I know that the NFL doesnt matter, but as I told you the above mentioned players were all GREAT in college. The best 2 college QBs, the best college OT, arguably the best college RB, the best college WR, and on and on. So from what I know, the stars indicate their success at college, and from what we saw, they werent good indicators.:thumb:
And here is another ranking shock. I know they dont mean anything when all is said and done, but it means a lot to fans during the recruiting process. Remember Jones, Tolliver and McKnight?
You are so right. Unfortunately, it's the only indicator for most fans-including myself- who only have that to go on since we don't get to watch most of the potential recruits.
Like everybody has said the rankings are based upon what they did in high school, if you were to rate these players after college I am sure they would have more stars. But you cannot predict how every highschool player is going to do in college.
NFL scouts cant do it with every player either based on their college careers. I saw a good example yesterday, undrafted Jack Delhomme stats vs. #1 pick overall Carr. Rivals does a better job than most and they even do stories about the star rankings that went wrong. Rivals is also better at evaluating players from the South.
4 stars are good. Star rating is a function of scholarship offers, measurables and performances at h.s. camps, their h.s. region, etc.. So this is fairly accurate. Everything is based on ODDS. It's like when 4 out of 5 people say a restaurant is good, most likely it is good, but nothing is GUARANTEED.
I was one of the Delhomme doubters too. When people would say he did this and he did that, I'd say, "Come on, he played at UL, how good can he be? and against their competition?" I was wrong. Good point, consider the MANY who can't afford to attend any camps, as compared to those who attend several. :thumb:
Do you have any idea how many HS football players are out there? There is no way anyone can evaluate them all so it has to be done on a regional basis. You end up with all these different people doing ratings. How do you know is everyone is on the same scale since its so subjective? You can't rate on head to head competition because teams primarily only play within their states. Then you have to add in the fact that not all competition in a state is equal. Some kid may put up god like numbers in a single A league but how does he really compare to a guy in 5A? You also have to compensate for systems styles and a thousand other things. I think it's pretty impressive that they get as close as they do.
It is a prediction. Just like anything trying to predict the future, it is a guess - of course it isn't perfect! Rivals and Scout also provide scholarship offers, highlight videos, stats, and measurables so that you can make your own guesses about how good a recruit may be. Rivals is the best that is out there as far as recruiting rankings go, IMO. Although I read somewhere that Scout's have actually been more accurate when compared to the NFL draft.
They also provide up to date information that you can't find anywhere else. I have a scout account and I love it.
