How the Chiefs and 49ers starters rated as high school recruits

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
8,308
Reaction score
800
Points
113
Interesting article. Really shows what a crap shoot o-line recruiting is. Most of the 10 Super Bowl starters along the o-line were ranked really low out of high school.
 

#2Gopher

Well-known member
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
5,102
Reaction score
252
Points
83
Spot on as to not to get too excited about ratings and stars. Can't measure the heart, can't predict the growth as to size always. In addition to all this. Coaching. Coming together as a team is critical, doing job and not worrying about the guy next to you and all the other intangibles.
 

fmlizard

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 19, 2012
Messages
1,973
Reaction score
290
Points
83
The offenses are hilarious. Both teams offenses would be a bad recruiting class for Minnesota. I've always heard defense is a bit more predictable because it's based more on physical ability and raw talent than offense is. This small sample seems to back that up.
 

hungan1

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 20, 2011
Messages
9,531
Reaction score
511
Points
113
It is interesting that most of the roster is full of formerly unrated, two-star, and three star players albeit this is not representative of the rest of the NFL.

If you want to make it to the pros, there is still a chance by going to a developmental programs not necessarily the Elite P5 schools.

What does it take to be successful in college football? Raw physical talent is one thing. It seems to me that the biggest differentiator is the strong desire and hard work to succeed. Whether it be Tanner Morgan or Blake Cashman, you see that in them. Don't get me wrong. You have some undeniably great talent like Adrian Peterson and others. You can't teach big and tall linemen. You are born with it. It is what you do thru hard work and determination, and for many luck, and getting the right mentors or coaches.

PJ Fleck touts the U as one such developmental program. We will see in the years ahead how successful the U has become.
 
Last edited:

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
9,125
Reaction score
912
Points
113
I don't really see that this changes much, although I agree this is a very interesting article. And thanks to the OP for sharing.

The only thing I would say is, if the player had FBS offers and played for an FBS team, then he's a 3*. Unless he had all FCS offers and the lone FBS offer was a very low end FBS, or something along those lines.

Zero chance Travis Kelce is/was a 2* player. Had multiple MAC offers, Cincy offer, played for Cincy. That's 3*.


Overall points:
- there are only like 32 players in each class rated as 5* (like the 1st round draft picks)
- not sure how many are 4*, but guessing maybe 100 per class or something like that? (like 2nd-3rd round picks)
- the rest of the P5 players are going to be 3*. The vast majority of a lot of P5 rosters are going to be 3* players.
- the rating services aren't purposefully trying to mis-label/mis-rate players. They're being genuine. Based on the data and tape available up to that point, they really are projecting those 32 players our of the entire country to be most likely to be significant contributors/starters right away on P5 rosters and end up as first round draft picks.
- there are a million reasons why it doesn't pan out for any given 5* recruit, who then doesn't fulfill that potential. Those can't be incorporated into some kind of perfect prediction.

- finally, zero chance that the Gophers would turn down any 5* recruit that wanted to play here. Caveats of course being if the guy didn't have grades, in which case I would think that would be known and he wouldn't be able to get that 5* rating right out of high school anyway (would have to go to JUCO first), or if the guy had a serious criminal record/serious character flaws, again I would think that would be known and might not be able to get that ratings right out of high school.

But even with the latter, I could see Fleck saying something like "we have a tremendous culture here at the U of Minn, people deserve a second chance, I am going to work with and mentor this young man personally, mold him into a person who wants to do the right thing" etc.
 

OldBob53

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2019
Messages
1,041
Reaction score
130
Points
63
I think recruiting services' Star rankings are a very rough, imprecise indicator of college and pro potential. Not completely worthless, but often wrong, perhaps most often wrong.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
9,125
Reaction score
912
Points
113
I think recruiting services' Star rankings are a very rough, imprecise indicator of college and pro potential. Not completely worthless, but often wrong, perhaps most often wrong.
And yet, 0.0% of P5 teams are ever going to tell a 5* recruit that wants to play for that school "sorry, I just don't believe in star ratings, and we just don't think you're going to be a contributor in college or the pros".
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
8,308
Reaction score
800
Points
113
And yet, 0.0% of P5 teams are ever going to tell a 5* recruit that wants to play for that school "sorry, I just don't believe in star ratings, and we just don't think you're going to be a contributor in college or the pros".
When did anyone say anything even remotely close to your quote above?

This story just confirms what everyone already knows and that is that the rankings are not the only thing that matters. Obviously your odds of getting a top flight player are higher with highly rated kids. The bigger issue is the fans that look down on the lower rated kids and assume they can't play based on their ranking.

Look at the O-Lineman playing in the super bowl. Most of us would not be excited to get a commitment from those guys based on those rankings, but clearly they turned into really good players.

Recruiting is about finding the right players, regardless of where they are from or what they are ranked.
 

PitinoFan

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
4,114
Reaction score
982
Points
113
I don't really see that this changes much, although I agree this is a very interesting article. And thanks to the OP for sharing.

The only thing I would say is, if the player had FBS offers and played for an FBS team, then he's a 3*. Unless he had all FCS offers and the lone FBS offer was a very low end FBS, or something along those lines.

Zero chance Travis Kelce is/was a 2* player. Had multiple MAC offers, Cincy offer, played for Cincy. That's 3*.


