Every year about this time, when recruiting is usually the only thing of merit to discuss, the topic of the recruit’s ‘star’ rankings floats to the top of the blog leader boards.
I’ve always been of the mind that I don’t really care that much what a PITT player does after college. I know it reflects well on the school and the program and I know that recruits look at it as incentive also. But IMO where the rubber meets the road is how well that recruit played during his college years.
This subject is singularly pertinent to PITT fans as we now have a new Head Coach in Paul Chryst who has been tagged with a question mark when it comes to his recruiting abilities. There has been a lot of hue and cry over a ‘late recruiting start’ which is unfounded compared to PITT’s recent recruiting history. In addition, PITT just had a Head Coach in Dave Wannstedt who was pretty good at pulling in four and five star players but didn’t have much to show at the end of the day with those kids on the roster.
This April 2011 article on Scout.com written by Scott Kennedy addresses those drafted in the first round of that year. As to Kennedy’s article, I discount the number of stars players in the 1st round have as being too small a sample and of their being projected as to how well they will play in the NFL and on the specific team that drafted them. It is fun to read and talk about but IMO it isn’t enough to base a solid discussion regarding player’s production in college though.
So, using the NCAA rankings for 2011, I did some in-depth research based on the question “What were the star rankings coming out of HS for the Top Ten performers in college football this season?” Basically I want to know how the top ranked players performed in the setting that we all care and talk about which is college football. These rankings list top 100 players in Division I in individual categories so the sample used below is the top 10%.
I used Scout.com for the number of stars assigned to these players as HS seniors. If Scout had the player unranked (UR) then I checked Rivals. To make it as fair as possible I used any star ranking between Scout & Rivals for the averages so that an “unranked” wouldn’t skew the result downward. To cover all aspects of the game I used three categories on offense: Rushing yards, Passing efficiency and Receiving yards per game. I also used three on defense; Total tackles, Passes defended and Sacks.
The results are pretty surprising I think…
OFFENSE
- LaMichael James, Oregon 3
- Bobby Rainey, Western Ky. 2
- Monte Ball, Wisconsin 3
- Ronnie Hillman, San Diego St. 3
- Trent Richardson, Alabama 5
- Bernard Pierce, Temple UR/2 Rivals
- Zach Line, SMU 2
- David Wilson, Virginia Tech 4
- Robbie Rouse, Fresno St. UR/2 Rivals
- Terrance Ganaway, Baylor 2
2.8 Stars on average
- Russell Wilson, Wisconsin 2
- Robert Griffin III, Baylor 4
- Kellen Moore, Boise St. 4
- Case Keenum, Houston 2
- Andrew Luck, Stanford 5
- Terrance Owens, Toledo 2
- Keith Price, Washington 3
- Matt Barkley, USC 5
- Brandon Weeden, Ok st. UR/UR (28 yrs old)
- Bryn Renner, North Carolina 4
3.0 Stars on average
- Jordan White, Western Mich. 2
- Nick Harwell, Miami (OH) 2
- Kendall Wright, Baylor 3
- Patrick Edwards, Houston UR/UR
- Justin Blackmon, Ok St. 3
- Marquess Wilson, Wash St. 3
- Rishard Matthews, Nevada 2
- Robert Woods, USC 5
- Gerell Robinson, Az St. 4
- Keenan Allen, California 5
2.5 Stars on average
DEFENSE
- Luke Kuechly, BC 3
- Brian Wagner, Akron 2
- Cornelius Arnick, Tulsa 2
- Trent Mackey, Tulane 2
- Demetrius Hartsfield, Maryland 2
- Danny Trevathan, KT UR/2
- Carmen Messina, NM UR/ 2
- Bobby Wagner, Utah St. 2
- Travis Freeman, Ball St. 2
- Jeremy Grove, EC 2
2.1 Stars on average
- Isaiah Frey, Nevada 2
- Merrill Noel, Wake Forest 3
- Broderick Brown, Ok St. 2
- Josh Robinson, UCF 3
- David Amerson, NC St 3
- Des Marrow, Toledo UR 2
- E.J. Gaines, Missouri 3
- Jordan Poyer, Oregon St. 2
- Dayonne Nunley, Miami 2
- Matt Daniels, Duke 3
2.5 Stars on average
- Whitney Mercilus, Illinois 5
- Trevardo Williams, Conn 3
- Brandon Joiner, AR St. 3
- Jake Bequette, AR 3
- Sammy Brown, Houston UR /3 rivals
- Jarvis Jones, Georgia 4
- Vinny Curry, Marshall 2
- Aaron Donald, Pittsburgh 4
- Nordly Capi, Colorado St. 2
- Nick Perry, USC 4
3.3 Stars on average
As you can see the only the “Sacks” category has an average above three stars. On the whole, with 60 players counted, we ended up with six five stars; eight four stars; 17 three stars; 27 two stars and two unranked players.
Guys, this comes up to a 2.7 star average for these 60 ‘best’ players in six major categories. I’ll stick with my assertion that getting a majority of three star kids and only few four & five star kids isn’t going to kill your program. The truly only thing that matters is what they do once they put that uniform on.
And remember, Revis and McKoy played on pretty bad teams defined by not even being able to win the lousy BE.
Give me many stars from the South who can read and write and we’ll win.
That is what the HC is recruiting for his own program. He wants player that will produce in the arena that they will actually be playing in. This isn’t a comparison to how a three star kid stacks up against a five star kids.
I think just about everyone would take that five star player – but there are only so many of them to go around. In Rivals.com’s case there is only 50 5* players per year.
