VaderFin wrote:Miami has 11 recruits so far including Scouts #1 RB in Bryce Brown, younger brother to LB Arthur Brown, and three 4 stars. Looking good so far.
I am really impressed by what Randy has done in Miami. He went back to what they used to do back in the 80's and through the nineties, which is draw a line in sand around the South Florida area and not let any of those guys out. Those schools down there are loaded and that has always been a Miami stronghold of talent, but when Miami started to struggle other teams (UF included) went down there and stole life long cane fan players away because of how Miami was recruiting. Randy knows what to do and those guys are going to have top classes every year IMO.
Speaking of recruiting, anybody listen to Colin Cowherd's rant on the last few Notre Dame recruiting classes? Basically saying that if they had such great classes why does it seem like there are absolutely no dominant athletes on the field this year. He continued it to knock the recruiting websites for catering to the larger fan bases in order to sell more subscriptions, etc. I tend to agree with that to a certain degree since I've seen quite a few prospects that commit early and don't get the large offer list get slightly snubbed when it comes to rankings.
That said, I still love to follow the stars and rankings just to keep up with what's going on. I think Virginia Tech can pull in another great class, even though we can't take nearly as many recruits as we did last year. The class hinges on getting Logan Thomas, who is by all accounts a heavy VT lean. Also getting Kevin Newsome would really boost our class, but it seems we're about a 30-40% chance on him at the moment (lifting the redshirt to Tyrod seems to be helping out on that front.)
Bot FSU and Miami look to be bringing in good classes, hopefully they can right the ship soon. Will be interesting to see how they finish, and if they all can make it to campus.
What are the criteria for handing out stars? I just read on a blog that they give stars to kids who attend camps, and the stars are based on evaluations made during those camps. I get that a lot of kids who are going to end up as top players go to these camps, but there are also a fair number who don't go due to distance and finances. Isn't this, if true, a pretty horrible way of rating "best" players?
One thing that Tim Brewster has shown he can do in his tenure is recruit (at least relative to other coaches at Minnesota). He brought in a pretty solid class this year, albeit one that was crushed by the departure of MarQueis Gray, and looks to have another solid class lined up for 2009. Eric Stephens and Hasan Lipscombe are two 4-star RB's that Brewster lured from Texas and both should be able to make an impact immediately at a position that is thin. Four solid O-Lineman are coming in as well, including Notre Dame transer Mike Carufel. QB Moses Alipate is pretty highly regarded, and from my alma-mater, and could be the QB once Adam Weber moves on.
I know nobody cares about the Gophers, but things are looking up in regards to Gopher football. Easy to do when you're lying on the ground.
knapplc wrote:What are the criteria for handing out stars? I just read on a blog that they give stars to kids who attend camps, and the stars are based on evaluations made during those camps. I get that a lot of kids who are going to end up as top players go to these camps, but there are also a fair number who don't go due to distance and finances. Isn't this, if true, a pretty horrible way of rating "best" players?
Camp performance is only a part of it, though a good showing can really get the spotlight on a player who comes from a relatively unknown recruiting area (ie Deion Walker, small private school player last year who ended up with 50+ offers, largely from his camp showing.) However, the recruiting services also use highlight film, personal observations, and input from college/high school coaches (which imo means the more offers a player gets from top programs, the higher he will be ranked.)
As far as determining stars, Rivals uses a ranking system, ranking players by position, and overall where the top 25-30 overall players will be 5 stars, "four star is a top 250-300 or so player, three-stars is a top 750 level player, two stars means the player is a mid-major prospect and one star means the player is not ranked."
The problem is that going to see every single player just isn't that feasible so they tend to rely more heavily on camps and film.
Mugrila wrote:The problem is that going to see every single player just isn't that feasible so they tend to rely more heavily on camps and film.
This is the answer I was really getting at, and this is exactly why so many people aren't so balled up about these stars. I'm a longtime non-believer in the star system. For every USC (chock full of starry goodness and a good team) you have a Notre Dame (chock full of starry goodness and a crummy team).
I don't buy for a second that these star ratings aren't biased towards buddies in the coaching ranks (Bill Callahan got a top-five recruiting class from someone - who just so happened to be his friend) and towards high-profile schools like the Irish and SEC schools.
I much prefer looking at a team ON THE FIELD, rather than on paper, to determine how good they are.
Mugrila wrote:The problem is that going to see every single player just isn't that feasible so they tend to rely more heavily on camps and film.
This is the answer I was really getting at, and this is exactly why so many people aren't so balled up about these stars. I'm a longtime non-believer in the star system. For every USC (chock full of starry goodness and a good team) you have a Notre Dame (chock full of starry goodness and a crummy team).
I don't buy for a second that these star ratings aren't biased towards buddies in the coaching ranks (Bill Callahan got a top-five recruiting class from someone - who just so happened to be his friend) and towards high-profile schools like the Irish and SEC schools.
I much prefer looking at a team ON THE FIELD, rather than on paper, to determine how good they are.
I'm with you. Look at the average recruiting class VT has had over the past 5-8 years (just sticking to what I follow and know, I don't mean to always talk about the same team ) and then look at the success of those players on the field and in the NFL; that is the problem with the recruiting thing on a national level. However, if you take it to a micro level, you find individuals on those sites that actually have the ability to see the players in that area play; those are the guys that give you a much better idea of a player's ability. I feel like the national gurus would be better off if they took more advice from the guys focused on a smaller area, and from my experience, that has slowly started to happen.
Cafe Home
Fantasy Baseball
Fantasy Basketball
Fantasy Hockey
by deerayfan072 » Mon Sep 08, 2008 1:06 pm 
) and then look at the success of those players on the field and in the NFL; that is the problem with the recruiting thing on a national level. However, if you take it to a micro level, you find individuals on those sites that actually have the ability to see the players in that area play; those are the guys that give you a much better idea of a player's ability. I feel like the national gurus would be better off if they took more advice from the guys focused on a smaller area, and from my experience, that has slowly started to happen.
