Sometimes those STARS do lie

[Snout team]

http://www.vcweplayhard.com/sports/fball/2017-18/bios/town_ricky_d6qf?view=gamelog&pos=qb

It is hard to figure out how the evaluation of so many can be so far off sometimes.

For comparison, the QB on the team with 2100 yards was originally an 82 three star who went to Boise and transferred.

[HogHomer]

http://www.vcweplayhard.com/sports/fball/2017-18/bios/town_ricky_d6qf?view=gamelog&pos=qb

It is hard to figure out how the evaluation of so many can be so far off sometimes.

Recruiting rankings cant really take into account on if a player has the ability to learn college concepts at a reasonable rate or the passion a player will have after they aren't the big man on campus.

Also some kids can handle the culture shock of coming to Arkansas from Cali some can't. It's hard to tell who will be able to adapt and who can't.

[Razor8]

I know from a close associate that stars can be purchased. So I don't fully trust the star rating organizations.

[Boss Hog in the Arkansas]

There's no coincidence that the teams at the top of the recruiting rankings are the teams vying for the playoffs at seasons end

[Science Fiction Greg]

There's no coincidence that the teams at the top of the recruiting rankings are the teams vying for the playoffs at seasons end

Correlation does not equal causation.  For instance, I think it's equally possible for the recruiting rankings for teams to be high because they are vying for the playoffs at season's end frequently.  A reversal of the cause and effect that most people just assume.  Based on what I've seen, it's probably even more likely to be this way.

[Bash]

I know from a close associate that stars can be purchased.

Seriously?  Purchased for what? Bitcoins? 

Star ratings are imperfect, as is any rating system in anything.  Please do tell who your "associate" is.  Does he pump gas for a living?

This "the system is rigged against Arkansas" is tiring.  This "you automatically get 4 stars if you commit to Alabama" is nauseating and stupidity of the highest order.

We can't and don't get the level of recruits that USC, Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan, Florida, Texas schools, etc. get. It's a matter of geography and fact, not some stupid theoretical conspiracy by ESPN. 

We recruit in the 20's and 30's.  We always have, and always will, regardless of our coach. Good gawd.  Let it friggin' go.  But please keep reading.

If you can't deal with the fact that the state of Arkansas and our 250 mile perimeter doesn't produce enough SEC talent, then that is on you and your brain. 

That's not a conspiracy by ESPN or 247, any other ranking service, Yankee's, or "talking heads."  It's on you and your brain.

What we have to do in Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get. Plenty of coaches at plenty of schools with lesser talent have learned how to beat other teams that have recruiting advantages. That's what Arkansas needs to do. Focus on that.  Not tin-foiled hat stupidity.

[bphi11ips]

Beware 3 stars from hot areas with G5 offers. 

Coaches are under tremendous pressure to produce highly ranked classes.  A cottage industry manufactures 3-stars at beauty contests called "elite" camps. 

The most succesfull coaches watch film and ignore recruiting rankings.  Gary Patterson is a good example. 

[NuttinItUp]

Seriously?  Purchased for what? Bitcoins? 

Star ratings are imperfect, as is any rating system in anything.  Please do tell who your "associate" is.  Does he pump gas for a living?

This "the system is rigged against Arkansas" is tiring.  This "you automatically get 4 stars if you commit to Alabama" is nauseating and stupidity of the highest order.

We can't and don't get the level of recruits that USC, Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan, Florida, Texas schools, etc. get. It's a matter of geography and fact, not some stupid theoretical conspiracy by ESPN.  We recruit in the 20's and 30's.  We always have, and always will, regardless of our coach. Good gawd.  Let it friggin' go.  But please keep reading.

If you can't deal with the fact that the state of Arkansas and our 250 mile perimeter doesn't produce enough SEC talent, then that is on you and your brain.  That's not a conspiracy by ESPN or 247, any other ranking service, Yankee's, or "talking heads."  It's on you and your brain.

