• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

B1G 2018 All conference/Div 1 All Americans & their Recruiting Star ranking

Bean

Gray Shirt
5 Year Member
Counting this recruiting class, Nebraska has 19 "247 Composite" four star athletes on the team out of ~146, including 2019 class and walkons:

2019 = 6 [Henrick, Robinson, Benhart, Robinson, McCaffrey, Noa Pola-Gates]
2018 = 6 [Martinez, Jurgens, Washington, Jones, Wildeman, Tannor]
2017 = 1 [McQuitty] 3 others left team
2016 = 4 [Jackson, Rairdon, Dismuke, Farniok] 1 other left team
2015 = 2 [Lee, Anderson] 2 others left team

QB = 2
RB = 2
OL = 3
CB = 1
ATH = 2
S = 3
WR = 1
W/SDE = 3
TE = 1
ILB = 1

  • Some of these 4 stars need to step up and play at the level they were ranked at.
  • Our 3 stars need to develop in Duvall's program [they all do] and learn their jobs in HCSF's system.
  • We need some walk-ons to develop and produce like they used to.

In comparison to the top B1G teams: From 2016-2019 these teams signed this many "Consensus" 4 & 5 star players:

B1G...5 Star/4 Star
OSU:.... 18/42
PSU:.... 6/31
MU:.... 4/45

Clemson..10/38
UCF:......0/1
 
Last edited:

Bean

Gray Shirt
5 Year Member
Army and UCF are good examples/exceptions that show you don't have to have the best athletes but you do have to have the best TEAM.

Army: 11-2
UCF: 12-0

But having great athletes are a big benefit/advantage if you have a good coach and program. Attitude and teamwork are essential.
 
Last edited:

Maverick

Recruit
Army and UCF are good examples/exceptions of why weak schedules do still exist. I'd love for UCF to be moved into one of the Power 5 to see how well they play, but UCF played zero ranked opponents. Army played one in Oklahoma (and played well) but the rest of their strength of schedule was so weak that they were ranked lower than UCF.
 

Husker Country Doc

All American
15 Year Member
Don't forget ATTENDING a Rivals camp bumps your star rating, a little bit. Attend more camps, maybe get bumped a whole star, IDK.

Also, the size of the alumni base, the veracity of the alumni base, affects recruiting "rankings" to a degree.

I mean, cmon, the "raters" never see the truly top 250 athletes at a position on the field, at the same time. It a subjective system, and always needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

Our coaches need to identify OUR needs, and identify the right athletes for our culture and system, and GET them.
 

Bean

Gray Shirt
5 Year Member
One of the reasons I go to the 247 Composite is that it uses all the rating systems to make their rating [Composite/consensus]. So if one system bumps a rating or is skewed some way it won't affect the composite ranking as much as the ranking that is skewed/bumped.
https://www.cougcenter.com/wsu-football-recruiting/2013/2/5/3956800/rivals-scout-espn-247-star-rating-system-national-signing-day

This article sheds a little more light on this thread's subject:
https://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/recruiting-ratings-are-useful-tool-but-don-t-tell-whole-story-042914

"Trieu said there is a common misconception about the star rankings because many view a three-star prospect as average. In reality, those players rank in the top half of all college football recruits because there are so few four- and five-star players. A two-star talent, meanwhile, is considered a player capable of playing Division I football somewhere.

But Tom Lemming, who has been evaluating high school football prospects since 1978 and is considered among the godfathers of the genre, said to take recruiting stars with a grain of salt. Many online entities, he said, base the stars on the number of major college programs to have offered scholarships.

So if a player is talented but hasn’t garnered offers from the likes of Alabama, Ohio State, USC, Notre Dame or Texas, for example, the stars will not necessarily pile up. And a player’s star value could be inflated simply based on the deluge of scholarship offers once one major program offers — a point Northwestern’s Fitzgerald emphasized as well.'"

"One of the most important things to know when scrolling through recruiting rankings is that they can’t possibly be perfect. Human error, after all, is always present.

"There is no one right way to predict human performance," said Scott Kennedy, Scout.com’s national director of scouting. "It’s impossible. You can get it right. You can scout trends and be right a lot more. But the people putting these together, we don’t agree ever. You can’t get the same top 10 out of two different guys. It just doesn’t happen that way."

"Meyer is among the select few Big Ten coaches who acknowledge the importance of recruiting analysts and rankings, even if it’s to simply monitor top prospects. The primary objective, Kennedy said, is to serve fan interests. Fans, after all, are the ones who flock to the Scout, Rivals, 24/7 and ESPN websites to pay for content, review player commitments and post comments on message boards."

