The Truth About the "In-State" Myth...

[WaGriz4life]

Here's a great quote from another board where a 4-year college and 4 year NFL player commented on why so many 5 star recruits never make it to the NFL, why the "star ratings" can be almost meaningless, why there are more players on the Superbowl winner from West Alabama (1) than Alabama (0) (and why I believe Montana walk-ons and players do so well):

"I still have a few friends in the industry and they say never has there ever been such great athletes but poor football players in college. These kids don't have a grasp of the game and get by on their skill set until they get to the pros where they're absolutely lost and their athletic ability is matched by every player out there. End result is the game is too quick for them, they have to think instead of being instinctual and they flounder. The high school and college coaches teaching the spread offense is doing nothing for these kids. It pads statistics because of the isolation aspect of the scheme but teaches them nothing about understanding the game."

An no, this author is not PR.

There are zero statistics that support your argument that star ratings are meaningless when it comes to college football. ALL of the programs competing for National Titles at the FBS level consistently have top 10-15 recruiting classes (with Bama, FSU, and Ohio State top 5 consistently). The only exception being TCU. Star ratings are projecting what they will be at the college level, not NFL. NFL is a different animal.

Players being recruited at our level don't get the level of evaluation as FBS recruits. So, I would agree that they can be fairly meaningless at our level. At the FBS level, very accurate.

I would disagree that the ratings are very accurate at the FBS level. I was listening to Mike & Mike on signing day and Golic was talking about his son's experiences with the recruiting process and the ratings. Golic explained there any number of camps kids attend and thats when the numbers are assigned. For some reason, Mike said what it was but I missed it, his son missed a camp and suddenly his star rating dropped significantly. I also missed the part about whether this was Mike Jr or Jake, but both went to ND as did dad. The Golics felt this was petty retaliation for snubbing the camp, they have no proof of course but there shouldnt be a major drop in a ratings, maybe minor move up or down based on performances. The point of Golic's tale, and one I agree with, is that the star ratings have some basis in fact but they are not as accurate as a lot of people think. Star ratings are useful tools for comparative purposes and there is some level of accuracy. But I would disagree that they are very accurate.

Well Golic is wrong. Going to camps helps you get in front of scouts for these recruiting services, but is certainly not the only criteria. Size, speed, and other things measured at camps on combines matter. As does, game film, level of competition, offer lists, and of course evaluation of players going against other elite players at camps.

Heres an article for you. Just published last week. Don't let stats get in the way.

http://athlonsports.com/college-football/dont-deny-climate-change-recruiting-rankings-matter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[NorthEndZoneDan]

Here's a great quote from another board where a 4-year college and 4 year NFL player commented on why so many 5 star recruits never make it to the NFL, why the "star ratings" can be almost meaningless, why there are more players on the Superbowl winner from West Alabama (1) than Alabama (0) (and why I believe Montana walk-ons and players do so well):

"I still have a few friends in the industry and they say never has there ever been such great athletes but poor football players in college. These kids don't have a grasp of the game and get by on their skill set until they get to the pros where they're absolutely lost and their athletic ability is matched by every player out there. End result is the game is too quick for them, they have to think instead of being instinctual and they flounder. The high school and college coaches teaching the spread offense is doing nothing for these kids. It pads statistics because of the isolation aspect of the scheme but teaches them nothing about understanding the game."

An no, this author is not PR.

There are zero statistics that support your argument that star ratings are meaningless when it comes to college football. ALL of the programs competing for National Titles at the FBS level consistently have top 10-15 recruiting classes (with Bama, FSU, and Ohio State top 5 consistently). The only exception being TCU. Star ratings are projecting what they will be at the college level, not NFL. NFL is a different animal.

Players being recruited at our level don't get the level of evaluation as FBS recruits. So, I would agree that they can be fairly meaningless at our level. At the FBS level, very accurate.

I would disagree that the ratings are very accurate at the FBS level. I was listening to Mike & Mike on signing day and Golic was talking about his son's experiences with the recruiting process and the ratings. Golic explained there any number of camps kids attend and thats when the numbers are assigned. For some reason, Mike said what it was but I missed it, his son missed a camp and suddenly his star rating dropped significantly. I also missed the part about whether this was Mike Jr or Jake, but both went to ND as did dad. The Golics felt this was petty retaliation for snubbing the camp, they have no proof of course but there shouldnt be a major drop in a ratings, maybe minor move up or down based on performances. The point of Golic's tale, and one I agree with, is that the star ratings have some basis in fact but they are not as accurate as a lot of people think. Star ratings are useful tools for comparative purposes and there is some level of accuracy. But I would disagree that they are very accurate.