What we have to do in Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get. Plenty of coaches at plenty of schools with lesser talent have learned how to beat other teams that have recruiting advantages. That's what Arkansas needs to do. Focus on that.  Not tin-foiled hat stupidity.

Wow! Vicious internet takedown.
I haven't seen a beatin' like that since somebody stuck a banana in my pants and turned a monkey loose.

[Bash]

Beware 3 stars from hot areas with G5 offers. 

Coaches are under tremendous pressure to produce highly ranked classes.

How, exactly, does a coach produce a highly ranked class under pressure?  What does that even mean?

[bphi11ips]

How, exactly, does a coach produce a highly ranked class under pressure?  What does that even mean?

Huh?  Have you noticed that fans focus almost as much today on recruiting rankings as they do on final rankings?  What if Bielema had produced classes in the 40s?

3-stars provide a safety net when a player doesn't work out.  There are a lot of 3-stars out there who look great in shorts and swag and one-on-one drills who can't play a lick of football.

[HoggyCat]

IE: Darius Winston

[Bubba's Bruisers]

Seriously?  Purchased for what? Bitcoins? 

Star ratings are imperfect, as is any rating system in anything.  Please do tell who your "associate" is.  Does he pump gas for a living?

This "the system is rigged against Arkansas" is tiring.  This "you automatically get 4 stars if you commit to Alabama" is nauseating and stupidity of the highest order.

We can't and don't get the level of recruits that USC, Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan, Florida, Texas schools, etc. get. It's a matter of geography and fact, not some stupid theoretical conspiracy by ESPN. 

We recruit in the 20's and 30's.  We always have, and always will, regardless of our coach. Good gawd.  Let it friggin' go.  But please keep reading.

If you can't deal with the fact that the state of Arkansas and our 250 mile perimeter doesn't produce enough SEC talent, then that is on you and your brain. 

That's not a conspiracy by ESPN or 247, any other ranking service, Yankee's, or "talking heads."  It's on you and your brain.

What we have to do in Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get. Plenty of coaches at plenty of schools with lesser talent have learned how to beat other teams that have recruiting advantages. That's what Arkansas needs to do. Focus on that.  Not tin-foiled hat stupidity.

Well done, my friend.  Well done.

[bphi11ips]

IE: Darius Winston

A good CB is one you don't hear much about.  Winston was a good CB for Arkansas.

[CDBHawg]

A good CB is one you don't hear much about.  Winston was a good CB for Arkansas.

[depressed_fan]

I know from a close associate that stars can be purchased. So I don't fully trust the star rating organizations.

I'd say amen to this by interpreting it two different ways.  If you mean a star player can be bought for money and will continue to be bought, that's 100% true. If you mean the recruiting rankings can change based on some scout who runs a recruit information service being paid, I believe that too.

I quit following recruiting a long time ago. Just entertain me on the damn field. If you lose to Alabama or LSU, at least keep me interested beyond the first few possessions

[bphi11ips]

I'd say amen to this by interpreting it two different ways.  If you mean a star player can be bought for money and will continue to be bought, that's 100% true. If you mean the recruiting rankings can change based on some scout who runs a recruit information service being paid, I believe that too.

I quit following recruiting a long time ago. Just entertain me on the damn field. If you lose to Alabama or LSU, at least keep me interested beyond the first few possessions

He means the latter.

[Snouty]

Seriously?  Purchased for what? Bitcoins? 

Star ratings are imperfect, as is any rating system in anything.  Please do tell who your "associate" is.  Does he pump gas for a living?

This "the system is rigged against Arkansas" is tiring.  This "you automatically get 4 stars if you commit to Alabama" is nauseating and stupidity of the highest order.

We can't and don't get the level of recruits that USC, Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan, Florida, Texas schools, etc. get. It's a matter of geography and fact, not some stupid theoretical conspiracy by ESPN. 

We recruit in the 20's and 30's.  We always have, and always will, regardless of our coach. Good gawd.  Let it friggin' go.  But please keep reading.

