Stars are good, but like I say, you can play football or you can't. Even in the Pros, they miss many times. The first films I saw on Joe Barksdale, I said, "I'd put him at OT." The folks thought I was nuts. DL we had, we needed OL at the time. I was talking with a college S&C Coach yesterday and this same thing came up. Heights, weights, 40 times, etc are all good. I want a guy that can play. You hear this all the time, "Looks like Tarzan, plays like Jane!" Former LSU Player Ryan Clark when running the 40 had to be timed with a calender, hes still playing in the Pros. Yea, guess they missed on him, lucky a CFA guy that made it. Not many know, but Ryan has the Sickle Cell Trait. This is something that should be a limit to him, but you can't tell. Congrats to him on another year. :tigereye:
And how many teams do Utah or Boise State play that have 3.4 or better average classes? LSU finished the regular season ranked one of the Top 10 teams from the big boy conferences (which is why LSU made a New Year's Day Bowl), so I don't see your problem with LSU. I didn't follow USC. Actually, there are just as many Jacob Hesters getting drafted in the early rounds as there are Patrick Petersons. However, the 5-star recruits represent a much, much smaller fraction of the recruits out of high school than the 3-stars, so that is not surprising. Again, I said that "I think the recruiting services do a good job overall." I even have some good articles on it I can share.
I think you missed the point. LSU has recruited great numbers of 4-5 star players, which was the only point. This gives way for a better selection of players come game day. In no way does it mean that the 3* guys or lower cannot end up becoming better players. But to compare the average player on the field as you have, in 2010 the LSU’s avg was: 3.59 – 2010 3.79 – 2009 3.58 – 2008 3.88 – 2007 3.50 – 2009 I think all this really means is that our 3* players are just as important as the rest.
anybody who played as true freshmen in '06 comes off the list for all schools. (plus any other attrition) Florida lost Tebow, Harvin and Spikes. Just off the top of my head. to knock LSU's number all the way down to 35 and not drop anyone else is a LOT less accurate than the list Hawker provided.
I don't know the answer to this question, but I do know they (Utah) have a 9 bowl game win streak which includes 5 against BCS teams including the likes of USC and Bama. And although I don't know the number I also am pretty sure they have a winning record from 2000 - present against all BCS programs. They may not face these teams week in and week out, but the fact remains that when they do play them they beat them with players that are not ranked as highly as many of the BCS schools they play. Now not all of the BCS schools have higher ranked recruits than them, but I am pretty sure that USC, Bama, Oregon, and Arizona do. Just to name a few that they have beaten.
Good point about Utah. My only thing with the Boise, TCU and Utah's are their week to week grind. They would not make it in the SEC and we all know it. They do not have the depth to keep it going week after week. While, yes, they would have a few good years here and there, but not the kind of numbers they put up now.. No way in Hell… Granted, Utah has done well in bowls, well, it is not that hard to play good in a bowl with a month to prepare and a relatively week year of playing. People can take it how they want, but make no shreds about it, we will remain the best football the country has to offer.
For the most part I do agree with you, with the exception of that Utah handled a schedule with 3 BCS schools last season. Granted they wouldn't be able to do it week in and week out, they just don't have the depth, but they have fared well against the BCS schools over the past decade. Granted much of that is against the Pac 10, but none the less it is still against schools with higher rated recruites. A lot of variables go into winning and losing, but in most cases better coaching will win out. In Utahs case, they have had better coaching in many of these games. Not better coaches, just better coaching.
For JohnLSU: As I mentioned in the thread starter, the list does not account for players who are no longer on the team. It is a list of the school's ability to attract/sign these kids.... therefore, you can't deduct for kids that are not still at LSU without going through the lists and deducting the "no longer there" from the other schools. To the point about Utah: The team that beat Bama in the Sugar Bowl was a very senior-laden team. As we have learned at Iowa, a three star with two or three years in the weight room... and those willing to perfect their technique... can be every bit as good as some of the 4 and 5 stars, who just happened to have frames that were totally bulked out when they were recruited. It's good to have a ton of 4/5 stars, as it improves your odds of finding kids who actually are. However, many schools compete just fine if they can build a pipeline of three star talent who will spend a few growth years building their bodies, defining their mobility skills, etc.
Say what you will about Ryan Perrilloux's career, but he did lead us to a blowout victory over Middle Tennessee State in 2007. Without him, I don't know if we get by the Blue Raiders that night.
Exactly. Almost every single one of those kids at Utah redshirt, and some of them go on Mormon missions and end up as 24 and 25 year old seniors.
