Good Article on "The Star System".

[Sparty2QP]

Football recruiting: Unfair expectations for high school players? | DesMoinesRegister.com | The Des Moines Register

Memo to high school seniors in Iowa and beyond who will sign national letters of intent for football today:

Those stars recruiting analysts placed beside your name? Forget them. They don't mean anything. They're gone now. You're starting over.

That's the gospel from former Iowa lineman Blake Larsen, a five-star recruit in 2001 from Atlantic High School who is knowledgeable about the bewildering high expectations placed on recruits by the experts.


"Those guys don't know what they're talking about," said Larsen, a policeman in Shawnee, Kan. "They're going to put five stars beside your name, and they've never even met you?

"That's unfair to the kid."

Iowa expects national letters of intent from 25 recruits today, but none with so-called four- or five-star designation. Nate Guillory, a running back transfer from Coffeyville (Kan.) Community College, enrolled in January.

Iowa State expects to sign at least 19 players, none with four- or five-star ratings.
Some players make it all the way to college stardom and beyond.

Some, like Larsen, do not live up to lofty five-star expectations.

"I think it's a bunch of B.S.," Larsen said of the star ranking system. "I lived through it. I saw how it works. I think it's a joke."



Chicago-based Midwest recruiting expert Tom Lemming has trouble with the system, too.

"A lot of it has to do with colleges offering guys scholarships, but (recruiting services) won't admit it," Lemming said. "A kid can start out under the radar, then all of a sudden jump up to a four- or five-star guy after he commits to someplace like a Florida State."
National experts, including Lemming, labeled Larsen one of the top offensive line recruits in the nation when he was a high school senior.

"Everyone was writing stuff like that," said Larsen, a Parade all-American as a senior. "It was nice back then, but now that I can reflect on it - I wish they would just leave guys alone and let them make their own reputation."

Larsen played only five games with the Hawkeyes, starting none, during an injury-plagued career that included two knee surgeries and a sprained ankle.
"When your parents told you stuff as a kid, you're like, 'Whatever,' " Larsen said. "When those recruiting guys told you stuff, you were like, 'Wow.' "



Lemming was so wowed with Larsen's high school prowess that he hung four stars on Larsen. The Rivals.com recruiting Web site made him a five-star recruit.

"It was a no-brainer," Lemming said. "Unlike some recruiting guys, I actually see in person the players that I rank.

"I see them play, I see them practice and for me, Blake Larsen was a four-star recruit.
"That being said, sometimes there are things like injuries that prevent a kid from living up to his ranking. Sometimes, I'll make a mistake.

"I'm not 100 percent."



No one is.

A no-star recruit out of Panorama High School, Jordan Carstens, went from a 1999 Iowa State walk-on to a three-year performer, and 15-game starter, for the NFL's Carolina Panthers.

"I don't even think I was on a list," said Carstens, a member of the Cyclones' 1999 rookie class.
"It's young kids you're talking about when ranking high school football recruits. Some kids aren't fully developed, and I'm a perfect example of that.

"I weighed 200 pounds when I played football as a senior in high school. I changed a lot in college. Changes like I made make me wonder how recruiting experts can accurately rank guys."



Carstens was one of many whose play far exceeded their recruiting stars - like former Iowa safety Bob Sanders.
"Just look at Bob," Larsen said of the two-star recruit. "He wasn't a big star-studded guy out of high school, but all he is now is the highest-paid safety in the NFL - plus, he's got a Super Bowl ring.

"That's how much all that star stuff means."

[DantonIzzo]

Great read.

[barberb6]

excellent piece

[GoBlueFromOhio]

I think its far from science, but i think the two examples they used, Iowa and Iowa state, and lack of 4 and 5 stars might help to explain the condition of their football teams.

[DantonIzzo]

Originally Posted by GoBlueFromOhio

I think its far from science, but i think the two examples they used, Iowa and Iowa state, and lack of 4 and 5 stars might help to explain the condition of their football teams.