If you can't deal with the fact that the state of Arkansas and our 250 mile perimeter doesn't produce enough SEC talent, then that is on you and your brain. 

That's not a conspiracy by ESPN or 247, any other ranking service, Yankee's, or "talking heads."  It's on you and your brain.

What we have to do in Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get. Plenty of coaches at plenty of schools with lesser talent have learned how to beat other teams that have recruiting advantages. That's what Arkansas needs to do. Focus on that.  Not tin-foiled hat stupidity.

But the tin-foiled hat stupidity is so much fun.

[12247]

1.  Stars can be purchased
2.  Teams like BAMA and their Smart coach can assist in increasing a players power just by offering him and for sure if they take him.
3.  Arkansas does have a bad location for ideal recruiting
4.  Arkansas is not the only team that suffers with location.
5.  Low rated players do turn out sometimes.
6.  Teams with the best talen win more often
7.  Well coached teams do have chances afforded them that poorly coached teams do not have.
8.  Coaching, effort and more effort and talent will win out most often.
9.  We need to gain as many of the winnable options as we can and accept those that we cannot
10.  Patterson proved you can win at a respectable rate with less overall talent

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Beware 3 stars from hot areas with G5 offers. 

Coaches are under tremendous pressure to produce highly ranked classes.  A cottage industry manufactures 3-stars at beauty contests called "elite" camps. 

The most succesfull coaches watch film and ignore recruiting rankings.  Gary Patterson is a good example. 

And talk to HS coaches, especially the coaching staffs who play against a team with a player that they are interested in pursuing. Sometimes, those staffs with no vested interest in the player, can give you a more accurate assessment. Film is good, but a coach who has seen a particular player from an opposing team have a significant impact on their game planning, are better sources of information about the total player.

This may be a real advantage for Morris because a lot of those coaching staffs may see him as one of them.

[bphi11ips]

And talk to HS coaches, especially the coaching staffs who play against a team with a player that they are interested in pursuing. Sometimes, those staffs with no vested interest in the player, can give you a more accurate assessment. Film is good, but a coach who has seen a particular player from an opposing team have a significant impact on their game planning, are better sources of information about the total player.

This may be a real advantage for Morris because a lot of those coaching staffs may see him as one of them.

Good point. 

[blu]

Take a look at Clemson's recruiting rankings prior to the past 4 yrs - how'd they all of a sudden become juggernauts? And now that they are, their recruiting ranking has improved.

As mentioned above, TCU has done well without standout recruiting rankings. As did Mizzou - winning the SECE two years in a row with classes ranked way less than GA,FLA,SC and TN. Ranked lower than AR for that matter.

Some guy watches a kid play and says he's a 4 Star - others see the same kid and see a 3 Star. We love 4 Stars but aren't that excited by 3 Stars - pretty much any kid recruited by SEC Teams is going to be at least a 3 Star.

CBB seemed to have a pretty good criteria - just had several glaring "misses" and evidently couldn't adequately develop the kids he did bring in.

Recruiting rankings don't get me excited - one team has one more 4* versus another team's 3, so their 12th and the other one is 19 - yeah right. 

[The NewEra]

And talk to HS coaches, especially the coaching staffs who play against a team with a player that they are interested in pursuing. Sometimes, those staffs with no vested interest in the player, can give you a more accurate assessment. Film is good, but a coach who has seen a particular player from an opposing team have a significant impact on their game planning, are better sources of information about the total player.

This may be a real advantage for Morris because a lot of those coaching staffs may see him as one of them.

I had never considered this angle of researching a recruit.  It makes great sense.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Good point. 

As a more personal example, a HS coach may say to a college coach (about your son), "That kid has a big leg, he's accurate, he hit two from around 40 on us and you can't ice him down, he's a cool customer".

Now as a college coach in need of a reliable kicker, if I heard that, guess who my next contact is going to be? Film is one thing, personal endorsements by professionals in the field are worth more.

[greenie]

Seriously?  Purchased for what? Bitcoins? 

