The fault is not in the stars.

Those of you who have pointed to the factoid of no former five-star recruits playing in the past Super Bowl as definitive evidence that recruiting rankings are overrated might want to take a look at where the four teams that appeared in the last CFP semi-finals finished in recruiting over the past four years.

40 Comments

Filed under Recruiting

40 responses to “The fault is not in the stars.

  1. PTC DAWG

    Still not sure why folks kept talking about the Super Bowl and recruiting…last time I checked UGA is not in the NFC South.

    Like

  2. TXBaller

    With Richt?

    Like

  3. I pointed that out, but it was not to debunk recruiting rankings in college football. Just thought it was interesting. I am certainly not in the “just get kids who play hard and want to play for Georgia–stars be damned” camp.

    I do wonder if it is proof that some of these kids peak early.

    Like

    • CannonDawg

      I posted the Super Bowl tidbit as well, not in an effort to marginalize the rankings, but to emphasize that great coaching is also at play. Saban and Myer attract 5* recruits because they are the two best in the CFB business at building a program by doing something with the talent they accumulate. That combination of great coaching and superior talent gets a program in the playoffs. If we look back on how close UGA has been in the past say, five years, has it been a gap in talent between UA or AU or LSU?

      Like

  4. Dawglover

    If we really want to evaluate these players for college, maybe someone should consider factoring in high school GPA and entrance-test grades into the “star” ranking system. It’s demeaning to everyone, especially the athletes, to think that only half-educated mercenaries belong on the college football playing field. Wouldn’t hurt to deflate some of these puffed-up adolescent egos. Naive but true.

    Like

  5. 904Biscuit

    I wonder how many 1, 2, and even 3 star recruits were playing in the super bowl. Probably not many. I would bet that, minus the kickers and long snappers, the majority of the players were 4 star recruits. Just because there happened to be no former 5 star recruits on the field doesn’t mean that the recruiting star system is a complete crap shoot. I’d rather have UGA take their chances with a bunch of 4 star guys over 3 star recruits any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

    Like

  6. dawgfan336

    My much younger half brother is being recruited up here in NC. The coaches tell him they could care less about star ratings and they only exist for the recruiting services.The recruiters say they look for the physical tools, grades, and can you hit. So, I’m pretty well convinced the stars are all hype.

    Like

  7. W Cobb Dawg

    Another day, another article that shows we underachieve on the field.

    Like

    • Bulldog Joe

      If recruiting rankings were revised on who remains on the team at the end of the first season, you will likely see we achieve as expected on the field.

      Recruiting rankings don’t factor in the talent effect of The Georgia Way.

      Like

    • PTC DAWG

      Hey man, nice shot

      Like

    • Irwin R Fletcher

      So two top 10 finishes in the past 3 seasons doesn’t seem about right for having the 6/7th highest recruiting average?

      Like

      • Bulldawg165

        If you consider us ranked 43rd at the end of 2013 (behind all of the teams that received votes in the AP but didn’t crack the top 25), our average finish over the last four years is 19th. Does that seem about right for having the 6/7th highest recruiting average?

        Like

        • Irwin R Fletcher

          Well
          #1
          Injuries.
          #2
          FSU finished 10, 1, and 5
          LSU finished 14, 14, and UR
          USC finished UR, 19, and 20
          UGA finished 5, UR, and 9
          Florida finished 9, UR, and UR
          Auburn finished UR, 2, and 22
          TAMu finished 5, 18, and UR
          Texas finished 19, UR and UR
          ND finished 4, 20, and UR
          UCLA finished UR, 16, and 10
          Tennessee finished UR, UR, and UR
          Clemson finished 11, 8 and 15
          OU finished 15, 6, and UR
          Miami finished UR, UR, and UR

          Those are the schools ranked 3 through 16 on that list. I have a small problem when folks draw a baseline of ‘under/over’ achievement based on their own fictitious belief of what average results are vs. what actual average results are. Looking at that list above…it is very hard and practically impossible to say UGA ‘underachieved’ the past three seasons based on its recruiting averages…well, unless you want to ignore baseline performance in order to serve your own narrative.

          Like

          • Bulldawg165

            “I have a small problem when folks draw a baseline of ‘under/over’ achievement based on their own fictitious belief of what average results are vs. what actual average results are”

            You do realize that in order for a school to perform worse than their recruiting ranking would predict another school has to actually perform better, than their recruiting would predict, right? In other words, it’s a zero sum game.

            Like

            • Bulldawg165

              There shouldn’t be a comma after “better” but I think you get my point.

              Like

              • Irwin R Fletcher

                I think I get the point you are trying to make…if we laid out all the schools 1-129 and gave them a value for three years of finishes and put them next to the recruiting ranking then we would have 64 underperform, 64 over perform, and 1 just right…that’s not what I’m talking about.

