5 STAR 4 STAR 3 STAR....HUTHUT! HERE'S MY TAKE....

Not sure why this is even an argument.
There are only so many 5 stars to go around. So any team has to take some 3 and 4 stars to round out their roster. Also, there is a theory that seems to hold water that many HS kids have not peaked yet, while others peak at the young age of 15. A good coach can identify the ones with upside.
Not sure why this hill is the one you want to die on.

 

If I could get rid of one Internet sports board cliche...

 

The current class is going well and I know 3 stars outnumber 4s and 5s. I'm saying that recruiting/coaching/retention has failed when Blake Gideon or Breckyn Hager are your leaders on the field. I acknowledge our 4 stars failed us when we lose more than we win 3 years in a row. That also affects recruiting going forward.

 

We're not signing 15 year olds and the recruiting services move players up and down during their junior and senior seasons. I'm still waiting for someone to prove to me that there's a university playing power 5 division 1 football that kicks *** with only 3 stars.

 

I'm still waiting for someone to actually claim that.

 

The whole star system is good for selling subscriptions and that's about it. Coaches evaluate players based on their needs not the stars next to their names. Of course the rating system is going to be able to pick out few good players based on their high school performance, even I can do that, but that doesn't mean a 3 star is a dud.

Show me a Power 5 Division 1 school without a 3 star recruit.

 

missing my whole point. YES, there are "lesser" star-rated players that do well (it's a bigger sample to choose from in the first place), but I am still saying that the teams playing for the biggest prizes have fewer of those lower rated players in starting positions. They're surrounded by 4s and 5s (and yes those 4s and 5s were accurately rated by a rating system that "anyone could do to sell a magazine"). But they're STILL RATED highly and that STILL COUNTS just as much as the rating a 3 star or fewer gets. You know, sometimes that 3 or 2 or 1 star guy turns out to be JUST THAT, so the rating systems were correct then. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Having said all of that, yes, team chemistry is the most important part of a football TEAM, and my point is that you're not going to find 12-0 teams (power 5) that are dominated by 3s and 2s. Will someone please find that team for me instead of finding ONE GUY who was a negative 2 and now is the CFHOF?

 

Was Colt McCoy slow?



When did running QB Colt McCoy become slow?

McCoy, Gideon and Hager are not comparable players.

McCoy was a great player, Gideon was a good player and Hager... I’ll nicely say is not on par with the other two.

These players do not have much in common otherwise. I mean, I guess you could compare Hager and Gideon as 2 star players, but McCoy was a solid 3 star ranked in the top 100 players in the state.

To compare these three specific players and make comments about McCoy being slow (I’ll note the issue with Hager is size & strength as a defensive lineman in a 3 linemen formation, not speed. Also, Hager is definitely not the “smartest” player on our defense... not sure why that label would be applied to him either) is..... questionable. McCoy was not slow. Hager is not the smartest player on our defense. Like I said, this McCoy, Gideon and Hager comparison does not make sense looking at the individuals. I will say if you feel the best players should play, we all agree with that.

 

Agreed. I just magically deleted Colt from all my negative posts. My next trick is to stop global warming and achieve world peace.

 

I think somebody needs to let this thread die.

 

Thanks, Moon, for being my sanity and civility check.

 

Sorry just saw this- so my only post about it and I’m done.
I think, and have always thought, a grown man who bashes 17-19 year old boys based upon their athleticism (when the poster could not make the team as a place kick holder) is a sad insecure Tool.
Capital T not indicate that the Tools tool is large. Me thinks that is just another issue being dealt with by the Tools small tool.