Star ratings are imperfect, as is any rating system in anything.  Please do tell who your "associate" is.  Does he pump gas for a living?

This "the system is rigged against Arkansas" is tiring.  This "you automatically get 4 stars if you commit to Alabama" is nauseating and stupidity of the highest order.

We can't and don't get the level of recruits that USC, Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan, Florida, Texas schools, etc. get. It's a matter of geography and fact, not some stupid theoretical conspiracy by ESPN. 

We recruit in the 20's and 30's.  We always have, and always will, regardless of our coach. Good gawd.  Let it friggin' go.  But please keep reading.

If you can't deal with the fact that the state of Arkansas and our 250 mile perimeter doesn't produce enough SEC talent, then that is on you and your brain. 

That's not a conspiracy by ESPN or 247, any other ranking service, Yankee's, or "talking heads."  It's on you and your brain.

What we have to do in Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get. Plenty of coaches at plenty of schools with lesser talent have learned how to beat other teams that have recruiting advantages. That's what Arkansas needs to do. Focus on that.  Not tin-foiled hat stupidity.

You must have quoted the wrong guy or something.  Although you make some good points here, he didn't say that the system was rigged against Arkansas or anything of the sort.  If stars can be "bought" (and I don't know if they can or not), that would work to fool everyone...wouldn't it?  It seems you extrapolated his statement so that you could run him down.

However, I particularly agree with "What we have to do at Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get" statement.  In fact, this is what every school should do.

[Dark Helmet Hog]

The star system was created to make money off foolish fans. Player ratings are manipulated daily by people like Otis Kirk. Think about that.

Of course talent matters, but the star system is like grading a beauty pageant. It's in the eye of the beholder and judges can be influenced.

[KCRazorbackfan]

Seriously?  Purchased for what? Bitcoins? 

Star ratings are imperfect, as is any rating system in anything.  Please do tell who your "associate" is.  Does he pump gas for a living?

This "the system is rigged against Arkansas" is tiring.  This "you automatically get 4 stars if you commit to Alabama" is nauseating and stupidity of the highest order.

We can't and don't get the level of recruits that USC, Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan, Florida, Texas schools, etc. get. It's a matter of geography and fact, not some stupid theoretical conspiracy by ESPN. 

We recruit in the 20's and 30's.  We always have, and always will, regardless of our coach. Good gawd.  Let it friggin' go.  But please keep reading.

If you can't deal with the fact that the state of Arkansas and our 250 mile perimeter doesn't produce enough SEC talent, then that is on you and your brain. 

That's not a conspiracy by ESPN or 247, any other ranking service, Yankee's, or "talking heads."  It's on you and your brain.

What we have to do in Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get. Plenty of coaches at plenty of schools with lesser talent have learned how to beat other teams that have recruiting advantages. That's what Arkansas needs to do. Focus on that.  Not tin-foiled hat stupidity.

Boom 💥!  +1000. I couldn't have said it any better.  These consistent whiners about "stars" need to start following another major school if that's what they only focus on.

[Calling All Hogs]

So basically this thread can be summed up as follows: The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves, that we are underlings.

[Mr Jade]

So basically this thread can be summed up as follows: The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves, that we are underlings.

This is true, but the ability to recruit good players is not a predetermined fact for forever. We can recruit better players by consistently being better than we have been. The best schools are not the best schools ad infinitum, with a few exceptions.

[Snout team]

1.  Stars can be purchased
2.  Teams like BAMA and their Smart coach can assist in increasing a players power just by offering him and for sure if they take him.
3.  Arkansas does have a bad location for ideal recruiting
4.  Arkansas is not the only team that suffers with location.
5.  Low rated players do turn out sometimes.
6.  Teams with the best talen win more often
7.  Well coached teams do have chances afforded them that poorly coached teams do not have.
8.  Coaching, effort and more effort and talent will win out most often.
9.  We need to gain as many of the winnable options as we can and accept those that we cannot
10.  Patterson proved you can win at a respectable rate with less overall talent

Good post

[Snout team]

Good discussion on the star system.  My question is how do so many professionals Miss on a player.  I mean everyone wanted RT.  He was highly rated and highly recruited.

