Zips pick up a LB

[pdt1420]

I think the main point here (which got lost) is not about the effect of ratings, recruiting, and success, but instead about how likely it is a recruit can be under-rated.... OR, fit into one program better than other one.The off-tangent started with the point that in general you can correlate a statistical accumulative affect of ratings to the overall level of the program, which is probably quite true... but I don't think that refutes the validity to the idea that an individual recruit can turn out to be much better than a rating.... no?

Well, I think the main MAIN point was that a kid should run faster than a 5.1 at 230 lbs.I don't think anything refutes the validity that a kid can be better than his rating, much as anything can't refute that he'd end up worse, or exactly at his rating. I bet that if you were able to map out success levels for 1 and 2 star recruits, that the accumulated statistics would end up centered right around 1 or 2 stars.

[Roo]

It's all fine and dandy that we have been recruiting 1* and 2* and we have gotten lucky and found a couple of gems, but what has it accounted for? Nothing.We have gotten one bowl bid in the history of the program and a couple of MAC titles. Obviously we are out there recruiting these kids, but they just aren't coming. Whatever it is that has to be, needs to be done. To be a middle of the pack MAC team is not good enough. Right now we are a middle of the road mid major. Some of you seem satisfied with that, but I would like to believe in this hotbed area of recruits, if we could snag a couple, it could dramatically turn the program around (with the right scheduling).But why we offer so early to these 1* kids is beyond me....these kids aren't going to help us win any games. They may be ok players their senior year, we may get lucky and have a player that has a solid career, but these kids are not stand out players that make an impact on the field and give us a chance to run off 10 victories in a season. It's not going to happen if we go into Feb with a list of commitments from 1*s.

[Zipgrad01]

your 100% on with the teams that get the high stars do well.the fighting irish consistantly land top 5 recruiting clasess.don't forget they have been in the poulan weed eater bowl the last five years.that should be proof enough.

Thanks for the exception. Charlie Cheeseburger has lots to do with that.Why don't you go find me the last NC, or even top 20 team that was made of all 1-2*?You can probably find 1 exception there too.

Buckzip, the number of stars a player has is a reflection of who offered them, not of their athletic ability. Just look at scout's page for Akron recruiting: they made every single one of our recruits a 2-star guy today, where there used to be quite a few 1-star guys. They did that because MAC recruits are automatically 2-stars unless they have a significant amount of offers from BCS schools.

That is not entirely true. Patrick Nicely is a 3 star knocking on 4 star and he doesn't have one BCS offer. There is a reason for the most part that MAC schools have their players rated as 2 stars. For goodness sakes watch the games. Most of the MAC players are just not as talented. Like anything else, there are a few guys that fall through the ratings crack like a Domenik Hixon, James Harrison, Ben Roethlisburger, Greg Jennings, etc... All those 4 and 5 star guys that USC, Miami, Florida, Texas, OSU, Oklahoma, etc.. gets every year sure seem to make a difference, don't they? Those teams recruit the cream of the crop BASED ON ATHLETIC ABILITY. The scouting services obviously see a kid not getting offers from bigger schools and most of the time correctly grade them out at a lower star level. I have no idea why some people on here think there is a conspiracy to downgrade MAC recruits star levels. Go to Rivals and click on the Akron verbals. Half of them show Akron as their ONLY OFFER! Go to any BCS conference and click on their players. Even the 2 and 3 star guys have multiple BCS offers. These programs have been doing this for decades. They know what they are doing.

Thanks genius! Now get off this board and go find a buckeye board to get off on.

That is the best you could come up with? What part of my comment was incorrect mr internet tough guy? Also, what is it with the OSU comment? What did I say that caused you to act like a 3 year old child and make a moronic statement? Some of you people on here amaze me with your maturity level.

[Zipgrad01]

I'm not getting in on this argument here, but if you guys want to see something that's rather depressing, go to Rivals and check out the Conference USA recruiting classes. As far as star-ratings go, their classes are absolutely blowing ours out of the water.

And we saw those results on the field this year during bowl season when 2 of our 3 best teams got pasted by C-USA teams.

[Buckzip]

your 100% on with the teams that get the high stars do well.the fighting irish consistantly land top 5 recruiting clasess.don't forget they have been in the poulan weed eater bowl the last five years.that should be proof enough.

