• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Recruiting Rankings vs. Offers vs. Meatballs

y0yoyoin;2275763; said:
yah i thought about that but i figured since he put dorian bell in that list, and his brain was injured, then D'Andrea's injury had to count as well

D'Andrea's injuries should count because he is a meathead and was more worried about his bench press total than how much playing time he got.

Bell is a headcase but had a dim future at OSU due to concussions as much as anything else. We saw in the case of Kenny Hayes that the staff won't clear someone to play if they have head issues.
 
Upvote 0
TheStoicPaisano;2275985; said:
D'Andrea's injuries should count because he is a meathead and was more worried about his bench press total than how much playing time he got.

Bell is a headcase but had a dim future at OSU due to concussions as much as anything else. We saw in the case of Kenny Hayes that the staff won't clear someone to play if they have head issues.
D'Andrea hurt his knee while doing the bench press? You'd think that someone would've told him that he was doing it wrong.
 
Upvote 0
Is there a more daft argument than "recruiting rankings don't matter"? The precision isn't perfect, but it has really improved with the vast amounts of available information. There hits and misses. But, I'd take a team of 4 and 5* kids all day over a team of unranked and 3* kids.

Alabama ain't kicking the holy heck out of people with bad recruiting.

Washington state ain't getting the holy heck kicked out of them with good recruiting.

Anyway, I agree with RB's finish to the class, but I think they still have a legitimate, if not probable, chance with Quick. With Bell, if you judge by actions, it's over.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
TheStoicPaisano;2275985; said:
D'Andrea's injuries should count because he is a meathead and was more worried about his bench press total than how much playing time he got.

No bashing of Buckeyes here...do it again and you'll be on a two-week vacation.
 
Upvote 0
IronBuckI;2275990; said:
D'Andrea hurt his knee while doing the bench press? You'd think that someone would've told him that he was doing it wrong.
C'mon, D'Andrea is on record for opening his gym to keep others from making the same missteps with overtraining...he's basically on record that his weight room mistakes cost him his career. It that's bashing, c'est la vie.

You can injure your shoulder or chest in the weight room (ask Branden Joe or Kudla about that)...all of a sudden you can't workout for a few months and you're putting extra weight on a knee, or over-compensating with the weights when you do get back in. Second and third-order effects.

At least D'Andrea's fondness for the weights has led him and Jamario O'Neal to make a good living by opening up the facility. Funny how things work out.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
isaac416;2276014; said:
Is there a more daft argument than "recruiting rankings don't matter"? The precision isn't perfect, but it has really improved with the vast amounts of available information. There hits and misses. But, I'd take a team of 4 and 5* kids all day over a team of unranked and 3* kids.

Alabama ain't kicking the holy heck out of people with bad recruiting.

Washington state ain't getting the holy heck kicked out of them with good recruiting.

Anyway, I agree with RB's finish to the class, but I think they still have a legitimate, if not probable, chance with Quick. With Bell, if you judge by actions, it's over.

offers lists are a much better indicator than rankings lists.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0
lvbuckeye;2276248; said:
offers lists are a much better indicator than rankings lists.

Bingo.

That said, recruiting rankings are a lot like preseason team rankings. If you are going to treat recruiting like a spectator sport (and that is why we are all reading this thread) it gives you some frame of reference.

In fairness to those who do the ranking they have a much different task than the coaches. Different rankers are reviewing thousands of kids with different sets of eyes and trying to fit them into a single national bell curve. A curve which I suspect is artificially normalized based on geographical prejudices. And as with any bell curve the closer you get to the mean the less variation. (Much less difference between a low 4 and a high 3 than between a low 5 and a high 4.)

And their biggest disadvantage is that they are evaluating 16 and 17 year old kids at a point in time. They see who they are - not who they might become. They don't always get to talk to the kids and get to know their work habits and character - which are commonly what helps a 3 star recruit become a 5 star player over time (or vice versa). Nor do they factor in the "Bollman effect".