My theory is he was really good in high school but burned out before he reached college.  I think the same thing could be said about Mustain.  Except with Mustain it was more of him being burned out by the end of his freshman year.

Can that be predicted based on evaluation of their support circle?  I know one thing.  These highly rated kids are under more pressure in a 5-7 year span than most adults face in a life time.

It's probably more amazing how few of them do burn out.

[Youngsta71701]

There's no coincidence that the teams at the top of the recruiting rankings are the teams vying for the playoffs at seasons end

Key word is "sometimes".

[Youngsta71701]

Seriously?  Purchased for what? Bitcoins? 

Star ratings are imperfect, as is any rating system in anything.  Please do tell who your "associate" is.  Does he pump gas for a living?

This "the system is rigged against Arkansas" is tiring.  This "you automatically get 4 stars if you commit to Alabama" is nauseating and stupidity of the highest order.

We can't and don't get the level of recruits that USC, Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan, Florida, Texas schools, etc. get. It's a matter of geography and fact, not some stupid theoretical conspiracy by ESPN. 

We recruit in the 20's and 30's.  We always have, and always will, regardless of our coach. Good gawd.  Let it friggin' go.  But please keep reading.

If you can't deal with the fact that the state of Arkansas and our 250 mile perimeter doesn't produce enough SEC talent, then that is on you and your brain. 

That's not a conspiracy by ESPN or 247, any other ranking service, Yankee's, or "talking heads."  It's on you and your brain.

What we have to do in Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get. Plenty of coaches at plenty of schools with lesser talent have learned how to beat other teams that have recruiting advantages. That's what Arkansas needs to do. Focus on that.  Not tin-foiled hat stupidity.

More money more stars. Politics is involved in everything rather some believe it or not.

[greenie]

I truly believe that the greatest reason for Bielema's failure was his recruiting strategy.  CBB was a pretty good recruiter, and was great with parents; however, I think the biggest mistake he made was to not emphasize recruiting in TX (and even OK)...and spent too much time in FL, GA, and the Midwest. He really wanted to have a very large recruiting footprint...including FL, GA, and the Midwest.  I once thought that this was a good idea, but this proved to be a hard road.  Not only do you have to sell Arkansas, you also have to sell the distance from home.  Arkansas is a much tougher sell in FL and GA kids (who know little of Ark) than to TX kids (who at least have some idea of who we are).  We were almost shutout from getting talent from our neighboring states to the west due to negligence in these areas...and a bit too much bravado with his offensive style vs the typical TX HS offensive style.  I don't think that went over well either. 

CCM's strategy of focusing heavily on TX, on top of the great reputation he has there, has had almost immediate effect.  I expect our recruiting stars to increase.  And no matter what you say, the stars don't lie (in general).  The teams at the top of the recruiting rankings seem to be in contention more often than not...and it's likely because they have better players.  Better coaches help too, I know, but better players can give you far more margin for coaching errors.

[bphi11ips]

You must have quoted the wrong guy or something.  Although you make some good points here, he didn't say that the system was rigged against Arkansas or anything of the sort.  If stars can be "bought" (and I don't know if they can or not), that would work to fool everyone...wouldn't it?  It seems you extrapolated his statement so that you could run him down.

However, I particularly agree with "What we have to do at Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get" statement.  In fact, this is what every school should do.

To be clear, stars aren't "bought" directly.  However, getting rated by recruiting services is an expensive proposition.  The 3-star range is where the wide range of talent exists.  Here's how the system works:

Ranking services don't have to do anything to identify 5-star talent.  The media does that for them.  Four stars are the best of the rest of undeniablly talented players with incredible bodies, film and stats.  Those who follow high school football know who they are.  Four and five star players are invited to elite camps with all expenses paid in many cases. 