Actually, Iowa's early classes under Ferentz were nothing -- filled with then-no name kids like Bob Sanders (recruited by MAC schools and no one else), Grant Steen (walk-on), Dallas Clark (walk-on), Bruce Nelson (walk-on), Chad Greenway (very few looks out of nowhere South Dakota), etc., etc. Those kids delivered three straight Top-10 finishes and two Big Ten titles.

Then, when Iowa started getting the "name" recruits and landed a Top-15 class in 2005, things fell apart. I'm pretty sure only like 5 or 6 of the 24 kids in that prized class started this past season, and Iowa's back to being mediocre with those kids (the ones who are left, at least) serving as the backbone of their program.

[newlander]

"Stars mean EVERYTHING."

Sincerely,

Recruiting Dorks everywhere

PS-Anthony Morelli is another good example: 5 star QB who went to PSu: not very good. Won't be drafted in April

[Ocho Cinco]

The funny thing about this is Lemming.

What a hypocrite.

He's the one that fluffs EVERY ND commit. He's the one that will try to convince kids to go to ND.

He's the one, for the last five years, has said ND's class is the best in 20 years.

Rivals is bad (see Hoover - actually, see Roe, they dropped his rating after he comitted to MSU over NC even after tearing up the summer league last year), but Lemming is right behind them.

[monty4msu]

When i read Larsen, my immediate thought is "sour grapes". It was not the star system that caused his injuries, it was playing the game. Never haivng been a "star" i dont have a clue how much impact it has. What we do understand is, teams with more 4 and 5 stars consistently finish higher in the polls and play in the BCS bowl games.

[greenjoker]

I think that getting no-star recruits that are solid and 4 and 5 star recruits that are busts are the exceptions and not the rule. Can anyone say that there isn't a positive correlation between higher rated players and more successful programs?

If people think that having a successful program doesn't depend on getting good players then why do successful coaches try to get these players if it just depends on coaching, facilities, etc.?

Perhaps the knock is on the rating services. Are they more wrong than right? I think not?

[TheGhettoHeisman]

Originally Posted by greenjoker

I think that getting no-star recruits that are solid and 4 and 5 star recruits that are busts are the exceptions and not the rule. Can anyone say that there isn't a positive correlation between higher rated players and more successful programs?

If people think that having a successful program doesn't depend on getting good players then why do successful coaches try to get these players if it just depends on coaching, facilities, etc.?

Perhaps the knock is on the rating services. Are they more wrong than right? I think not?

Bang.

[SpartanBoiler]

Originally Posted by greenjoker

I think that getting no-star recruits that are solid and 4 and 5 star recruits that are busts are the exceptions and not the rule. Can anyone say that there isn't a positive correlation between higher rated players and more successful programs?

If people think that having a successful program doesn't depend on getting good players then why do successful coaches try to get these players if it just depends on coaching, facilities, etc.?

Perhaps the knock is on the rating services. Are they more wrong than right? I think not?

You're missing part of the point in that article. People are often 4 and 5 star recruits because they get offers or commit to top schools. So, the top programs are successful because they good the good players who are rated high because they went to the good programs.

[Will Teasle]

I agree. Dont care what a guy's ***** are. I only have one demand:

[tacojohn]

If I can play devil's advocate, is it so wrong to use offers and recruiting buzz as at least a part of a kid's ranking? How many recruits can get good evaluations from the Rivals/Scout staff? If USC, Oklahoma, LSU, Florida, and Ohio State all offer a kid, isn't that a pretty good indication that a bunch of really smart football people think a kid is pretty good? If all indications are that these coaches are pouring it on trying to get the kid, isn't that a good indication that the kid is really, really good? If the only offers a kid has are from non-BCS schools, doesn't that say something?

It's much harder though to make up some defense for changing a kid's ranking based on where he commits. If OU, USC, OSU and LSU all think a kid is worthy of a scholarship, and that makes him a 4*, deciding to go to MSU shouldn't make him a 3*.

