On the ongoing discussion thread someone brought up this article by Dr Saturday and wondered how things would be if you take out the offensive linemen. The reason for the curiosity, for those that don't know, is because offensive linemen are most often rated as 3* coming out of high school due to the difficulty of predicting how the body will change as they get older. So I decided to do a little research and see how the numbers fall. I looked up the All-American teams from 05-09 since those were the years dealt with in the article. I also went ahead and removed Kickers and punters as they are almost always 2 and 3* kids. On to the break down.
Little anecdote, a lot of the 3* and below kids appeared to be RBs, return men and (surprisingly to me) LBs. Something else that hopped out to me a bit was that, going by the All-American list, the rankings are pretty spot on when it comes to DTs. There just were not a lot of 3* kids who turn into All-American DTs.
55.6% of all the AA players I could find rankings for, minus the OL, kickers and punters, were 4* or higher. I think that is a fairly large jump from the 46.2% you get with the OL, Ks and Ps put into the numbers. Just looking at the percentages like that though could lead someone to think that 44.4% being 3* or lower means that the rankings are right just over half the time. If you think that you really should check Dr Saturday's article. from 05-09 only 13.9% of the kids in FBS were 4* or higher. That means that a group that makes up less than a fifth of the players excelled to such a level that over half of the top players in the nation come from that group.