SEC WDWHA
Comments
-
I'm too lazy to look but the ratings seem very different from a few years back. Too many 4* and way too many 3*. What happened to the Sarkisian filler special 2* guys? Do they even exist?RoadDawg55 said:The #388 player on 24/7 is a four star. These rankings are ridiculous. There could be another 4 or 5 rounds added to the NFL draft and he wouldn’t be drafted if he played to his ranking. There are 433 four star players. These rankings jumped the shark awhile ago.
It’s basically five stars and everyone else. It’s been that way for a few years now.
Their numerical rank is a little more meaningful than the now meaningless stars. Only a little though. -
Different criteria between old and newchuck said:
I'm too lazy to look but the ratings seem very different from a few years back. Too many 4* and way too many 3*. What happened to the Sarkisian filler special 2* guys? Do they even exist?RoadDawg55 said:The #388 player on 24/7 is a four star. These rankings are ridiculous. There could be another 4 or 5 rounds added to the NFL draft and he wouldn’t be drafted if he played to his ranking. There are 433 four star players. These rankings jumped the shark awhile ago.
It’s basically five stars and everyone else. It’s been that way for a few years now.
Their numerical rank is a little more meaningful than the now meaningless stars. Only a little though.
Scout used to have the top 300 always be 4* and the top 1000 always be 3*. 247 is trying to do NFL draft projection, so their criteria for stars is different and the amount of stars is different (much more inflated)
Stars have always been an inexact science since you have different raters watching different tapes and evaluating at different times -
Look at committable offers not at stars hth
-
I like and agree BUT the services haven’t evolved to reporting “commitable offers.” That’d be cool though.NEsnake12 said:Look at committable offers not at stars hth
-
I get what you’re saying but the ratings don’t come close to draft projection unless the NFL goes back to 12 rounds.whatshouldicareabout said:
Different criteria between old and newchuck said:
I'm too lazy to look but the ratings seem very different from a few years back. Too many 4* and way too many 3*. What happened to the Sarkisian filler special 2* guys? Do they even exist?RoadDawg55 said:The #388 player on 24/7 is a four star. These rankings are ridiculous. There could be another 4 or 5 rounds added to the NFL draft and he wouldn’t be drafted if he played to his ranking. There are 433 four star players. These rankings jumped the shark awhile ago.
It’s basically five stars and everyone else. It’s been that way for a few years now.
Their numerical rank is a little more meaningful than the now meaningless stars. Only a little though.
Scout used to have the top 300 always be 4* and the top 1000 always be 3*. 247 is trying to do NFL draft projection, so their criteria for stars is different and the amount of stars is different (much more inflated)
Stars have always been an inexact science since you have different raters watching different tapes and evaluating at different times -
It's a fucking retarded system IMO. It only matters how they perform in college and it should be easier to project that. I think they came up with the NFL thing to muddy the waters. They want to gift the guys going to blue blood programs, playing 7on 7, and participating in underwear Olympics and training academies with higher ratings. When guys don't pan out all they have to do is say "well we were projecting NFL potential not NCAA success. It's not our fault he didn't develop."CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:
I get what you’re saying but the ratings don’t come close to draft projection unless the NFL goes back to 12 rounds.whatshouldicareabout said:
Different criteria between old and newchuck said:
I'm too lazy to look but the ratings seem very different from a few years back. Too many 4* and way too many 3*. What happened to the Sarkisian filler special 2* guys? Do they even exist?RoadDawg55 said:The #388 player on 24/7 is a four star. These rankings are ridiculous. There could be another 4 or 5 rounds added to the NFL draft and he wouldn’t be drafted if he played to his ranking. There are 433 four star players. These rankings jumped the shark awhile ago.
It’s basically five stars and everyone else. It’s been that way for a few years now.
Their numerical rank is a little more meaningful than the now meaningless stars. Only a little though.
Scout used to have the top 300 always be 4* and the top 1000 always be 3*. 247 is trying to do NFL draft projection, so their criteria for stars is different and the amount of stars is different (much more inflated)
Stars have always been an inexact science since you have different raters watching different tapes and evaluating at different times
