Are Recruiting Rankings (Team And Player) Reliable?

[CrimsonKat]

You often hear people say that they do not pay any attention to rankings. Everyone who has followed college football recruiting with even a passing interest can name for you a two star recruit who became an All-American and a five star recruit who is bagging groceries at the local Piggly Wiggly. I would suggest though, at least over the last 10 years, that recruiting rankings for teams and players have been a very reliable predictor of team and player success on the field.

Certainly, there are outliers, but the overall numbers across the board do not lie. As I mentioned in another thread, you give me 10 random five stars and I will give you 20 random three stars and we can compare notes in three or four years. Same as far as comparing the Top Five in Recruiting Rankings to the last 10 teams in the Top 25 of recruiting rankings.

In the following replies, I am going to post some statistics/analysis as far as team and player recruiting rankings. Feel free to add your own and let me know your thoughts.

[CrimsonKat]

Here are ESPN's Early 2012 College Football Pre-Season Rankings:

1. LSU

2. USC

3. Alabama

4. Oregon

5. Oklahoma

6. Georgia

7. West Virginia

8. Florida State

9. Michigan State

10. South Carolina

Now, over the past four recruiting classes, there are only four (4) schools who have been inside Rivals' Top 10 Team Recruiting Rankings for every season -- those teams are LSU (#1), USC (#2), Alabama (#3), and Florida State (#8).

A fifth team, Georgia, has been inside the Rivals' Top 10 for three out of four seasons.

There is only one school, Texas, who has been in the Rivals' Top 10 in recruiting rankings for three of the last four seasons that does not appear on the Pre-Season Top 10 list above (Note: Texas appears in the Pre-Season ranking at #21).

Of the Pre-Season Top 10 above, Oklahoma (twice) and Oregon have also appeared in the Rivals' Top 10 Team Recruiting Rankings.

The only schools who have not been in the Rivals' Top 10 who are included in the ESPN Pre-Season Top 10 are South Carolina, Michigan State, and West Virginia. Of those, each has appeared in the Rivals' Top 30 at least once, with a high of #12 for South Carolina, #17 for Michigan State, and #27 for West Virginia. South Carolina has also appeared in the Rivals' Top 25 all four seasons.

The school just outside of ESPN's Pre-Season Top 10, Michigan, has made the Rivals' Top 10 in two of the past four seasons.

Excluding Texas and Michigan, there are only two (2) teams in the remaining ESPN Pre-Season Top 25 (11-15) who have appeared inside the Rivals' Top 10 Recruiting Rankings -- #22 Clemson and #23 Notre Dame (twice).

* That is pretty strong statistical analysis in favor of team recruiting rankings.

[BeachDawg21]

The rankings do mean something. They represent the players skill right now. So the 5 star guys right now, have the best chance to make an immediate impact. But it doesnt mean that in 4 years that 5 star will be better than the 2 or 3 star guy. One thing the stars and rankings dont take into consideration, as far as my knowledge goes, is the current situation the player is in. Is the player getting good coaching? Lord knows there are some questionable HS coaches out there. So great coaching could make that 3 star kid a lot better! Also, what resources does the player have? Do they have a good school and environment? Weight rooms, solid relationships in school, etc. Is the player playing in the right offensive or defensive system that takes advantage of their skills?

I think the ranking are good and can predict future success. But there are other factors that need to be considered when examining a player. So the rankings dont tell the whole story. But are still good indicators of what youre getting.

[PIGismyhomeboy]

I agree with you a good deal. A class full of 5 star recruits should be and almost always are the better teams. Sure there are busts and 2 stars turned first rounders. There are several factors that determine these outcomes. Work ethic, injuries, grades, strength and conditioning levels, coaching abilities, ability to stay out of trouble, schemes, and many other factors. The 5 stars definitely have the size/ability advantage coming out of high school and there is little doubt about that. It's the ability to come out on the good side of most of the above factors that determines team success and individual success of getting to the highest level.

[CrimsonKat]

Perhaps, the best indicator of player recruiting rankings is their on-field performance in college (as some college players' games do not translate as well to the NFL), but the quickest comparison is a look at the most recent 2011 NFL draft:

1. Cam Newton (Carolina) -- 5 Stars (Rivals/HS and JUCO)

2. Von Miller (Denver) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

3. Marcell Dareus (Buffalo) -- 4 Stars (Scout)

4. A.J. Green (Cincinnati) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

5. Patrick Peterson (Arizona) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

6. Julio Jones (Atlanta) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

7. Aldon Smith (San Francisco) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

8. Jake Locker (Tennessee) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

9. Tyron Smith (Dallas) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

10. Blaine Gabbert (Jacksonville) -- 5 Stars (Rivals)

11. J.J. Watt (Houston) -- 2 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

12.Christian Ponder (Minnesota) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