Overall points:
- there are only like 32 players in each class rated as 5* (like the 1st round draft picks)
- not sure how many are 4*, but guessing maybe 100 per class or something like that? (like 2nd-3rd round picks)
- the rest of the P5 players are going to be 3*. The vast majority of a lot of P5 rosters are going to be 3* players.
- the rating services aren't purposefully trying to mis-label/mis-rate players. They're being genuine. Based on the data and tape available up to that point, they really are projecting those 32 players our of the entire country to be most likely to be significant contributors/starters right away on P5 rosters and end up as first round draft picks.
- there are a million reasons why it doesn't pan out for any given 5* recruit, who then doesn't fulfill that potential. Those can't be incorporated into some kind of perfect prediction.

- finally, zero chance that the Gophers would turn down any 5* recruit that wanted to play here. Caveats of course being if the guy didn't have grades, in which case I would think that would be known and he wouldn't be able to get that 5* rating right out of high school anyway (would have to go to JUCO first), or if the guy had a serious criminal record/serious character flaws, again I would think that would be known and might not be able to get that ratings right out of high school.

But even with the latter, I could see Fleck saying something like "we have a tremendous culture here at the U of Minn, people deserve a second chance, I am going to work with and mentor this young man personally, mold him into a person who wants to do the right thing" etc.
You were pretty much on the money regarding their number of 5 star players. In the 2020 class, there are only 31, according to the 247 composite rankings. However, there are 335 4-star recruits, which is a lot more than I expected.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
9,125
Reaction score
912
Points
113
Thanks! Yeah that is a lot more 4* than the 70 2nd/3rd rounders, but there are also 65 P5 teams as opposed to 32 NFL teams, and also a crap ton of high schools, so it seems fair to me.

That's still only 31 + 335 = 366 / 65 = 5-6 4*/5* per P5 if they were divided evenly, which they of course aren't. Would be great to get 2-3 4* (or 5* if we could) per class, if we can get up to that.
 

Swede

Active member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
461
Reaction score
25
Points
28
The NFL is loaded with players who were lightly recruited and developed over the course of their college careers into Sunday afternoon players. Almost every collegiate program at any level has a guy every year who punches above his weight. A program that can consistently identify and develop under the radar players could sustain success high success at the college level. Is there a program that has figured out this formula? Wisconsin on the O line, maybe?

But keep in mind the other thing that happens, particularly along the offensive line, is that these guys are not only lower rated high school players, but also late round or UDFA NFL players. Meaning that the NFL teams develop them into NFL players, perhaps as much or more so than the college program.

The goal of the U shouldn't be to produce NFL players. That should be a happy byproduct of a successful program. The U's goal is to win college football games. To that end, it is best served by recruiting, signing, developing and playing good high school turned college football players. Recruiting rankings are not an exact science. But the consistently successful college football programs are not signing under the radar guys and turning them into UDFA players. They are signing 4 and 5 star players and playing for conference championships and national titles.
 

Breakin' The Plane

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
8,220
Reaction score
187
Points
63
I assume Tyreke Hill was unranked because no one wanted to evaluate him for fear of being strangled or being repeatedly punched in the stomach.
Or does he just do that to pregnant women?
 

OldBob53

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 15, 2019
Messages
1,041
Reaction score
130
Points
63
And yet, 0.0% of P5 teams are ever going to tell a 5* recruit that wants to play for that school "sorry, I just don't believe in star ratings, and we just don't think you're going to be a contributor in college or the pros".
True that. And Alabama and Clemson are evidence there's some value in landing a handful of 5 star recruits year after year, along with numerous 4 star guys.
 

abrams

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2015
Messages
372
Reaction score
9
Points
18
Agreed. The o-line is the biggest crap shoot. If you're 6'5" 250 pound high school kid you're going to dominate. What happens in college is where you make the difference.
 

CoMn

Active member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
900
Reaction score
54
Points
28
It is interesting that most of the roster is full of formerly unrated, two-star, and three star players albeit this is not representative of the rest of the NFL.

If you want to make it to the pros, there is still a chance by going to a developmental programs not necessarily the Elite P5 schools.

What does it take to be successful in college football? Raw physical talent is one thing. It seems to me that the biggest differentiator is the strong desire and hard work to succeed. Whether it be Tanner Morgan or Blake Cashman, you see that in them. Don't get me wrong. You have some undeniably great talent like Adrian Peterson and others. You can't teach big and tall linemen. You are born with it. It is what you do thru hard work and determination, and for many luck, and getting the right mentors or coaches.

PJ Fleck touts the U as one such developmental program. We will see in the years ahead how successful the U has become.
I would take a hard worker over a gifted person in ANY industry...sales, engineering, nursing, landscape, social work...ANY. I believe strongly it is the biggest differentiator.
 

4four4

Active member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Messages
1,293
Reaction score
10
Points
38
And yet, 0.0% of P5 teams are ever going to tell a 5* recruit that wants to play for that school "sorry, I just don't believe in star ratings, and we just don't think you're going to be a contributor in college or the pros".
IMO, college football coaches don't pay any attention if a player is a 5*.
 

4four4

Active member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Messages
1,293
Reaction score
10
Points
38
I would take a hard worker over a gifted person in ANY industry...sales, engineering, nursing, landscape, social work...ANY. I believe strongly it is the biggest differentiator.
Agreed, and when they have both traits they become leaders and legends in any profession.
 

MNVCGUY

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2011
Messages
8,308
Reaction score
800
Points
113
Agreed, and when they have both traits they become leaders and legends in any profession.
Fleck likes to talk about teams really taking off when your best players are your hardest workers.
 
Top Bottom