Three stars usually don't get ranked without starting the camp process by the summer before their sophomore year.  Junior at latest.  Camp registration fees and travel expenses are significant.  It is possible to spend the cost of a college education on the college football recruiting process.  In order to be noticed at "elite" camps, it is essential to be connected to a players' representative organization.  These organizations provide training designed to maximize performance in camp drills.  They also serve as liasons between the camp organizers and obtain better positioning for their players at camps.  A player may only get two reps at a camp, so positioning is important.  Players generally pay for reps based upon some sort of sliding scale depending upon the ability to pay and how bad the rep wants to be associated with the player.

Players have little chance to become rated as a 3-star without participating in camps.  High school coaches have no input whatsoever into the rating system.  High school coaches point their better players in the direction of the camps and take calls from college coaches and meet with them when they visit campus.  High school coaches are generally not a proactive source in recruiting as they once were. 

Players are generally rated by their body type and performance in camp drills.  Swag does influence the process.  Race does influence the process depending upon the position.  A white defensive back has virtually no chance of being rated highly no matter his measurables. White linemen, QBs and TEs may be helped a bit .  There are almost no black specialists.  We know these stereotypes exist simply by observation, but they are openly discussed in the recruiting process by coaches and parents of both races and accepted as reality.

So, a player can become a 3-star simply by working the camp system properly with the right representatives.  That doesn't mean they are not great athletes.  They can't get noticed without having exceptional bodies and demonstrating extraordinary athleticism.  However, no one knows from camp whether a player can block, tackle, run a disciplined route, wants to hit in pads, or even knows where to line up.  Camps don't tell services anything about a player's desire or football IQ.  Stats may influence ratings later, but a camp star seldom gets checked later for stats to prove up the measurables and eyeball test he passed during the summer.  So - now you know how so many three stars get to campus without knowing how to block or tackle.

Coaches know how the system works.  They watch film, talk to high school  coaches, watch practices and games, etc.  They know for the most part who the best players are.  The problem is there aren't enough real three stars to go around.  That's where you have to look at offer lists to know who the best player are.  A three star without offers from other P5 upper tier schools is probably not going to help Arkansas much.  But many coaches would rather hope they can "coach up" a 3-star physical specimen than give a scholarship to an unrated guy they know can play football.  A lot of this has to do with speed and physicality.  A guy can be a great fundamental football player and still not be able to play at the SEC level.  On the other hand, a three star can be a great athlete but a terrible football player with no desire.  I'm afraid we have seen some of those under Bielema.

There are still a few Max Emfingers out there, but no one pays much attention to them.  They do influence the big services because the services know they know what they are doing.  But by and large ratings will be controlled by a huge industry driven by up to the second demand from fans for information, including social media directly from players.

That's my best description based upon recent personal experience with my son and other fathers with theirs.  It is not intended to be an idictment of the process itself, only an explanation of why the rating services can be unreliable once the 4 and 5 stars and 3 stars with solid offer lists are gone.

[greenie]

^^^^This is a good post. 

[Science Fiction Greg]

^^^^This is a good post.

Indeed.  An example of someone showing that they are someone you should listen to.  Make a list people.  It's possible to filter out the nonsense on hogville and actually get good quality content if you know which users to listen to and just kind of giggle at the others.

[cardinalandwhite]

Can that be predicted based on evaluation of their support circle?  I know one thing.  These highly rated kids are under more pressure in a 5-7 year span than most adults face in a life time.

It's probably more amazing how few of them do burn out.

This.

Can you imagine, at 18, having grown men paying you six figures to play football for their school (admittedly extreme example), and the pressure that follows?

[bphi11ips]

Indeed.  An example of someone showing that they are someone you should listen to.  Make a list people.  It's possible to filter out the nonsense on hogville and actually get good quality content if you know which users to listen to and just kind of giggle at the others.

You and greenie are on the list of posters I listen to.  He nailed it above on Bielema's flawed recruiting strategy.  In some instances I believe Bielema thought he'd won the recruiting war when he gave us some three stars from Forida.  Sort of like a cat bringing a bird to the front porch.  Everyone jumped up and down and said CBB has found the Promised Land.  No one checked the offer lists to see the teams he beat for those recruits.

