did you know NO 5* players played in the Superbowl?

sarktastic

... and that the average star ranking of both starting lineups was 2.4?

I got that off a cuog bored from a comfort thread reminding everybody stars don't matter... even though they mattered a lot two weeks ago when they were ranked as high as third in the Pac... before Sark, Helfrich, Peterman, San Jose State, Nevada, Stoops and Stanford began finalizing their rosters.

at least the two star "who???" D-I-R guys that filled those slots last second have "better hudl tape than the 4*'s who left"... so there's that.

DugtheDoog

sarktastic said:

... and that the average star ranking of both starting lineups was 2.4?

I got that off a cuog bored from a comfort thread reminding everybody stars don't matter... even though they mattered a lot two weeks ago when they were ranked as high as third in the Pac... before Sark, Helfrich, Peterman, San Jose State, Nevada, Stoops and Stanford began finalizing their rosters.

at least the two star "who???" D-I-R guys that filled those slots last second have "better hudl tape than the 4*'s who left"... so there's that.

Why do you hate Dartmouth?

I forgot to poast this but I was bored on signing day and wanted some entertainment so I went over to cougfarm to read about their meltdown. I know we make jokes about doogs not blaming a kid who goes to stanford, but there was a thread about their recruit decommitting for Dartmouth and at least two coogs posted "you can never blame a kid for wanting to go to Dartmouth". I know, I was surprised I was surprised. But still...

RoadDawg55

As others have pointed out, Ohio State, Alabama, Florida State, and even Oregon have had plenty of four and five star guys. Obviously if you can't develop or recruit strictly by stars, it's possibly to suck like Texas and USC.

The only thing the SuperBowl rankings prove is that there is tons of talent out there if you evaluate and develop. It's why being terrible should never be accepted anywhere, even at WSU and other schools that have disadvantages.

BallSacked

The % of how the stars shake out in the NFL is what matters. Data I've seen shows that 5star players make the NFL at a much higher rate than 3 stars.

Data also consistently shows that better recruiting means better results. But I agree with RD that stars aren't a pre-requisite to win at a conference champion level. CFP is maybe a different story. You are almost guaranteed to face a very talented AND well coached team in the CFP now.

RaceBannon

Two out of 32 teams play in the Super Bowl. How many 5 stars end up in the NFL would be interesting, although still not relevant to college ball where it actually matters. I also think you need to lump 4 and 5 stars together since there are not that many 5 stars to start with.

The sheer numbers of 3 stars means they will be well represented. A 3 star at a good program with a good coach should be a good player.

And then you have to factor a 17 year old versus 22 year olds. A lot can change in that 5 years.

sarktastic

also, every kid that came from an fcs school or below had zero or one star in most cases.

Of course, others keenly point out the schools who have put together a consecutive decade of classes like this and their corresponding w/l records over the same decade and one by one, the threads fall silent.

doogsinparadise

sarktastic said:

... and that the average star ranking of both starting lineups was 2.4?

I got that off a cuog bored from a comfort thread reminding everybody stars don't matter... even though they mattered a lot two weeks ago when they were ranked as high as third in the Pac... before Sark, Helfrich, Peterman, San Jose State, Nevada, Stoops and Stanford began finalizing their rosters.

at least the two star "who???" D-I-R guys that filled those slots last second have "better hudl tape than the 4*'s who left"... so there's that.

Nybe.

RaceBannon said:

Two out of 32 teams play in the Super Bowl. How many 5 stars end up in the NFL would be interesting, although still not relevant to college ball where it actually matters. I also think you need to lump 4 and 5 stars together since there are not that many 5 stars to start with.

The sheer numbers of 3 stars means they will be well represented. A 3 star at a good program with a good coach should be a good player.

And then you have to factor a 17 year old versus 22 year olds. A lot can change in that 5 years.

Is this all you got old man?

RaceBannon

Passive aggressive