                I’m talking about comparing Georgia to it’s peers in recruiting rankings, which I think was the original idea made by the commenter above. When you look at UGA compared to others in the range…two top 10 finishes is more than any other school and 2 out of 3 seasons ranked is about the norm.

                Like

                • W Cobb Dawg

                  The list had us tied at #6. That’s considerably better recruiting than I would’ve thought without seeing those numbers. And on the face of it, our 40-14 record during the last 4 years looks good. I guess if we had won an upper tier bowl game or the secc, it wouldn’t feel like we underachieved.

                  Like

          • pete

            Good point Fletch. You can also add the element of how much a team can absorb with those injuries. The SEC has 11teams in the top 25 on that list. By contrast the Big 10 only has 2. The 2nd team being 16 spots below Ohio St. Meyer can play many more 2nd and 3rd string players while their starters rest/heal without it costing them a game in the Big 10.

            Like

        • D.N. Nation

          2013 Georgia lost one game on a Hail Mary, another on two of the worst calls in the history of the conference, and at one point in the season were down RB1, RB2, WR1, WR2, and WR4.

          Like

          • Macallanlover

            Has to be Bobo, Richt or W’s fault according to the one trick ponies who hang around just to rip the program. Injuries, bad calls, and blind luck should not be included because “degree of” is far too complex for that group to grasp.

            Like

  8. Dawg in Beaumont

    The whole star discussion drives me crazy sometimes. The reason why you see so many more two, and three star players in the NFL than five star players is because there are so many more two and three star players than there are five star players.

    These recruiting websites have twenty times as many two star players evaluated than players given the very rare five star rating. It’s purely a quantity question.

    The best illustration I could think of would be if we were setting up a basketball game and I got to choose my five players from every woman in America and you got to choose your five from the 10 or 20 guys in your neighborhood. Odds are I’d win very easily. Obviously women aren’t fundamentally better than men at basketball, but when you have that quantity difference there will be more women succeeding in that hypothetical game.

    Sure recruiting isn’t an exact science, but five star players, on average, perform better in college and pro football than any other star level.

    Like

  9. Russ

    I really admire the consistency of some commenters here. It seems that regardless of topic, it’s a chance to bemoan UGA’s perceived under-performance.

    Like

  10. Hogbody Spradlin

    Drop Dead Corch.

    Like

  11. Grayish

    That chart shows the reason Ohio State doesn’t too much of a hard time in their conference. Huge difference between and the Big Ten avg.

    Like

    • Macallanlover

      And that hasn’t been any different since the 60’s Big Ten was even easier to win a title in than even the ACC. Plus, they only sent their champ to the Rose Bowl to play the PAC 8 champ (almost equally as weak). None of the other teams in that conference was allowed to play other conference teams in the post season. And yet those who believe in faux NCs accept those teams as true #1s. What a sham conference, ohio and Michigan have around 90 titles between them….what does Bama have 23? Think there isn’t a difference in conference strength?

      Like

  12. Dawg Fan

    5 star recruits are six times more likely to make it the NFL than the average college player.

    Like

  13. Irwin R Fletcher

    I’m not sure why this author used the numerical ranks to average instead of the composite scores.

    Alabama’s 4 year avg is 315.05. tOSU is 2nd at 290.21. To understand how wide a gap 25 points is…FSU at #3 has 280.93 while Clemson at 13 is 253.57.

    BTW…Big 10 fans are hypocrites….guess which school is the only one in the top 15 who has signed more than 26 on average over the last 4 years? tOSU. I’m sure we’ll see tons of articles from their bloggers complaining about oversigning this month.

    A couple of UGA nuggets…I’m truly shocked that UGA has signed on average over 25 players a year. UGA is #6 in Total and #5 in average score per player. If Roquan signed with UGA, it wouldn’t change the rankings (6th and 5th), but it would be the difference in UGA’s 4 year average slightly trending up from last year compared to slightly trending down.

    Like

  14. Goat Balls

    I’m pretty excited about this years signees. The Dawgs main problem has been our defense for years. Pruitts fingerprints are all over the kids we got this year. A good group of db’s, linebackers, Defensive linemen, defensive ends….this is good stuff man. And we should be fairly deep too.

    I would like to see more emphasis on O linemen but we all know that frustration right? We should have good QB’s, running backs, and hopefully some good receivers.

    There may not be a lot of so called five star stuff, but we should have filled our needs nicely. Now if we can just coach them up.

    Like

  15. I think it’s really simple. Some positions are much easier to project into college and beyond. OLs, DTs, WRs, 4-3 DEs and DBs seem to be all over the place. QBs are a little less predictable, but arm strength and accuracy are readily apparent out of high school and will carry even the dumbest player pretty far. For whatever reason, pass rushing OLBs seem to project fairly consistently. ILBs and MLBs are pretty consistent. RBs might be the most consistent, at least insofar as being a productive college player; drop off is significant, however, when you look at NFL productivity. TEs consistently are projected accurately.

    Like