stars, unless they feel that the recruit is really a reach. On a few rare occasions, the recruit may receive a three-star rating. I've never seen a recruit jump from no stars to 4-stars.

I think you credit the recruiting services with a lot more research than actually happens. How many fake players have ended up on top 100 lists over the years because most of the services do little or no research at all. As far as jumping from no stars to 4-stars I think that is exactly what would happen in my hypothetical. A player shows up as a UT commitment that they don't have in their database. They check up and discover that this guy is one of the top receivers in the state and a first team 5a all state player. I believe it is likely they would rate this player very high just based on UT's interest and very strong stats. In my mind this is no different than what happens with most players recruited by the lower tier schools that are not in their database. They have no idea of how good the players are but they received a lower tier school ship therefore they are at least 2 star recruits.

[TicketJohn]

Ok, we got two first team all state players from the area to verbal commitments. This is great, but I don't understand why rivals/scouts rates them so low. They made the all state team in the most competitive football region in the best football state, doesn't that merit a better ranking?

I understand that they might think Padron is undersized, but what about Breece Johnson? This kid is a stud. Why isn't this guy one of the top rated recruits? Also, how is this class shaping up compared to DD's recruiting classes from the past few years?

Ok, here's the deal. Rivals used to say they rated players based on their pro potential, not neccesarily whether they had great success in high school or that they will have success in college. It was more based on athleticism and size before other intangibles come into play. They changed up the ranking system last year...saying that they base it more on the potential to be a college star, but it doesn't look much different to me. Here's how it reads:

Rivals100.com has assembled the top team of recruiting analysts in the nation with both national and regional experts based all throughout the country. With those strengths, players at a number of different positions will be ranked once a month from June until February.

The rankings are compiled after countless hours of film evaluation, personal observations and input from professional, college and high school coaches.

In the finished product, players are ranked a number of different ways but the most important ways are numerically by position, qualitatively by stars and a new ranking system that grades players on the expected impact they will make in college.

Players are ranked numerically on a national level at their positions. The numerical ranking at each position varies depending on the depth of the talent at the position.

Players are also ranked on their quality with a star ranking. A five-star prospect is considered to be one of the nation?s top 25-30 players, four star is a top 150-200 player, three-stars is a top 550 level player, two stars means the player is a mid-major prospect and one star means the player is not ranked.

5 Star=6.1 Franchise Player; considered one of the elite prospects in the country, generally among the nation's top 25 players overall; deemed to have excellent pro potential; high-major prospect

4 Star=6.0-5.8 All-American Candidate; high-major prospect; considered one of the nation's top 200 prospects; deemed to have pro potential and ability to make an impact on college team

3 star=5.7-5.5 All-Region Selection; considered among the region's top prospects and among the top 500 or so prospects in the country; high-to-mid-major prospect; deemed to have pro potential and ability to make an impact on college team

2 star=5.4-5.0 Division I prospect; considered a mid-major prospect; deemed to have limited pro potential but definite Division I prospect; may be more of a role player

4.9 Sleeper; no Rivals.com expert knew much, if anything, about this player; a prospect that only a college coach really knew about

***Note: Only one Mean Green recruit from last year was ranked above a 5.1. That was Kelvin Drake, who was rated a 5.4, just a tick below a 3 star prospect.

[El Paso Eagle]

Where is their explanation on how a player jumps up in his ratings when he is being recruited by mainly non-BCS schools and then signs with a BCS school?

[GreenN'walinsVet]

Its in the fine print where its stated who pays for all the RIVALS information

[AnotherEagleFan]

Where is their explanation on how a player jumps up in his ratings when he is being recruited by mainly non-BCS schools and then signs with a BCS school?

Sounds to me like the part where they talk about the professional input from coaches (high school and colleges). So if Brown or Stoops think that they are worthy of playing for their team then they get a higher star.