[Sparty2QP]

Originally Posted by tacojohn

It's much harder though to make up some defense for changing a kid's ranking based on where he commits. If OU, USC, OSU and LSU all think a kid is worthy of a scholarship, and that makes him a 4*, deciding to go to MSU shouldn't make him a 3*.

Bingo!! See Tyler Hoover!

[greenballs]

Originally Posted by Sparty2QP

Football recruiting: Unfair expectations for high school players? | DesMoinesRegister.com | The Des Moines Register

Memo to high school seniors in Iowa and beyond who will sign national letters of intent for football today:

Those stars recruiting analysts placed beside your name? Forget them. They don't mean anything. They're gone now. You're starting over.

That's the gospel from former Iowa lineman Blake Larsen, a five-star recruit in 2001 from Atlantic High School who is knowledgeable about the bewildering high expectations placed on recruits by the experts.


"Those guys don't know what they're talking about," said Larsen, a policeman in Shawnee, Kan. "They're going to put five stars beside your name, and they've never even met you?

"That's unfair to the kid."

Iowa expects national letters of intent from 25 recruits today, but none with so-called four- or five-star designation. Nate Guillory, a running back transfer from Coffeyville (Kan.) Community College, enrolled in January.

Iowa State expects to sign at least 19 players, none with four- or five-star ratings.
Some players make it all the way to college stardom and beyond.

Some, like Larsen, do not live up to lofty five-star expectations.

"I think it's a bunch of B.S.," Larsen said of the star ranking system. "I lived through it. I saw how it works. I think it's a joke."



Chicago-based Midwest recruiting expert Tom Lemming has trouble with the system, too.

"A lot of it has to do with colleges offering guys scholarships, but (recruiting services) won't admit it," Lemming said. "A kid can start out under the radar, then all of a sudden jump up to a four- or five-star guy after he commits to someplace like a Florida State."
National experts, including Lemming, labeled Larsen one of the top offensive line recruits in the nation when he was a high school senior.

"Everyone was writing stuff like that," said Larsen, a Parade all-American as a senior. "It was nice back then, but now that I can reflect on it - I wish they would just leave guys alone and let them make their own reputation."

Larsen played only five games with the Hawkeyes, starting none, during an injury-plagued career that included two knee surgeries and a sprained ankle.
"When your parents told you stuff as a kid, you're like, 'Whatever,' " Larsen said. "When those recruiting guys told you stuff, you were like, 'Wow.' "



Lemming was so wowed with Larsen's high school prowess that he hung four stars on Larsen. The Rivals.com recruiting Web site made him a five-star recruit.

"It was a no-brainer," Lemming said. "Unlike some recruiting guys, I actually see in person the players that I rank.

"I see them play, I see them practice and for me, Blake Larsen was a four-star recruit.
"That being said, sometimes there are things like injuries that prevent a kid from living up to his ranking. Sometimes, I'll make a mistake.

"I'm not 100 percent."



No one is.

A no-star recruit out of Panorama High School, Jordan Carstens, went from a 1999 Iowa State walk-on to a three-year performer, and 15-game starter, for the NFL's Carolina Panthers.

"I don't even think I was on a list," said Carstens, a member of the Cyclones' 1999 rookie class.
"It's young kids you're talking about when ranking high school football recruits. Some kids aren't fully developed, and I'm a perfect example of that.

"I weighed 200 pounds when I played football as a senior in high school. I changed a lot in college. Changes like I made make me wonder how recruiting experts can accurately rank guys."



Carstens was one of many whose play far exceeded their recruiting stars - like former Iowa safety Bob Sanders.
"Just look at Bob," Larsen said of the two-star recruit. "He wasn't a big star-studded guy out of high school, but all he is now is the highest-paid safety in the NFL - plus, he's got a Super Bowl ring.

"That's how much all that star stuff means."

This is the part that some people can't get through their heads.

[J2K]

Originally Posted by DantonIzzo

Great read.

Couldn't have written it better yourself, I s'pose?

