Star Rankings

It's just my opinion.. but I think an accurate list of offers is far more telling than anything else. Example being..

Brandon Worle 3* RB/FB LSU commit. Has better measurables than Fowler. Offers from just about everyone.

Jalston Fowler 4* RB/FB Bama commit. Slightly lower measurables compared to Worle. Rarely blocked in highschool.. was used as a RB. Offers from Alabama, South Alabama, and South Carolina.

Fowler was a 2* last year.. and without undergoing any further evaluations/camps/playing games he jumped to a 4*. The film used to evaluate him was the same as last years also.

 

Pretty good point and probably it's not fair to label thousands of player busts because some random guy put a star value on him.

Fowler wasnt recruited last year because they knew he had another year in high school, that is why his offer list has not been updated.

He was listed a 2* not because of his talent level but because he had not been evaluated -- now he is a 4* on both sites. Florida's coaches went by the school a few weeks ago to see him as have plenty of other BCS schools.

I think if you watched him in person your tune might change...he is an absolute beast. Just watch the first play.

[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MtQVV4vI5Q[/MEDIA]

 

I've seen his film.. he'll be a fullback or linebacker in college. He's extremely athletic. Have you seen Worles film? Worle is probably already better than Dominique Allen who will see significant playing time in his freshmen year for LSU.

My point is.. Worle and Fowler have a similar ceiling. Both can run and catch.. but one of them is already a blocker. Why is the more complete package ranked lower? Fowler played his 'senior season' last year. That's another point to Worle.. Fowler is already more physically developed due to age. He's literally a man amongst boys out there.

Fowler is an athlete. Worle is a fullback. These are star rankings.. and yes, they're the best we've got for now. But sometimes it just makes you scratch your head.

 

not sure why this is a big deal. unless he thinks the guy wasnt 5* worthy and was pumping sunshine for his own enjoyment. i'd hope and expect that rivals/scout/espn get insight from coaches all the time and weight the inevitable homer factor into the rankings.

not to mention this guy was a top100 player anyway(aka not a 3*)

 

Yes, but that wasnt the point. You made points about Fowler's offers and star rating from last year and I was just telling you the real story. Everyone can debate stars so that is not a big deal to me and I am not sure I understand why I am talking about Worle.

I dont care to debate the players but this is sort of funny to me. You say run and catch like once you can do one that is all that matters. Obviously some are better at running and catching than others...perhaps that is why one is rated higher?

How can you say Fowler cant block when his highlight tapes dont show him doing it? Plus, he is also being recruited as a short yardage RB.

He missed the cutoff by a week. Thats not extreme.

 

I was just using it as an illustration to show that things change. His offer list is still not as impressive as Worle who I think should be ranked higher. I'm only talking about offer lists and the like because I think that's the most accurate way to evaluate a prospect.

No.. being able to run and catch are good things. Fullbacks (especially for LSU/Bama) are mainly blocking backs. They might catch an occasional wheel route or a pass in the flats.. but the majority of their work is blocking. I can't really think of any teams outside of triple option attacks that use a fullback-type player as a real threat up the middle.

If he was shelling people left and right like Worle was.. it would have made his video. That's my reasoning. I'm not saying that he can't block.. just that he doesn't. It's not his focus.. they let him run the ball. Fowler will be a LB/FB in college.. and he should be rated as such. At the very least rate him as an ATH.

I'm simply trying to get the most accurate ratings possible. I would love to have Fowler on our squad.

The difference between the typical 18 year old graduate and the almost 20 year old graduate is pretty steep. The cut-off is 19 before September 1st. The guys an athlete regardless of age.

When I played highschool ball.. we had a guy who was ineligible. We called him 'Old man Coleman'.

 

I have cautioned more than once about taking the online evaluations too seriously. At best they represent broad guestimates of a prospect's athleticism and some politicking may be envovled in arriving at those ratings. Coaches use their own systems which are certainly more credible. Having said that, there also seems to be at least some correlation between the online evaluations and the degree to which prospects are recruited by the top schools. So I would not say the online evaluations are completely unreliable. Still, the best evaluation is the one that takes place on the gridiron from September to December of each year.