Thanks for the exception. Charlie Cheeseburger has lots to do with that.Why don't you go find me the last NC, or even top 20 team that was made of all 1-2*?You can probably find 1 exception there too.

Buckzip, the number of stars a player has is a reflection of who offered them, not of their athletic ability. Just look at scout's page for Akron recruiting: they made every single one of our recruits a 2-star guy today, where there used to be quite a few 1-star guys. They did that because MAC recruits are automatically 2-stars unless they have a significant amount of offers from BCS schools.

That is not entirely true. Patrick Nicely is a 3 star knocking on 4 star and he doesn't have one BCS offer. There is a reason for the most part that MAC schools have their players rated as 2 stars. For goodness sakes watch the games. Most of the MAC players are just not as talented. Like anything else, there are a few guys that fall through the ratings crack like a Domenik Hixon, James Harrison, Ben Roethlisburger, Greg Jennings, etc... All those 4 and 5 star guys that USC, Miami, Florida, Texas, OSU, Oklahoma, etc.. gets every year sure seem to make a difference, don't they? Those teams recruit the cream of the crop BASED ON ATHLETIC ABILITY. The scouting services obviously see a kid not getting offers from bigger schools and most of the time correctly grade them out at a lower star level. I have no idea why some people on here think there is a conspiracy to downgrade MAC recruits star levels. Go to Rivals and click on the Akron verbals. Half of them show Akron as their ONLY OFFER! Go to any BCS conference and click on their players. Even the 2 and 3 star guys have multiple BCS offers. These programs have been doing this for decades. They know what they are doing.

Thanks genius! Now get off this board and go find a buckeye board to get off on.

That is the best you could come up with? What part of my comment was incorrect mr internet tough guy? Also, what is it with the OSU comment? What did I say that caused you to act like a 3 year old child and make a moronic statement? Some of you people on here amaze me with your maturity level.

You simply can't have a conversation with some people without them going into attack mode. Pretty f'ing sad IMHO.

[Zipgrad01]

your 100% on with the teams that get the high stars do well.the fighting irish consistantly land top 5 recruiting clasess.don't forget they have been in the poulan weed eater bowl the last five years.that should be proof enough.

Thanks for the exception. Charlie Cheeseburger has lots to do with that.Why don't you go find me the last NC, or even top 20 team that was made of all 1-2*?You can probably find 1 exception there too.

Buckzip, the number of stars a player has is a reflection of who offered them, not of their athletic ability. Just look at scout's page for Akron recruiting: they made every single one of our recruits a 2-star guy today, where there used to be quite a few 1-star guys. They did that because MAC recruits are automatically 2-stars unless they have a significant amount of offers from BCS schools.

That is not entirely true. Patrick Nicely is a 3 star knocking on 4 star and he doesn't have one BCS offer. There is a reason for the most part that MAC schools have their players rated as 2 stars. For goodness sakes watch the games. Most of the MAC players are just not as talented. Like anything else, there are a few guys that fall through the ratings crack like a Domenik Hixon, James Harrison, Ben Roethlisburger, Greg Jennings, etc... All those 4 and 5 star guys that USC, Miami, Florida, Texas, OSU, Oklahoma, etc.. gets every year sure seem to make a difference, don't they? Those teams recruit the cream of the crop BASED ON ATHLETIC ABILITY. The scouting services obviously see a kid not getting offers from bigger schools and most of the time correctly grade them out at a lower star level. I have no idea why some people on here think there is a conspiracy to downgrade MAC recruits star levels. Go to Rivals and click on the Akron verbals. Half of them show Akron as their ONLY OFFER! Go to any BCS conference and click on their players. Even the 2 and 3 star guys have multiple BCS offers. These programs have been doing this for decades. They know what they are doing.

Thanks genius! Now get off this board and go find a buckeye board to get off on.

That is the best you could come up with? What part of my comment was incorrect mr internet tough guy? Also, what is it with the OSU comment? What did I say that caused you to act like a 3 year old child and make a moronic statement? Some of you people on here amaze me with your maturity level.

You simply can't have a conversation with some people without them going into attack mode. Pretty f'ing sad IMHO.

I agree. I thought the whole point of these boards was to discuss the program, college football, etc and exchange opinions and information. I didn't realize you had to drown in the UA kool aid before being allowed to write anything.