[Frank Ricard]

Originally Posted by monty4msu

What we do understand is, teams with more 4 and 5 stars consistently finish higher in the polls and play in the BCS bowl games.

Show me this in facts. This past year you would been wrong 50% of the time. I won't go back further than this year, but I bet I could still show strong evidence that this statement has MANY holes in it.

Leave with 2 examples: Who do you think has, on average, had better recuiting classes the last 5 years - UM or OSU? University of Miami has had top classes the last 5 years. Finished 6-6 in '05 and not bowl eligible this year.

I could go on, but if you want further evidence, just do a search function. Ranking classes, which is based on the star system, is at best a 50/50 crapshot.

[Dr. Dunkenstein]

The 4/5 Stars due matter. Norman is a start

Sun February 10, 2008

Analysis shows that highly rated prep players usually have standout college careers


By Jake Trotter
Staff Writer
Bob Stoops said last week he doesn't pay attention to the star ratings of prospects his staff recruits. Maybe he should.
An in-depth analysis by The Oklahoman of the last nine Oklahoma and Oklahoma State recruiting classes comprising of more than 440 players revealed that stars do matter.





The higher the star rating was in high school, the more likely the player became a standout in college. Even though many high-profile recruits have failed to pan out, their total is doubled by the ones that do.
For every 4-star flop like Moe Dampeer, there have been two 4-star phenoms like Malcolm Kelly and Curtis Lofton.
For every 4-star dud like Brad Girtman, there have been two 4-star dandies like Tatum Bell and Rashaun Woods.
Stars have never directly resulted in tackles or touchdowns ever since Rivals.com first instituted the popular rating system back in 1999.
Players usually have to earn their way onto the field.
"There is no clear-cut formula to predict who is going to turn out to be the best,” said Jeremy Crabtree, one of eight Rivals analysts who decide on star ratings. "This is a very subjective, difficult mockup job.”
But while subjective and not always accurate, star ratings have proven to be a good indicator as to what kind of players recruits will become in college.
And the statistics support this claim:
Two-thirds of OU's 5-star recruits became full-time starters.
Just one-third of its 4-star recruits became full-time starters.
And only a little more than one-fifth of its 3-star recruits became full-time starters.
This trend holds true in Stillwater, as well:
Better than one-half of OSU's 4-star recruits became full-time starters.
Less than one-quarter of its 3-star recruits became full-time starters.
Not every 5-star recruit, though, becomes an All-American. Not every 2-star prospect sits the bench.
Last season, seven players who were 2-star recruits coming out of high school like Kansas State wide receiver Jordy Nelson and Central Florida running back Kevin Smith made the Associated Press' All-America team.
Only four players who were 5-star recruits did the same.
"You throw the Josh Heupels and the Quentin Griffins, the list goes on and on, the guys we've had here that have been All-Americans that didn't have a lot of stars,” Stoops said. "I think around the country there are a lot of big-star guys that maybe didn't end up that way.”
Since Stoops arrived in Norman nine seasons ago, the Sooners have signed 11 quarterbacks, which included six who had ratings of 4 stars or more.
Heupel, Jason White and Sam Bradford only earned 3 stars, overshadowed by fool's-gold quarterbacks like Tommy Grady, Noah Allen, Brent Rawls and Chase Williams.
Heupel, White and Bradford, however, will go down as three of the most proficient quarterbacks in Sooner history.
"I don't pay attention to it. I never have,” Stoops said. "We look at guys who fit. We don't just recruit guys because of stars. There are plenty of guys with a lot of stars that we're not going to recruit that we don't think fit us.”
OSU has also had its share of players who weren't highly recruited but turned into all-Big-12-caliber players. In fact, seven of the 11 Cowboys on NFL rosters from the past nine classes were2- or 3-star prospects coming out of high school.
Defensive tackle Kevin Williams received only 2 stars.
Now Williams is a perennial NFL All-Pro with the Minnesota Vikings.
Offensive tackles Charlie Johnson and Corey Hilliard also received only 2-star ratings.
Now both are with the Indianapolis Colts.
Tight end Brandon Pettigrew, a 2-star recruit, earned first-team all-Big 12 honors last season and could be the first tight end taken in the 2009 NFL draft.
In contrast, the three most ballyhooed Cowboy recruits of the last decade haven't panned out.
Defensive lineman Lance Carson, OSU's only 5-star recruit, never made it to the playing field because of academic issues.
Four-star defensive tackle Xavier Lawson-Kennedy, who delighted the Cowboy faithful when he committed to the Pokes on regional television, finished his injury-ridden tenure at OSU last season with just one career sack.
And finally 4-star quarterback Bobby Reid, perhaps OSU's most hyped recruit ever, lost his starting job this past season to 3-star backup Zac Robinson.
"A lot of people get caught up in ratings and stars, but we all know if you look back four or five years it's really hard to tell how they will pan out,” OSU coach Mike Gundy said. "For example in this recent class, we'll know a lot more during the 2010 season how successful we were bringing in this group."
Carson, Lawson-Kennedy and Reid, however, are exceptions to the trend dating back to the advent of the star-rating system.
Since then, 9 of OSU's 11 first-team all-conference performers were either 3- or 4-star recruits, including safety Chris Massey, wide receiver Adarius Bowman and running back Dantrell Savage.
The best prospects usually turn out to be the best players in Norman, too.
In the last five years, 14 Sooners have earned All-American honors. Only White had fewer than 4 stars.
Mike Baldwin contributed to this report.

