Interesting to note, though, that MSU’s four top players (Cousins/White/Anderson/Jones) only had a total of 8 starts between them as incoming recruits.

…that stars are the worst and most overrated way to judge current rosters.

It is like using minor league stats from 2-4 years ago for to judge whether the Yankees or Phillies are going to win the World Series.

Not to be a smartass, but past performance is the best indicator of future performance that is available. Even in baseball:

http://www.baseballnotebook.com/essay.asp?esource=e_041198.asp&topt=What%20Minor%20League%20Stats%20Really%20Mean

 USC and Florida aren’t in the top ten every year simply because they develop players better than anyone else. They have players with better tools to start with. Granted, there will always be exceptions, but the star ratings are the best available means to quantify raw talent.

I agree with you for judging recruiting classes, but not for judging today’s squads.

Most players that are starters in the majors were high prospects. But few of the prospects even make it to the majors. If Decker weren’t hurt, I believe you would have him on your list as a 2 star player. Is that really worth anything knowing what you now? It seems silly.

Likewise, you wouldn’t use baseball players’ minor league stats to make projections when you have more relevant (major league stats) data.

And no, you were not a smartass, nor am I trying to be. I just don’t think that using high school evaluations are very relevant for most of the players (except maybe freshman).

I really do think that Pete Carroll and Urban Meyer are better at getting players to reach their potential than other coaches, and hence, their success rates. Better recruiting classes certainly help (and you can use star ratings for that) but Notre Dame gets similar recruits and Weiss can’t do what they do. The same can be said at Miami

I think we are in agreement. I don’t think that recruiting ratings directly correspond to gameday results. However, a 5 star recruit has about a 50% chance of making the NFL and is more likely to make an impact. I agree regarding Miami and Notre Dame’s inability to develop players, too. Some coaches are able to develop their players better than others. The star ratings correlate to a player’s projected potential, not their actual performance. The key word is projected. My intent is to set a baseline for how the teams should play, not how they actually will.

25% of the top 100 HS football players never play a down of D-1 or pro football on average. Even if you are a high rank there are still other obstacles to overcome which means a lot of teams end up with 3 star and 4 star guys or even less play significant roles. There are only so many 5 star guys to go around. That is where I agree that coaching comes into play. Player development is the key and a lot of star wide outs and linebackers or RB’s played QB in high school…you see it all the time.