"With thousands of prospects playing across the country, downgrades off a single performance aren’t unusual. Trieu noted his biggest gaffe was dropping running back Mark Ingram a star after watching perhaps the worst game of his high school career. Ingram went on to win the 2009 Heisman Trophy at Alabama."

Not every outcome will hold true to star rating form, of course. Sports are played by humans, and the unpredictability of it all is what makes the drama so great. More than a decade worth of recruiting statistics, however, indicates any opportunity for coaches to find the best players is one worth taking, Kennedy said.

Whether coaches opt to evaluate recruits their own way is up to them. But both Lemming and Kennedy noted avoiding a service readily available to everybody on the basis of principle does not serve coaches, whose role is to leave no stone unturned in recruiting and whose job security ultimately depends on winning."
 
Last edited:

gardenjam

Red Shirt
2 Year Member
This article sheds a little more light on this threads subject:
https://www.foxsports.com/wisconsin/story/recruiting-ratings-are-useful-tool-but-don-t-tell-whole-story-042914

"Trieu said there is a common misconception about the star rankings because many view a three-star prospect as average. In reality, those players rank in the top half of all college football recruits because there are so few four- and five-star players. A two-star talent, meanwhile, is considered a player capable of playing Division I football somewhere.

But Tom Lemming, who has been evaluating high school football prospects since 1978 and is considered among the godfathers of the genre, said to take recruiting stars with a grain of salt. Many online entities, he said, base the stars on the number of major college programs to have offered scholarships.

So if a player is talented but hasn’t garnered offers from the likes of Alabama, Ohio State, USC, Notre Dame or Texas, for example, the stars will not necessarily pile up. And a player’s star value could be inflated simply based on the deluge of scholarship offers once one major program offers — a point Northwestern’s Fitzgerald emphasized as well.'"

"One of the most important things to know when scrolling through recruiting rankings is that they can’t possibly be perfect. Human error, after all, is always present.

"There is no one right way to predict human performance," said Scott Kennedy, Scout.com’s national director of scouting. "It’s impossible. You can get it right. You can scout trends and be right a lot more. But the people putting these together, we don’t agree ever. You can’t get the same top 10 out of two different guys. It just doesn’t happen that way."

"Meyer is among the select few Big Ten coaches who acknowledge the importance of recruiting analysts and rankings, even if it’s to simply monitor top prospects. The primary objective, Kennedy said, is to serve fan interests. Fans, after all, are the ones who flock to the Scout, Rivals, 24/7 and ESPN websites to pay for content, review player commitments and post comments on message boards."

"With thousands of prospects playing across the country, downgrades off a single performance aren’t unusual. Trieu noted his biggest gaffe was dropping running back Mark Ingram a star after watching perhaps the worst game of his high school career. Ingram went on to win the 2009 Heisman Trophy at Alabama."

Not every outcome will hold true to star rating form, of course. Sports are played by humans, and the unpredictability of it all is what makes the drama so great. More than a decade worth of recruiting statistics, however, indicates any opportunity for coaches to find the best players is one worth taking, Kennedy said.

Whether coaches opt to evaluate recruits their own way is up to them. But both Lemming and Kennedy noted avoiding a service readily available to everybody on the basis of principle does not serve coaches, whose role is to leave no stone unturned in recruiting and whose job security ultimately depends on winning."


Sports are played by humans, and the unpredictability of it all is whatmakes the drama so great.


Wait until A.I. football
 

Bean

Gray Shirt
5 Year Member
https://www.independentmail.com/story/sports/college/clemson/2018/12/27/these-four-states-top-when-comes-football-recruiting/2405130002/

"These four states are at the top when it comes to football recruiting:
In the current recruiting cycle [2019], Texas, Florida, California and Georgia combined to produce 47 percent of the four and five-star recruits [High School] in the country, according to 247Sports. Each of those four states churned out at least 40 blue-chip high school players in the current 2019 recruiting class."

I looked up all the All Americans for 2018 that I posted earlier in this thread to see where they all went to H.S. This is what I found:

H.S. Location / # All Americans
Texas = 14
Florida = 13
California = 11
Georgia = 9
Ohio = 6
Mississippi = 5

The top 5 state's High Schools produced 47% of the 2018 CFB Div 1 All Americans. These 53 athlete's ranking ranged from 2 - 5 Stars. The 6 states listed produced 51% of the 2018 All Americans. Looks like there is good reason to recruit from these states.

