All American breakdown by stars
by osceolafan850 on Feb 5, 2010 12:27 AM EST
Email
Print
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.
via i48.tinypic.com
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.
22 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
On a somewhat related note I was looking back and realized
Recardo Wright was a four star prospect and rated the #2 outside linebacker in the nation per Rivals. Dekoda Watson was a three star and #25 OLB. While we can say Chuck Amato did not develop Wright, some of it is probably on him or just the guessing game of ranking kids future in college. Brandon Warren came out of HS weighing more than both those guys and Toddrick Verdell (Mryon Rolle weighed about as much as those linebackers). I know people say, “he has the frame to add weight,” but these guys are still young with high metabolisms. How can they be sure of which ones will add weight?
On a somewhat unrrelated note
also noticed after looking at the 2006 guys, though we can blame the coaches for not developing the guys or for not paying attention to grade issues, give them some slack on recruiting because it looks like many of those guys that did not pan out where also being chased by big time programs which were successful.
doesn't matter IMO
every school will go after talent, it’s what you do WITH the talent.
Not panning out has just as much to do with the support structure as it does the actual kid. Trust me, I’m in the FSUTeach program, and the first thing we are shown is how BAD many students’ support is at home, and that is a huge reason why they do not succeed. Without proper motivation, students lose interest, struggle, or give up.
This is where I see the starkest difference between Bowden and Jimbo. Bowden is the old way of teaching (Repetition, Memorization, Experience) while Jimbo is the NEW way (Conceptual and Inquiry Based).
I could go on and on about how much a difference Conceptual and Inquiry based learning makes compared to memorization and repetition, but lets just say the top 10 nations in the world use these styles in their schools, and the US isn’t anywhere near it.
Sorry for the rant, but basically what I’m trying to say is that, in theory, the reason the students failed (academically, athletically, morally, life-in-general, etc.) is largely (not fully) based on the fact that the teachers(coaches) and support structure failed them (or was absent entirely).
Jimbo will be the difference maker.
by freshcollegeboy on Feb 5, 2010 1:51 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Good post
I see our nation turning into Idiocracy. I wish we could revamp our education system to take better advantage of the opportunities that we have. At least our beloved football program is moving in that direction.
by scalp n spank on Feb 6, 2010 12:00 AM EST up reply actions
no need to apologize for the "rant"
I have been a member here for over a year, and I hardly take the time to reply to replies because my three Chinese girlfriends and 1 Korean girlfriend are killing me, but this was an excellent read. I learned something.
Good job for breaking it down to me in simple chapter and verse so I could understand that.
Xie Xie Laoshi………………….
by LincolnHighNole on Feb 7, 2010 12:16 AM EST up reply actions
Top 10 nations?
What are they? I’m assuming you’re talking about the educational systems. All the standardized testing kind of screws up the education here, I think.
Just checked out the 06/07 Rivals top rankings
Seems to me that most of the people not already in the NFL are on their way to a high pick in the NFL. I am not sure how anyone can predict the top prospets for the pros better than this?
I understand but
And maybe someone has already said this in the other article.
You have to take into consideration the kids with the higher rankings more often then not go to a better school with better players then the guys with lower rankings. Id say they have alot better shot becoming an AA.
"alot of people dont realize that FSU is about to TAKE OFF" - Telvin Smith
Slightly disagree
With a lot of positions having more talent means your numbers can go down, as can your playing time. For example lets say Christian Jones went to USF. He would by far be the most athletically gifted defender allowing him to make more tackles. Putting him on our defense he has more competition for tackles grouped with Luc, Smith and co for the next 3-4 years. You also face better teams with better players, making it harder to get your numbers. One of the lower rated guys to make AA was a RB from Boise State, the guy who proposed after scoring against OU. He was a good college back, but physically not one of the best that year. But the level of teams Boise State played was low enough to allow him to dominate. Imagine if a player like Spiller or Moreno would have ran against those defenses.
by osceolafan850 on Feb 5, 2010 7:38 AM EST up reply actions
There is another thing to look at… Weren’t there only a small amount of 5*s given this year? Meaning, if the size of the total 5* population is only 10 or 15% of the entire prospect base, but the AA roster shows that 5*s are more than 15% of that sample then, it’s extremely obvious to me, stars do matter.
Thats not to say that four and five stars are the only players we should accept or be happy to get, hell no. It just means to me that if you can get your hands on a 6’4" 225lb WR who runs a 4.4 or less and is a 5*, you might have more success with him than the 5’10" 165lb thee star. Yeah and look at Wes Welker, but you have a much greater chance of getting that stud with a Larry Fitzgerald body.
Development is important, a lot of 5 and 4*s are wasted (FSU), but just look at how many 3 stars were available in the 05,06,07,08 and 09 recruiting classes, I’m sure there were a lot more than 27% as in 05 or 25% in 06.
after posting i realized that 5 star prospects do not even come close to making up 10 or 15% of the entire class of any given year.
so the fact that they can make up that percentage of the AA class does mean something
Suggest a program?
Wife lost the product key for Office so I can’t use Excel.
by osceolafan850 on Feb 5, 2010 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
vmleary@yahoo.com
You can send it to me and I’ll give it a crack.
by osceolafan850 on Feb 5, 2010 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
I agree with NoleRaised, I think this would make more sense if you broke it down by percentage.
For example, what percentage of 5 stars make all-american, what percentage of 4 stars, etc. Otherwise, we’re looking at these numbers out of context.
I’m guessing that the highest percentage of all-americans are 5 star players.
by FSUjab on Feb 5, 2010 9:47 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
In Dr Saturday's article
From 2005-2009 5* kids made up 1.3% of FBS players but made up 12.9% of the All-Americans. I didn’t post it in the fanpost because the data is in the article I linked. There are more 3* kids in FBS than 4* and 5* combined.
by osceolafan850 on Feb 5, 2010 1:04 PM EST up reply actions
And that's all there is to it.
Anyone who disagrees about stars mattering is [fill this in with any derogatory term].
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE TOMAHAWK NATION STORE
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