[Frank Ricard]

Originally Posted by Dr. Dunkenstein

The 4/5 Stars due matter. Norman is a start

Sun February 10, 2008

Analysis shows that highly rated prep players usually have standout college careers


By Jake Trotter
Staff Writer
Bob Stoops said last week he doesn't pay attention to the star ratings of prospects his staff recruits. Maybe he should.
An in-depth analysis by The Oklahoman of the last nine Oklahoma and Oklahoma State recruiting classes comprising of more than 440 players revealed that stars do matter.





The higher the star rating was in high school, the more likely the player became a standout in college. Even though many high-profile recruits have failed to pan out, their total is doubled by the ones that do.
For every 4-star flop like Moe Dampeer, there have been two 4-star phenoms like Malcolm Kelly and Curtis Lofton.
For every 4-star dud like Brad Girtman, there have been two 4-star dandies like Tatum Bell and Rashaun Woods.
Stars have never directly resulted in tackles or touchdowns ever since Rivals.com first instituted the popular rating system back in 1999.
Players usually have to earn their way onto the field.
"There is no clear-cut formula to predict who is going to turn out to be the best,” said Jeremy Crabtree, one of eight Rivals analysts who decide on star ratings. "This is a very subjective, difficult mockup job.”
But while subjective and not always accurate, star ratings have proven to be a good indicator as to what kind of players recruits will become in college.
And the statistics support this claim:
Two-thirds of OU's 5-star recruits became full-time starters.
Just one-third of its 4-star recruits became full-time starters.
And only a little more than one-fifth of its 3-star recruits became full-time starters.
This trend holds true in Stillwater, as well:
Better than one-half of OSU's 4-star recruits became full-time starters.
Less than one-quarter of its 3-star recruits became full-time starters.
Not every 5-star recruit, though, becomes an All-American. Not every 2-star prospect sits the bench.
Last season, seven players who were 2-star recruits coming out of high school like Kansas State wide receiver Jordy Nelson and Central Florida running back Kevin Smith made the Associated Press' All-America team.
Only four players who were 5-star recruits did the same.
"You throw the Josh Heupels and the Quentin Griffins, the list goes on and on, the guys we've had here that have been All-Americans that didn't have a lot of stars,” Stoops said. "I think around the country there are a lot of big-star guys that maybe didn't end up that way.”
Since Stoops arrived in Norman nine seasons ago, the Sooners have signed 11 quarterbacks, which included six who had ratings of 4 stars or more.
Heupel, Jason White and Sam Bradford only earned 3 stars, overshadowed by fool's-gold quarterbacks like Tommy Grady, Noah Allen, Brent Rawls and Chase Williams.
Heupel, White and Bradford, however, will go down as three of the most proficient quarterbacks in Sooner history.
"I don't pay attention to it. I never have,” Stoops said. "We look at guys who fit. We don't just recruit guys because of stars. There are plenty of guys with a lot of stars that we're not going to recruit that we don't think fit us.”
OSU has also had its share of players who weren't highly recruited but turned into all-Big-12-caliber players. In fact, seven of the 11 Cowboys on NFL rosters from the past nine classes were2- or 3-star prospects coming out of high school.
Defensive tackle Kevin Williams received only 2 stars.
Now Williams is a perennial NFL All-Pro with the Minnesota Vikings.