It's the snarky posters I don't like.  You can disagree without the snark.

[12247]

greenie, I felt Bash hammered the OP unreasonable too.

I believe Muskogee was totally accurate in his summation of a part of recruiting.  Recruiting correctly is durn hard work and many coaches are opposed to that.

BPH laid it out, nice post. thanks.

[WarEagleSharkFalconHawg]

How the heck did Ole Miss just pull in two new four star recruits?

[Razor8]

Seriously?  Purchased for what? Bitcoins? 

Star ratings are imperfect, as is any rating system in anything.  Please do tell who your "associate" is.  Does he pump gas for a living?

This "the system is rigged against Arkansas" is tiring.  This "you automatically get 4 stars if you commit to Alabama" is nauseating and stupidity of the highest order.

We can't and don't get the level of recruits that USC, Alabama, LSU, Florida State, Ohio State, Auburn, Michigan, Florida, Texas schools, etc. get. It's a matter of geography and fact, not some stupid theoretical conspiracy by ESPN. 

We recruit in the 20's and 30's.  We always have, and always will, regardless of our coach. Good gawd.  Let it friggin' go.  But please keep reading.

If you can't deal with the fact that the state of Arkansas and our 250 mile perimeter doesn't produce enough SEC talent, then that is on you and your brain. 

That's not a conspiracy by ESPN or 247, any other ranking service, Yankee's, or "talking heads."  It's on you and your brain.

What we have to do in Arkansas is run a system that utilizes what we can get. Plenty of coaches at plenty of schools with lesser talent have learned how to beat other teams that have recruiting advantages. That's what Arkansas needs to do. Focus on that.  Not tin-foiled hat stupidity.

Reading comprehension difficult for you? Let me try to dumb it down so you will understand! I never once complained about arkansas's class ranking as it relates to stars, meaning I am not saying Arkansas can't get high star players. If you don't think something in this world can't be changed with money, your an idiot. My associate who I don't need to name had a son rated as a 2 star, he knew one of the recruiting service evaluators who told him for xxx dollars I can have your son re-evaluated up a star, since you prob don't understand why that matters, I'll explain. The difference between 2 star and 3 star players in recruit is the level of the schools they get interest from

[Razor8]

Oh and my associate owns his own oil and gas company so yeah I guess he does pump gas!

[Hardcore Hoggy]

On average the recruiting ranking services get it right. No matter how many example of them getting it wrong get pointed out, this will never be untrue.

[Science Fiction Greg]

On average the recruiting ranking services get it right. No matter how many example of them getting it wrong get pointed out, this will never be untrue.

Fine, but the real issue is:

1) Are players rated higher because teams that are traditionally powerhouses are recruiting them or
2) are traditionally powerhouse teams recruiting more players that are rated higher?

Because both of these possibilities result in the correlation that we see.  I think there is some pretty significant evidence that the first option is often the case.  And it makes sense.  There's no way that recruiting services can accurately evaluate every high school player out there.  If there is a player they haven't evaluated and a bunch of powerhouse teams extend them offers, guess what happens to that player's rating?  If the same player has offers from a middling P5 school (like Arkansas) and a bunch of local scrubs, guess what doesn't happen?  This is without a recruiting service evaluating the player at all.

The recruiting services aren't getting anything right in this case, they are just flowing with the prevailing winds.  And it works because people see the correlation this results in and thinks the recruiting services are actually doing great work.  They aren't.  They are just playing the percentages for the most part.

Recruiting rankings aren't really ranking future prospects, they are essentially predicting how you well you just recruited by how successfully you've recruited in the past.  It results in pretty good correlations, but isn't really based on what most people think it is based on.  It's basically a shell game.

[Bubba's Bruisers]

Of course the first option is most likely.  The most credible thing any service could possibly do is give more merit to a kid who's been offered by Saban, Meyer, Smart and Dabo.