13. Nick Fairley (Detroit) -- 4 Stars (Scout JUCO)

14. Robert Quinn (St. Louis) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

15. Mike Pouncey (Miami) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

16. Ryan Kerrigan (Washington) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

17. Nate Solder (New England) -- 3 Stars (Rivals)

18. Corey Liuget (San Diego) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

19. Prince Amukamara (NYG) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

20. Adrian Clayborn (Rampa Bay) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

21. Phil Taylor (Cleveland) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

22. Anthony Castonzo (Indianapolis) -- 2 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

23. Danny Watkins (Philadelphia) -- 4 Stars (Rivals JUCO)

24. Cameron Jordan (New Orleans) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

25. James Carpenter (Seattle) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout JUCO)

26. Jonathan Baldwin (Kansas City) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

27. Jimmy Smith (Colorado) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

28. Mark Ingram (New Orleans) -- 4 Stars (Rivals)

29. Gabe Carimi (Chicago) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

30. Muhammed Wilkerson (NYJ) -- 3 Stars (Rivals)

31. Cam Heyward (Pittsburgh) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

32. Derek Sherrod (Green Bay) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

The breakdown:

Five Stars -- 7 players

Four Stars -- 14 players

Three Stars -- 9 players

Two Stars -- 2 players

*** A couple of notes: There are a disproportinate number of three stars to five stars in recruiting rankings (probably 10 to 1 at least) -- in fact, the five stars and four stars combined do not equal the number of three star recruits. Still, you have 21 players at four star or higher and only 11 players at three star or lower. That is remarkable.

Also, take a look at the Top 10 in the NFL Draft -- a single player below a four star with six (6) players rated as a five star recruit. Again, those numbers are convincing.

[Billy Ocean]

7. Aldon Smith (San Francisco) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

That young man is a BEAST

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XCPM67fFEg

[BeachDawg21]

Perhaps, the best indicator of player recruiting rankings is their on-field performance in college (as some college players' games do not translate as well to the NFL), but the quickest comparison is a look at the most recent 2011 NFL draft:

1. Cam Newton (Carolina) -- 5 Stars (Rivals/HS and JUCO)

2. Von Miller (Denver) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

3. Marcell Dareus (Buffalo) -- 4 Stars (Scout)

4. A.J. Green (Cincinnati) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

5. Patrick Peterson (Arizona) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

6. Julio Jones (Atlanta) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

7. Aldon Smith (San Francisco) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

8. Jake Locker (Tennessee) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

9. Tyron Smith (Dallas) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

10. Blaine Gabbert (Jacksonville) -- 5 Stars (Rivals)

11. J.J. Watt (Houston) -- 2 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

12.Christian Ponder (Minnesota) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

13. Nick Fairley (Detroit) -- 4 Stars (Scout JUCO)

14. Robert Quinn (St. Louis) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

15. Mike Pouncey (Miami) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

16. Ryan Kerrigan (Washington) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

17. Nate Solder (New England) -- 3 Stars (Rivals)

18. Corey Liuget (San Diego) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

19. Prince Amukamara (NYG) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

20. Adrian Clayborn (Rampa Bay) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

21. Phil Taylor (Cleveland) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

22. Anthony Castonzo (Indianapolis) -- 2 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

23. Danny Watkins (Philadelphia) -- 4 Stars (Rivals JUCO)

24. Cameron Jordan (New Orleans) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

25. James Carpenter (Seattle) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout JUCO)

26. Jonathan Baldwin (Kansas City) -- 5 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

27. Jimmy Smith (Colorado) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

28. Mark Ingram (New Orleans) -- 4 Stars (Rivals)

29. Gabe Carimi (Chicago) -- 3 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

30. Muhammed Wilkerson (NYJ) -- 3 Stars (Rivals)

31. Cam Heyward (Pittsburgh) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

32. Derek Sherrod (Green Bay) -- 4 Stars (Rivals and Scout)

The breakdown:

Five Stars -- 7 players

Four Stars -- 14 players

Three Stars -- 9 players

Two Stars -- 2 players

*** A couple of notes: There are a disproportinate number of three stars to five stars in recruiting rankings (probably 10 to 1 at least) -- in fact, the five stars and four stars combined do not equal the number of three star recruits. Still, you have 21 players at four star or higher and only 11 players at three star or lower. That is remarkable.

Also, take a look at the Top 10 in the NFL Draft -- a single player below a four star with six (6) players rated as a five star recruit. Again, those numbers are convincing.

Great info! Very interesting to see that. There is really no way to predict a kids future with so many factors in the 3-5 years they are in college. I would absolutely take a 5 star over a 3 star recruit. But just because a team lands a 3 star, that doesn't mean they should be disappointed. The teams that recruit the best, usually win (just look at your previous posts), that's not debatable.

[JunkyardDawgBlawgger]

I would say alot more goes into making a 3 star an NFL caliber athlete. IMO a 5 star comes out of high school with nearly all the tools to compete at a very high level, their challenges come from their ego. 3 stars work their tails off to become NFL prospects. Hard work and coaching go a long way as well, but the obvious difference between a 5 star that makes it and one that doesn't is work ethic. Then look at players like Richard Samuel, through no fault of his own, he just hasn't found a position that he fits in. He is a great athlete but he is too rigid for RB and he is outmatched at LB. Then the changing positions has really put him in an awkward state. Then you look at Burfict from ASU and he was ready to go pro out of high school IMO.