Offensive tackles Charlie Johnson and Corey Hilliard also received only 2-star ratings.
Now both are with the Indianapolis Colts.
Tight end Brandon Pettigrew, a 2-star recruit, earned first-team all-Big 12 honors last season and could be the first tight end taken in the 2009 NFL draft.
In contrast, the three most ballyhooed Cowboy recruits of the last decade haven't panned out.
Defensive lineman Lance Carson, OSU's only 5-star recruit, never made it to the playing field because of academic issues.
Four-star defensive tackle Xavier Lawson-Kennedy, who delighted the Cowboy faithful when he committed to the Pokes on regional television, finished his injury-ridden tenure at OSU last season with just one career sack.
And finally 4-star quarterback Bobby Reid, perhaps OSU's most hyped recruit ever, lost his starting job this past season to 3-star backup Zac Robinson.
"A lot of people get caught up in ratings and stars, but we all know if you look back four or five years it's really hard to tell how they will pan out,” OSU coach Mike Gundy said. "For example in this recent class, we'll know a lot more during the 2010 season how successful we were bringing in this group."
Carson, Lawson-Kennedy and Reid, however, are exceptions to the trend dating back to the advent of the star-rating system.
Since then, 9 of OSU's 11 first-team all-conference performers were either 3- or 4-star recruits, including safety Chris Massey, wide receiver Adarius Bowman and running back Dantrell Savage.
The best prospects usually turn out to be the best players in Norman, too.
In the last five years, 14 Sooners have earned All-American honors. Only White had fewer than 4 stars.
Mike Baldwin contributed to this report.

This article still misses the point - it's not that the kid who has more stars usually ends up in the starting lineup (who the f cares), IT'S WHETHER OR NOT YOU WIN GAMES. JFC.

The correct question isn't about who's starting and how many stars did they have, it's whether or not the recuiting rankings, based upon the star system, accurately predicts where you in end up on the field and whether the results mirrored the recuiting ranking. When viewed from it this way, the results contradict this article many times. FTR, numerous articles have been done using the correct analysis, and time and time again, the results show the recruiting rankings are WRONG 50% of the time.

Look at OU's record - according to the article, it just full of 4 and 5 stars. Then look at how they've actually performed when they're in the spotlight in the BCS games. They've had their asses handed to them by teams where a f'n 3 star becomes a celebrity. Then you include how they were EMBARRASSED by USC in the NC game 3 years ago, and you have to wonder if they aren't being overated from the day they announce the finals of the recuiting rankings

Is OU better than a MSU? Of course, but my point is if you look at the recuiting rankings and then compare that result to where they subsequently ended in the final polls, there's a lot of discrepencies.

USC hasn't had a class ranked out of the Top 5 in several years. True, they won 1.5 NC's in the recent recuiting cycles, they've still lost multilple games the past 2 years. If you went by the recuiting and star rankings, you have to wonder how the F did they ever lose once, let alone twice in back to back years? Truth is, as good as they are, they still didn't come close to matching the hype based on recuiting rankings.


These are just 2 examples. There are many others. Are the ranking always wrong? No. But they're only right 50% of the time. Trust them at your own peril.