A Different Way Of Rating Recruits

Share on your favorite social network:
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail to someoneGoogle+share on TumblrShare on Reddit

You guys know that for some time now I’ve had an issue with the star system as it currently stands.  247 and Rivals both have their own numerical ranking system, and they are both good ideas.  For example, a 4-star player can be ranked anywhere between a 90 and a 97 on 247.  Their three-star recruits are broken down into three different categories.

Here’s the three-star levels that are listed on the 247 website…

“A high three-star (87-89): is considered a player with significant NFL upside who we expect to be an impact college football player.

A mid three-star (84-86): is a player that we consider to be a capable starter for a Power Five football team and an impact player at the Group of Five level.        

A low three-star (80-83): is a player that we consider to be a potential contributor at a Power Five program but a probable Group of Five starter with impact potential.”

I think that’s a good system…if people actually paid attention to it.  Instead, people’s eyes are draw to the stars next to a recruit’s name.  That’s understandable, but it comes with problems.  For example, in the 2021 class, the No. 35 recruit in the country was the highest-ranked 4-star recruit, while the No. 365 recruit in the country was the lowest-ranked 4-star recruit.  That No. 365-ranked player had seven Power 5 offers and signed with Cal, while the No. 35 recruit was listed with 30 Power 5 offers and signed with Oregon.

To most people who just gloss over the rankings and look at the stars, those two prospects are the same.  But in reality, that No. 35 player is one spot away from being a 5-star recruit, and the No. 365 player is one spot away from being a 3-star recruit.  In no way should they be considered on the same level as prospects, but people make that mistake all the time by just looking at the star rankings.

The recruiting services know this, and that’s why they came up with their numerical ratings.  It was a good idea.  The problem is that people tend to just look at the stars, and they don’t make an effort to understand the numerical ratings.  Thus, to me, a half-star system would be better.

...