Looking at the top 2018 Composite 247 Recruiting class Makeup to see how many were from the top 5 states producing All Americans, this is what they signed:

2018 Team rank.......Signees from:
1. Georgia:..... GA: 14...FL: 3......TX: 1
2. Ohio State:... FL: 5......TX 2
3. Texas:........ TX: 19.....CA: 2.....FL:1
4. USC:.........CA: 12
5. Alabama ..... FL: 4.....CA: 2......TX: 1
6. PSU:....... FL: 2....TX: 2....OH: 1
7. Clemson:.....GA: 5.....FL: 2....OH: 1

23. NU:....GA: 2....CA: 2 [Was 3 - Bell left]....FL: 8.....TX: 2.....MS: 1

2019 Team rank......Signess from:
1. ALA: ........ FL: 5...GA: 2.....TX: 2.....MS: 1
2. Georgia:.....GA: 7...FL: 4....TX: 1.....MS: 1
3. Texas A&M:....TX: 17.....GA: 2.....FL: 2
4. Oklahoma:.....TX: 9....CA: 3.....GA: 1.....FL: 1
5. LSU:.......TX: 2....MS: 2.....GA: 1.....FL: 1
6. Clemson:.....FL: 7.....GA: 7......CA: 1

19. NU: ...... GA: 4 [if Mills Signs].....TX: 1

http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/22312871/college-football-recruiting-true-battlegrounds
 
Last edited:

Bean

Gray Shirt
5 Year Member
Where do college football's best players come from? Like in an election, winning in the battleground counties can produce classes full of recruits that make the difference in winning it all.
http://www.espn.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/22312871/college-football-recruiting-true-battlegrounds

Link shows ALL STATES, TOP STATES, TOP COUNTIES.

Total/top recruits by state
These 11 power states, most of which lie in ACC and SEC territories, produced 76.4 percent of all top recruits in the last 10 years.

Top 4:
1. Florida
2. Texas
3. Georgia
4. California
 

Bean

Gray Shirt
5 Year Member
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2019/1/21/18191515/super-bowl-starters-as-recruits
How every Super Bowl 53 starter rated as a high school recruit
  • Here’s the full star-rating breakdown.
    • Five-stars: The Patriots have two, while the Rams have four.
    • Four-stars: The Patriots have six, while the Rams have seven.
    • Three-stars: The Patriots have eight, while the Rams have six.
    • Two-stars or lower: The Patriots have six, while the Rams have five.
In total, 43 percent of the Super Bowl starters were four- or five-star recruits. To put it another way, about two in every five Super Bowl starters were four- or five-star recruits, but only about one in every 770 rated recruits gets that many stars — and hundreds of thousands of high school players don’t get rated at all. So, yes, your odds of starting in the Super Bowl are, unsurprisingly, much higher if you were a superstar recruit in high school.
---------------------------------
247Sports Composite rankings:
https://247sports.com/Article/Rams-vs-Patriots-How-Super-Bowl-players-ranked-as-recruits-128433605/
There are eight total former five-stars on Super Bowl rosters, along with 28 former four-star prospects. That’s a pretty good ratio when you consider active NFL rosters are made up of 53 players. That means just over 30 percent of Super Bowl participants ranked as a four or five-star prospect coming out of high school.
If that doesn’t sound like a large total, remember there are thousands of players evaluated each year with only a few hundred of those being tagged as four or five-star recruits.
New England Patriots
Five-Star Players (2)
Malcom Brown, Texas
Sony Michel, Georgia

Four-Star Players (14)
Dwayne Allen, Clemson
Adrian Clayborn, Iowa
Duke Dawson, Florida
Stephon Gilmore, South Carolina
Rob Gronkowski, Arizona
Lawrence Guy, Arizona State
Dont'a Hightower, Alabama
Jeremy Hill, LSU (On IR)
JC Jackson, Maryland
Cordarrelle Patterson, Tennessee
John Simon, Ohio State
Kyle Van Noy, BYU
Deatrich Wise, Arkansas
Isaiah Wynn, Georgia (On IR)

Los Angeles Rams
Five-star Players (6)
Dominique Easley, Florida (On IR)
Dante Fowler, Florida
Lamarcus Joyner, Florida State
Andrew Whitworth, LSU
Robert Woods, USC
Malcolm Brown, Texas (On IR)