Well Golic is wrong. Going to camps helps you get in front of scouts for these recruiting services, but is certainly not the only criteria. Size, speed, and other things measured at camps on combines matter. As does, game film, level of competition, offer lists, and of course evaluation of players going against other elite players at camps.

Heres an article for you. Just published last week. Don't let stats get in the way.

http://athlonsports.com/college-football/dont-deny-climate-change-recruiting-rankings-matter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You missed my point. I agree with you that ratings matter. Where we disagree is the level of accuracy in the ratings system. I understand the process and stats behind the ratings. As I said, they are a useful tool. However, there is no denying Golic's point. He was a rated recruit, played college ball, played successfully in the NFL, his two sons were rated recruits and played college ball. His sons attended numerous camps over a number of years, missing one camp should have no effect on the numbers produced during the evaluation. As Golic's story illustrates, there is a human element in the ratings system and that introduces bias. In spite of all the efforts to collect and analyze a ton of data, I dont think the ratings are as accurate as some believe.

 

[horribilisfan8184]

Dont'a Hightower played at Alabama. So West Alabama (1) Alabama (1). Superbowl loser had West Alabama (0) Alabama (3).

For some reason Dont'a doesn't show on the Patriots' active roster. But even so, its a wash with DII players.

And there are 8 FCS and lower division players (including Regina) against 3 Alabama players on the Superbowl loser, and 125 Bama players on the team that lost to Ohio State in the FBS semi's. If star recruits was all it took, judging by their recruiting class rank, every 'Bama player for the last 10 years would be in the NFL, and Ohio State wouldn't have stood a chance.

Point was, best athletes (recruits) do not = best football players. Just ask Stitt.

 

[KoolMoeDee]

For MT kids the Sims experience is a good example. If he doesn't go to those camps. He is not noticed by OSU and probably unranked. If Daum or Ryan go to those camps and perform well. I would think they would have a 2-3 star ranking.

 

[MrTitleist]

Here's some well-timed reading on rankings systems.
http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2015/2/10/8012747/college-football-recruiting-rankings-strengths-flaws" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[WaGriz4life]

Here's some well-timed reading on rankings systems.
http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2015/2/10/8012747/college-football-recruiting-rankings-strengths-flaws" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And here's some more for you

https://www.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1714733" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[MrTitleist]

You realize that Rivals changes star rankings based on an athlete's commitment, right? If a 3-star commits to Bama it's not uncommon for him to become a 4-star over night. Of course Rivals is going to publish a story saying, "See! Our rankings are right! Just look at the numbers!" Well yeah, that's how they keep their credibility up, by adjusting the stars to fit their needs.

 

[PlayerRep]

What is the "In-State Myth"?

 

[AllWeatherFan]

What is the "In-State Myth"?

That is exactly the question I was going to ask.

 

[IroneagleXP]

What is the "In-State Myth"?

That is exactly the question I was going to ask.

....that all griz fans are latent homosexuals. And using ejizz as a reference, it would seem that the myth is indeed true. Of course this generalization does not include CDA, who is well known for his overt homosexuality.

 

[WaGriz4life]

You realize that Rivals changes star rankings based on an athlete's commitment, right? If a 3-star commits to Bama it's not uncommon for him to become a 4-star over night. Of course Rivals is going to publish a story saying, "See! Our rankings are right! Just look at the numbers!" Well yeah, that's how they keep their credibility up, by adjusting the stars to fit their needs.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So it's a big conspiracy, got it. FSU, OSU, and BAMA really don't sign the best players they just adjust the rankings to make it look like they do. :thumb:

 

[CDAGRIZ]

What is the "In-State Myth"?

That is exactly the question I was going to ask.

....that all griz fans are latent homosexuals. And using ejizz as a reference, it would seem that the myth is indeed true. Of course this generalization does not include CDA, who is well known for his overt homosexuality.