They do a pretty decent job of identifying the 5 star outliers. Beyond D'Andrea, from 2002 to OSU recruited four other Scout 5 stars. They were:

Kudla
Clarett
Whitner
Ginn

Not a bad group.
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch;2276260; said:
Bingo.

That said, recruiting rankings are a lot like preseason team rankings. If you are going to treat recruiting like a spectator sport (and that is why we are all reading this thread) it gives you some frame of reference.

In fairness to those who do the ranking they have a much different task than the coaches. Different rankers are reviewing thousands of kids with different sets of eyes and trying to fit them into a single national bell curve. A curve which I suspect is artificially normalized based on geographical prejudices. And as with any bell curve the closer you get to the mean the less variation. (Much less difference between a low 4 and a high 3 than between a low 5 and a high 4.)

And their biggest disadvantage is that they are evaluating 16 and 17 year old kids at a point in time. They see who they are - not who they might become. They don't always get to talk to the kids and get to know their work habits and character - which are commonly what helps a 3 star recruit become a 5 star player over time (or vice versa). Nor do they factor in the "Bollman effect".

They do a pretty decent job of identifying the 5 star outliers. Beyond D'Andrea, from 2002 to OSU recruited four other Scout 5 stars. They were:

Kudla
Clarett
Whitner
Ginn

Not a bad group.

Eugene Clifford?
Derrick Morris?
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch;2276260; said:
Bingo.

That said, recruiting rankings are a lot like preseason team rankings. If you are going to treat recruiting like a spectator sport (and that is why we are all reading this thread) it gives you some frame of reference.

In fairness to those who do the ranking they have a much different task than the coaches. Different rankers are reviewing thousands of kids with different sets of eyes and trying to fit them into a single national bell curve. A curve which I suspect is artificially normalized based on geographical prejudices. And as with any bell curve the closer you get to the mean the less variation. (Much less difference between a low 4 and a high 3 than between a low 5 and a high 4.)

And their biggest disadvantage is that they are evaluating 16 and 17 year old kids at a point in time. They see who they are - not who they might become. They don't always get to talk to the kids and get to know their work habits and character - which are commonly what helps a 3 star recruit become a 5 star player over time (or vice versa). Nor do they factor in the "Bollman effect".

They do a pretty decent job of identifying the 5 star outliers. Beyond D'Andrea, from 2002 to OSU recruited four other Scout 5 stars. They were:

Kudla
Clarett
Whitner
Ginn

Not a bad group.

Beanie
 
Upvote 0
TheStoicPaisano;2276062; said:
C'mon, D'Andrea is on record for opening his gym to keep others from making the same missteps with overtraining...he's basically on record that his weight room mistakes cost him his career. It that's bashing, c'est la vie.
Calling him a meathead is...
 
Upvote 0
5 Star according to Scout:

2005
Alex Boone
Doug Worthington
Jamario O'Neal

2006
Beanie
Conner Smith
Larry Grant JC

2007
Eugene Clifford

2008 WHAT A HAUL
T. Pryor
E. Sabino
Mike Brewster
JB Shurgarts
Mike Adams
DeVier Posey

2009
Melvin Fellows
John Simon
Dorian Bell

2010
Andrew Norwell

2011
Brax
Curtis Grant
Steve Miller

2012
Brionte Dunn
Noah Spence
Tommy Schutt
Aldolphus Washington
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye;2276282; said:
Calling him a meathead is...

Bro, are you like implying there's something wrong with being a meathead, bro?

Please visit reddit.com/r/swoleacceptance and educate yourself

Regarding the whole stargazing debate, stars are certainly not the be all end all of recruiting, but relatively speaking, a much greater % of 4 and 5 star recruits succeed and excel, as compared to their 3 star brethren. We've seen this debate at least once every few months, and it seems to be the same exact people laying out the same exact viewpoints.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top