I agree that every team needs those “big gun” 5*/4* players. But we shouldn’t turn our noses up at 3* players as 1) there may be no real difference between that third star and a fourth star and 2) depending on team needs that 3 star guy may regarded as a must have or a great recruit based on what he brings to the team.
I think a player like Scott Orndoff may be an example of this. Chryst uses his TEs as integral parts of his offense and treats them much like ‘skill’ players as we saw in the TE’s article on here two days ago. So for him to bag a TE with Orndoff’s skill set which seems to fit perfectly into the staff plans – that skill set makes him equivalent to a 4/5 star player in staff eyes.
Under DW, where the TE didn’t catch a pass unless it was mistakenly thrown at him, a TE who can catch and run like Orndoff may just be a another 3 star recruit.
So IMO staff requirements and needs should be factored in before we dismiss a 3* as ‘just another 3*’ recruit. Hey, if there are two players that fill the same need on the team and one is a 4* and one is a 3* – I want that 4 star also. But I don’t think being a 3 star player is a negative at all and isn’t a detriment to the team as some fans feel they are.
“After three bowl wins in four years at Tulsa, Graham left the Golden Hurricane to become the head coach at Pittsburgh in 2011, believing it was a step up. But after one mediocre season, Graham was on the move again, this time to take the job at Arizona State.
The bouncing around sent up red flags to ASU’s fans, particularly after there were reports Graham told Pitt’s players he was leaving via text message.
Graham had no problem convincing ASU’s administration that he was headed to the desert for the long haul, telling them that, other than the move to Pitt, he had always taken a better job and better situation for his family.”
Ex. If there are 500 5 stars currently on College FB rosters, but 1500 2 stars, are there really 3 2-stars to every 1 5-star in the top 25?
What it all boils down to, at least for me, is how well do these players, regardless of how many stars they have, are able to adapt to both college and college football. Then how do they adapt to the specifics of what the staff coaches want to do?
I think that when I next have some time to kill I’ll look at the star rankings for All-Conference players from every Div I conference – that would be another insight as to how well ranked players do against their peers.
It is just too easy for a fan to look at the star designations and say “This one is better than that one”.
In other words, what percentage of the 5 stars make the list, what percentage of the 4 stars, 3 stars, etc. As each groupn is progressively larger the law of averages will distort the results.
Plain and simple.
Also, not entirely surprised no Pitt players were drafted . . . performance on the field actually matters and I don’t think Pitt had too many standouts in the senior class . . . although a bit surprised no one took a shot on Lindsay
Lindsay, for whatever reason, didn’t progress from his 2010 level. Who else would have been considered?
It was a down year for PITT as far as the NFL and if you had looked seriously at what DW had left for 2011 there was really nothing there but Ray Graham. We shot our wad in the 2010 draft.
This will impact our recruiting also, kids want to know they have a chance at getting drafted and it may take a year or two for that to level out.
Wisconsin hasn’t had problems getting players into the NFL and that will happen again at PITT.
I do expect this to change in the coming years as we’ll see a more balanced, and talented, across the board team with Chryst.
Stillers signed Brandon Lindsey as a rookie free agent which I think is awesome news! Gives the kid a shot in some familiar environs, and it bodes well that the Steelers coaching staff (John Mitchell) liked what they saw from him on the UPMC practice fields. BTW, Nix went to Oakland and Gruder went to Atlanta as rookie free agents. I think Nix was one of the first players snatched up for what it’s worth.
Lindsay & Nix may actually have decent shots at making the roster…
Alabama and LSU have an embarassment of riches, however, signing a combined 10 – 5 star players and 60 – 4 star players the last two seasons. It’s hard to deny the success of those numbers at the most elite level.
True the SEC is by far the most difficult conference in the land, but after the SEC, the conferences are pretty much on par.
I have no problem naming lots of NFL players in the NFL from those conferences described by Cavalier as being inferior.
The real measure of a player (discounting for injury) is his NFL value where rosters are small and competition brutal.
Lastly, no Pitt players taken is a function of injury, coaching ambivalence (Fraud) and lack of true NFL starting caliber players.
It shows that the chances are better of being drafted in the NFL first round the more stars a kid has:
Percent drafted:
5 Star: 40-48% of the pool of 5 stars
4 Star: 9-11% of the pool of 4 stars
3 Star: 3.6% of the pool of 3 stars
2 Star: less then 1% of the pool of 2 stars (or lower)
Here’s the link cited–
It does, show, of course, that more than half of the high picks weren’t 5-stars.
In terms of college recruiting this means that, since the pools the less than 5 stars come from is so much larger, a coaching staff needs to really have scouted the less than 5-stars more thoroughly to find those that are really the cream of the crop because the percentage of high talent or high potential individuals in those groups is far lower. You have to cull the Revis’s and Dion Lewis’s out of a large group of mostly not so great (or not potentially great) players if you want to succeed big on 3-stars or less alone. You also nave to be careful (only less so) with recruiting 4 and 5-star kids to be sure you avoid the over-rated (or topped out) ones who will turn out to be under-performers at the college level.
I think it says a lot more about Trent Richardson that he was #5 playing a brutal SEC schedule than it does that Bobby Rainey was #2. A lot of the offensive players were in schemes that favor racking up stats too: James, Keenum, Boise State’s spread offense.
Bottom Line: While stars aren’t the be all end all of predicting output in college, we should’t let the success of some 2 or 3 star guys in spread offenses in non-AQ conferences lead us to believe stars are a bad predictor.