25COMMENTS
Four-Star Players (14)
Brian Allen, Michigan State
Mark Barron, Alabama
Austin Blythe, Iowa
Michael Brockers, LSU
Blake Countess, Auburn
Justin Davis, USC
Jared Goff, California
Todd Gurley, Georgia
Sean Mannion, Oregon State
Nickell Robey-Coleman, USC
Garrett Sickels, Penn State (On IR)
Sam Shields, Miami
Ndamukong Suh, Nebraska
John Sullivan, Notre Dame
 
Last edited:

Huskerthom

All Legend
5 Year Member
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2019/1/21/18191515/super-bowl-starters-as-recruits
How every Super Bowl 53 starter rated as a high school recruit
  • Here’s the full star-rating breakdown.
    • Five-stars: The Patriots have two, while the Rams have four.
    • Four-stars: The Patriots have six, while the Rams have seven.
    • Three-stars: The Patriots have eight, while the Rams have six.
    • Two-stars or lower: The Patriots have six, while the Rams have five.
In total, 43 percent of the Super Bowl starters were four- or five-star recruits. To put it another way, about two in every five Super Bowl starters were four- or five-star recruits, but only about one in every 770 rated recruits gets that many stars — and hundreds of thousands of high school players don’t get rated at all. So, yes, your odds of starting in the Super Bowl are, unsurprisingly, much higher if you were a superstar recruit in high school.
This reminds me of the old phrase. Figures lie and liars figure. Here's why.

4 and 5 star players go to the biggest most successful schools predominantly. That means:
1. They get the best training and weight lifting
2. They are coached by the best coaches
3. They get more visibility and are drafted higher.
4. The 4 and 5 star linemen tend to be genetically larger than their counter parts.

So it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Let's take it out of the realm of football. If you have 2 kids that have 140 IQs. One goes to private school while another goes to a failing inner city school. The one at the private school goes to Harvard and the other goes to Community College then on to south central middle western state. Who is more likely to succeed?
 
Last edited:

Bean

Gray Shirt
5 Year Member
This reminds me of the old phrase. Figures lie and liars figure. Here's why.

4 and 5 star players go to the biggest most successful schools predominantly. That means:
1. They get the best training and weight lifting
2. They are coached by the best coaches
3. They get more visibility and are drafted higher.
4. The 4 and 5 star linemen tend to be genetically larger than their counter parts.

So it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Let's take it out of the realm of football. If you have 2 kids that have 140 IQs. One goes to private school while another goes to a failing inner city school. The one at the private school goes to Harvard and the other goes to Community College then on to south central middle western state. Who is more likely to succeed?
It is what it is, but not necessarily as negative as what you state. Nebraska has more academic all Americans than ANY other school in the US, including Harvard [or any Ivy league school]. And NU is considered to be in one of those middle western 'Fly Over' states.
It really is more about how good/effective the coach/teacher is to get their student/athlete to learn or be willing to learn/perform. BL: Those athletes who are 4 and 5 stars have a much better chance of becoming All Americans and playing in a Super Bowl than 3 stars.

http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=3943
CoSIDA Academic All-Americans Across All Sports NCAA Division I
No. .. School.. Total

1. Nebraska 333
2. Notre Dame 257
3. Stanford 216
4. Penn State 200
5. Alabama 161
6. Florida 144
T7. Minnesota 137
T7. Michigan 137
T9. Texas 136
T9. Georgia 136
T9. Ohio State 136
12. Bucknell 134
T13. North Dakota State 128
T13. Oklahoma 128
 
Last edited:

Huskerthom

All Legend
5 Year Member
It is what it is, but not necessarily as negative as what you state. Nebraska has more academic all Americans than ANY other school in the US, including Harvard. And NU is considered to be in one of those middle western 'Fly Over' states.
It really is more about how good/effective the coach/teacher is to get their student/athlete to learn or be willing to learn/perform. BL: Those athletes who are 4 and 5 stars have a much better chance of becoming All Americans and playing in a Super Bowl than 3 stars.

http://www.huskers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=3943
CoSIDA Academic All-Americans Across All Sports NCAA Division I
No. .. School.. Total

1. Nebraska 333
2. Notre Dame 257
3. Stanford 216
4. Penn State 200
5. Alabama 161
6. Florida 144
T7. Minnesota 137
T7. Michigan 137
T9. Texas 136
T9. Georgia 136
T9. Ohio State 136
12. Bucknell 134
T13. North Dakota State 128
T13. Oklahoma 128
The harvard thing is a false flag argument. Mainly because Harvard does not offer Schollies and they have far less athletes
 

Native

ToungeInCheek since 2010
5 Year Member
Bucknell on the list is sorta wild. At least to me, I know nothing about them.
 
Top