The DM.C Fallacy

doogsinparadise said:

*poof*

Welcome to Nazi Germany.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XDkJsVoZYOc

personally I was offended by your post.

allpurpleallgold said:

In what way are 3 star and 4 star football players fundamentally different? Why would one succeed in recruiting one but not the other?

4*s are more likely to come in, not get redshirted (because they're fucking 4*s, what do you expect?) and end up being misused/not developed properly, like Cody Bruns, Kevin Smith, Sione Potoae, and maybe Darrell Daniels (he really should've RS'd instead of playing Special Teams and switching to TE midseason... I hope Sark didn't fuckup his Husky career).

allpurpleallgold said:

In what way are 3 star and 4 star football players fundamentally different? Why would one succeed in recruiting one but not the other?

To get semi-serious in this irrelevantly nonscensical thread, I believe the fundamental differences between 3-star and 4-star recruits are promotional and potential:

Promotional because most 4(and 5)-star recruits typically live and grow as prep athletes in large media markets where teen-stalking, self-proclaimed recruiting experts are constantly shagging the names and statistical hyperbole of the best performing in the best high school programs.

Potential because it's evident that the prospects for 3(or lower rated)-star recruits matriculating into the best they can be at the college and NFL levels is greater than the typical 4 and 5-star recruits, who as have likely developed as prep superstars closer to the maximum degree of their potential.

In all this expert postulating over college football recruiting, a fact of nature seems to get lost in the minds of many. Far more 17-18 year old teens are still just kids becoming men when they graduate from high school than are not. I think all college recruiters know this and it's the coaches willing to work the hardest to find, sign, and develop their fair share of 3 or lower-star OKG's that are more likely to succeed.