[CrimsonKat]

Someone mentioned Boise in the Georgia recruiting thread as proof that recruiting rankings do not work. Again, there are outliers and you have to look at this from the full picture, not the statistical anomalies. However, how does Boise State rack up its 10 to 12 wins per year? Generally, by getting up for one big out of conference game and beating up on the rest of the Mountain West -- since 2005, Boise State has had the #1 or #2 rated recruiting class (per Rivals) in the Mountain West five (5) times. They are on pace to again have the #1 rated recruiting class from the Mountain West this Signing Day.

[CrimsonKat]

Great info! Very interesting to see that. There is really no way to predict a kids future with so many factors in the 3-5 years they are in college. I would absolutely take a 5 star over a 3 star recruit. But just because a team lands a 3 star, that doesn't mean they should be disappointed. The teams that recruit the best, usually win (just look at your previous posts), that's not debatable.

I would say alot more goes into making a 3 star an NFL caliber athlete. IMO a 5 star comes out of high school with nearly all the tools to compete at a very high level, their challenges come from their ego. 3 stars work their tails off to become NFL prospects. Hard work and coaching go a long way as well, but the obvious difference between a 5 star that makes it and one that doesn't is work ethic. Then look at players like Richard Samuel, through no fault of his own, he just hasn't found a position that he fits in. He is a great athlete but he is too rigid for RB and he is outmatched at LB. Then the changing positions has really put him in an awkward state. Then you look at Burfict from ASU and he was ready to go pro out of high school IMO.

I think these points are accurate -- certainly a 3 star can become an NFL player just like a 5 star can be a bust and sometimes work ethic is the difference. There are also reasons that some of these guys have lower rankings -- for example, they may have played at a smaller high school and had to line up at Defensive Tackle instead of the Linebacker position they will play in college and never got to put their skills on proper display. Same reasons some walk-ons turn into All-Americans.

[DawgBone]

Someone mentioned Boise in the Georgia recruiting thread as proof that recruiting rankings do not work. Again, there are outliers and you have to look at this from the full picture, not the statistical anomalies. However, how does Boise State rack up its 10 to 12 wins per year? Generally, by getting up for one big out of conference game and beating up on the rest of the Mountain West -- since 2005, Boise State has had the #1 or #2 rated recruiting class (per Rivals) in the Mountain West five (5) times. They are on pace to again have the #1 rated recruiting class from the Mountain West this Signing Day.

That is all true, but I still believe Boise's success is due in greater part to coaching than the fact that they are signing the strongest classes in the Mountain West. Though they only have to get up for one or two big games annually, they do get up for those games.

Stanford when Harbaugh arrived is another example.

I get what you're saying - there are clearly guys at the top of the various lists who will excel at the college level and beyond. The majority of those players are grown men in 18 year old bodies. But there's always going to be the two or three star guy who works his butt off and goes in the first round as well.

[90% mental]

I think the accuracy of the rating systems is greatly improving with the increase in video production. A recruit reel used to take $$, time, equipment, and professional expertise but can now be done in a night by a couple kids on a computer and a mt. dew buzz. Not to mention the cost of distribution is 0 with the web etc. The percentage of kids that can now be seen and evaluated has greatly increased and that allows these services to have a much better feel for talent and where it ranks in relation to it's peers. I'd really like to see that same draft pick/stars rating for the 2000 draft.

Edited January 29, 2012 by 90% mental

[Porter Osborne Jr]

After reading the Senator's blog I found this article comparing star power to the possibility of making an All American Team. It's a pretty good indication that stars do matter to an extent. A 5* recruit is ten times as likely to be an All American as a 3* and 100 times more than a 2*.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/star-power-defense-recruiting-rankings-214251813.html

[capologist]

I've learned my lesson on rankings. I don't give a flip about rankings. I don't judge a class until 3 years later. At that point I look back and see how they've turned out--that's when you know whether you really did good or not. UF's classes have been ranked highly the past 5 years or so but if you look back, sometimes half the class doesn't pan out...

[DawgBone]

That '07 top 1% of the top 1% comes to mind.

[Carter]

The recruiting rankings are not a perfect system, but it is a system that works about as well as one can when you're trying to determine who stands out amongst the vast vast numbers of high school football players in the country. There are some very sore misses sometimes, but I would say those "recruiting busts" are more often a result of non-football factors or things the player has no control over such as coaches changing their position. And on the flip side of that coin are the 3-star and below guys who get that rating because few people know anything about them in many cases.

On the Boise State tip, I have a local story from here in west Texas that applies here. There is a BEAST of a RB here in El Paso named Jack Fields, consensus best player in the city... I would take him at Georgia in a heartbeat. He's a great kid with tremendous talent, but El Paso is nowhereville in the recruiting landscape and this young man is a 3-star recruit. He has been committed to Boise State for months. Boise State has better overall talent in the conferences they have played in because they look for those diamond in the rough guys and develop them with great coaching. Kellen Moore was a 3-star QB with offers from Boise State, Eastern Washington and Idaho.

[capologist]

That '07 top 1% of the top 1% comes to mind.

Yeah, that class is full of examples of why rankings are like predicting the weather...