[Science Fiction Greg]

Of course the first option is most likely.  The most credible thing any service could possibly do is give more merit to a kid who's been offered by Saban, Meyer, Smart and Dabo.

Agree, but it means the recruiting services are not really doing anything useful.  That's the point.  I mean, I could do that from my living room.  It also means that recruiting rankings are just based on a team's past successes, not based on a prediction of their future using the players they recruited.  It's a significant difference and I'm surprised more people don't see through it.

The goal of a recruiting service should not be to do what is most "credible."  In other words, they shouldn't be doing what will make most people believe they are right.  They should be trying to evaluate each recruit on their own merits.  If they did that, then saying "recruiting services usually get it right" would be a meaningful statement.  As it is, recruiting rankings tell us almost nothing more about what will happen in the future than simply looking at the last ten years of top 25 polls would tell us.

[Bubba's Bruisers]

Agree, but it means the recruiting services are not really doing anything useful.  That's the point.  I mean, I could do that from my living room.  It also means that recruiting rankings are just based on a team's past successes, not based on a prediction of their future using the players they recruited.  It's a significant difference and I'm surprised more people don't see through it.

The goal of a recruiting service should not be to do what is most "credible."  In other words, they shouldn't be doing what will make most people believe they are right.  They should be trying to evaluate each recruit on their own merits.  If they did that, then saying "recruiting services usually get it right" would be a meaningful statement.  As it is, recruiting rankings tell us almost nothing more about what will happen in the future than simply looking at the last ten years of top 25 polls would tell us.

And I'm saying it doesn't matter, because fans believe what they want to believe.  When your team isn't getting the 4 star players, then the services automatically become suspect.  When they get the 4 stars, then the services got it right.  The ranking methodology is really irrelevant. 

The only useful thing any service offers is a reasonably accurate offer sheet. 

[Science Fiction Greg]

The only useful thing any service offers is a reasonably accurate offer sheet.

This I can agree with.

[bphi11ips]

Agree, but it means the recruiting services are not really doing anything useful.  That's the point.  I mean, I could do that from my living room.  It also means that recruiting rankings are just based on a team's past successes, not based on a prediction of their future using the players they recruited.  It's a significant difference and I'm surprised more people don't see through it.

The goal of a recruiting service should not be to do what is most "credible."  In other words, they shouldn't be doing what will make most people believe they are right.  They should be trying to evaluate each recruit on their own merits.  If they did that, then saying "recruiting services usually get it right" would be a meaningful statement.  As it is, recruiting rankings tell us almost nothing more about what will happen in the future than simply looking at the last ten years of top 25 polls would tell us.

I don't think that's the way the process works, but it is the way it works out. No one needs a crystal ball to predict that Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Michigan, Penn State, Florida State, Georgia, Miami, LSU and a handful of others are going to make up the best teams in any given year. The best players want to play there. Recruiting services track the best players. They are easily identifiable. Where it breaks down and always has is after you get past the top predictable teams who are always the same decade after decade. The further down the rankings you go the less reliable they become.

You can't blame a bunch of guys for making a buck.  They just don't add much that we couldn't get from Dave Campbell's Arkansas football. But the pressure put on coaches to sign highly recruited classes has changed the decisin making process when it comes to who to sign. 

[Science Fiction Greg]

I don't think that's the way the process works, but it is the way it works out. No one needs a crystal ball to predict that Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, USC, Texas, Michigan, Penn State, Florida State, Georgia, Miami, LSU and a handful of others are going to make up the best teams in any given year. The best players want to play there. Recruiting services track the best players. They are easily identifiable. Where it breaks down and always has is after you get past the top predictable teams who are always the same decade after decade. The further down the rankings you go the less reliable they become.

You can't blame a bunch of guys for making a buck.  They just don't add much that we couldn't get from Dave Campbell's Arkansas football. But the pressure put on coaches to sign highly recruited classes has changed the decisin making process when it comes to who to sign.

Agree, totally.