Sweet burn, bro. So, we know you're over 50.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

You realize that Rivals changes star rankings based on an athlete's commitment, right? If a 3-star commits to Bama it's not uncommon for him to become a 4-star over night. Of course Rivals is going to publish a story saying, "See! Our rankings are right! Just look at the numbers!" Well yeah, that's how they keep their credibility up, by adjusting the stars to fit their needs.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So it's a big conspiracy, got it. FSU, OSU, and BAMA really don't sign the best players they just adjust the rankings to make it look like they do. :thumb:

Dude, there is actually some truth to this. I've definitely seen rivals take stars away from BB recruits when they commit to Gonzaga instead of UCLA or Arizona.

 

[WaGriz4life]

You realize that Rivals changes star rankings based on an athlete's commitment, right? If a 3-star commits to Bama it's not uncommon for him to become a 4-star over night. Of course Rivals is going to publish a story saying, "See! Our rankings are right! Just look at the numbers!" Well yeah, that's how they keep their credibility up, by adjusting the stars to fit their needs.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So it's a big conspiracy, got it. FSU, OSU, and BAMA really don't sign the best players they just adjust the rankings to make it look like they do. :thumb:

Dude, there is actually some truth to this. I've definitely seen rivals take stars away from BB recruits when they commit to Gonzaga instead of UCLA or Arizona.

Haha. I just posted Titleist post on rivals Ohio State site and the mods got a good laugh. They said offers and commitments have nothing to do with how they rank their players. But of course they are going to say that, it's all a conspiracy.

 

[bgbigdog]

Here's some well-timed reading on rankings systems.
http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2015/2/10/8012747/college-football-recruiting-rankings-strengths-flaws" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for sharing, great perspective on a multi-faceted process.

Most of us argue that the development element of the process is everything. Spotting a great athlete who understands and leverages their talents isn't really rocket science. On the other hand, recognizing potential or ceiling is. Good coaching as a part of a comprehensive programs will put the individuals/team in a position to achieve their goals. No rating process or system can adequately predict what's going on in their heads, how the kids will adapt to the new environment or commit themselves to the steps laid out for them once they arrive. They are used to being big fish, but their recognition of the new pond is most critical as the integrate into any program.

 

[MrTitleist]

You realize that Rivals changes star rankings based on an athlete's commitment, right? If a 3-star commits to Bama it's not uncommon for him to become a 4-star over night. Of course Rivals is going to publish a story saying, "See! Our rankings are right! Just look at the numbers!" Well yeah, that's how they keep their credibility up, by adjusting the stars to fit their needs.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So it's a big conspiracy, got it. FSU, OSU, and BAMA really don't sign the best players they just adjust the rankings to make it look like they do. :thumb:

I didn't say they don't sign the best players, those schools basically recruit themselves so they typically get most athletes they're chasing (in football anyways). What I'm saying is, star rankings are an inexact science that Rivals adjusts on the fly to fit their needs. I've seen a 3-star sign at Wyoming and immediately drop to a 2-star upon his verbal.

 

[Spanky]

What is the myth?

 

[AllWeatherFan]

What is the "In-State Myth"?

That is exactly the question I was going to ask.

....that all griz fans are latent homosexuals. And using ejizz as a reference, it would seem that the myth is indeed true. Of course this generalization does not include CDA, who is well known for his overt homosexuality.

Sam Smith doesn't need your affirmation, and neither do I, friend!

 

[garizzalies]

What is the "In-State Myth"?

That is exactly the question I was going to ask.

....that all griz fans are latent homosexuals. And using ejizz as a reference, it would seem that the myth is indeed true. Of course this generalization does not include CDA, who is well known for his overt homosexuality.

Sweet burn, bro. So, we know you're over 50.

Actually, I think we knew this as 2506 already told us he was over 50. I didn't believe it at first as it seems so unimaginable that a troll can survive in him mom's basement on nothing but hot pockets and juice boxes for that long. But then I realized, survival principles do not seem to apply to people with "no life."

 

[NorthEndZoneDan]

What is the myth?

The origins of the In-State myth are shrouded in the fog and haze of history. Some believe it originated with Henry Plummer and the Vigilantes, ala 3-7-77. Some believe it originated with Norman Maclean when he said that "The world is full of bastards, the number increasing rapidly the further one gets from Missoula, Montana." Subsequent scholarly research into the In-State mythology would reveal the presence of the Maclean Corollary, The number of bastards increases exponentially as one nears the Bozone.