Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Only few of the Rivals 100 make a Pro roster.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • EricCartmann
    started a topic Only few of the Rivals 100 make a Pro roster.

    Only few of the Rivals 100 make a Pro roster.

    I was going over the Rivals Top 100 recruits through the years, and noticed few if any make it to an NFL roster. Actually very few seem to even make an impact in college.

    Of the 300 players selected as the top 100 recruits coming out of high school between 2002-2004, I am only seeing 2 Potential NFL Hall of Famers, Haloti Ngata (#2 in 2002), Adriane Peterson (#1 in 2004). Still too early to comment on guys from the Rivals 2005 class.

    So what's my point? Point is don't get too happy if your school got a "good" recruiting class, it does not mean jack.

  • BuddyCHRIST
    replied
    Many of the top prospects have been great recruits, some of those guys didn't workout in the NFL but making two jumps in competition your going to have alot of busts.

    My main problem with Rivals is they drop and rise guys based on when they commit, the guys who commit early and don't bring alot of traffic to their site fall while guys who wait till NSD tend to rise.

    Leave a comment:


  • J52
    replied
    Originally posted by BamaFalcon59 View Post
    The percentage of five star players drafted is higher than the percentage of four star players drafted.

    The percentage of four star players drafted is higher than the percentage of three star players drafted.

    The percentage of three star players drafted is higher than the percentage of two star players drafted.

    The percentage of two star players drafted is higher than the percentage of non-ranked players drafted.

    So the guys are obviously doing something right. It's not an exact science, but for the most part higher ranked players make more impact than lower ranked players. But a few thousand players sign D-1 football scholarships each year, so of course some mistakes will be made or some players missed out on.
    Logic; ahh how I love thee.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dagagad
    replied
    This comes up every year. One of my favorite bloggers, Matt Hinton looked at it this year again, although before the draft.

    He looked at the drafts from 2006-08 and found that according to rivals rankings..

    you are a 5 *, you have a 1/8 chance of 1st round, 1/4 chance of 1st 3 rounds

    you are a 4*, you have a 1/21 chance of 1st round, 1/12 top 3

    you are a 3*, you have a 1/107 chance of 1st round, 1/29 top 3

    you are a 2*, you have a 1/412 chance of 1st round, 1/99 top 3

    The odds seems to line up with the stars.

    http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...n=ncaaf,158543

    Leave a comment:


  • Race for the Heisman
    replied
    Just to add on what has already been mentioned in passing, half of these players will never even have a chance at the NFL due to injury or legal troubles. It's just a fact. Also, sport has shown that the greatest levels of moral corruption also typically occur in the highest caliber athletes. Furthermore, given that roughly half the rookies who enter the league each year are out of it in less than two, it shouldn't really come as a surprise that only 25 or so of these players end up on NFL rosters. Getting even half that could probably be considered a success from a scouting perspective.

    Leave a comment:


  • devinhester=R.O.Y 2006
    replied
    2005 could be very successful depending on how some of the guys fair in the NFL.

    1. Derrick Williams
    3. Eugene Monroe
    5. Rey Maualuga
    7. Mark Sanchez
    8. Martellus Bennett
    10. Jonathan Stewart
    12. Kenny Phillips
    18. DeSean Jackson
    19. Justin King
    23. Darren McFadden
    28. Macho Harris
    29. Mohamed Massaquoi
    42. James Davis
    45. Mario Manningham
    48. Michael Oher
    53. Brian Cushing
    57. Jamaal Charles
    59. Ricky Jean-Francois
    62. Curtis Lofton
    68. Malcom Kelly
    69. Henry Melton
    78. Everette Brown
    90. Rashard Mendenhall
    Last edited by devinhester=R.O.Y 2006; 05-18-2009, 01:43 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • devinhester=R.O.Y 2006
    replied
    Here are some of the better guys from Rivals 2002 Top 100

    2002

    1. Vince Young
    2. Haloti Ngata
    3. Lorenzo Booker
    9. Leon Washington
    15. Justin Blalock
    20. Trent Edwards
    22. Jerious Norwood
    29. Devin Hester
    36. Marcedes Lewis
    48. DeShawn Wynn
    49. Kedric Golston
    51. Eric Winston
    55. Jarrad Page
    56. Winston Justice
    58. Kamerion Wimbley
    59. Tambi Hali
    64. Tony Ugoh
    70. Parys Haralson
    75. Selvin Young
    98. Davin Joseph

    Here are guys from Rivals Top 100 in 2003 and 2004

    2003

    1. Ernie Sims
    2. Reggie Bush
    10. Greg Olsen
    14. LaMarr Woodley
    20. Robert Meachem
    23. Victor Abiamiri
    25. Jarvis Moss
    27. Donte Whitner
    28. Michael Bush
    30. Steve Smith
    40. Antonio Cromartie
    48. Vernon Davis
    54. Maurice Jones-Drew
    60. Michael Griffin
    61. Reggie Nelson
    68. Sedrick Ellis
    69. Lawrence Jackson
    73. Marcus Thomas
    79. JaMarcus Russell
    81. Tavares Gooden
    87. LaRon Landry
    91. Sam Baker

    2004

    1. Adrian Peterson
    2. Ted Ginn
    3. Early Doucet
    5. Keith Rivers
    8. Derrick Harvey
    11. DeMario Pressley
    13. Chad Henne
    18. Frank Okam
    19. Fred Davis
    24. Dan Connor
    28. Marshawn Lynch
    33. Zach Miller
    34. Brandon Siler
    37. Calvin Johnson
    44. Dwayne Jarrett
    47. Glenn Dorsey
    61. Lawrence Timmons
    73. Lavelle Hawkins
    Last edited by devinhester=R.O.Y 2006; 05-18-2009, 01:40 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • JHG722
    replied
    Originally posted by holt_bruce81 View Post
    Hahahaha this got a little personal for me. One of the guys they listed, Callahan Bright, lives like 5 minutes from me and went to my rival high school. To make you guys understand, there are three high schools in my immediate area, and they are three of the worst football teams in PA and in the country. We're honestly horrendous. So this kid was a big deal, 5 star, top recruit, NFL talent and blew everything. To start, unlike his name suggests, he is not very intelligent. He wasn't academically eligible to play college football, couldn't handle prep school, couldn't handle JUCO. He went to a DII school, but I'm not sure what happened to him there.

    He got busted in a sting a few years ago: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n19399019/

    Rivals page: http://rivals100.rivals.com/viewpros...p?pr_key=27548

    One of the best stories I heard about him was that after he got his offer from FSU, he told FSU he and his girlfriend were a package deal, and I think said he wouldn't go to FSU unless she got a scholarship too. They told him to go **** himself :p

    Total moron.

    Leave a comment:


  • JHG722
    replied
    Originally posted by Iamcanadian View Post
    As for predicting recruiting classes, you'd be surprised how ratings on high school prospects change quickly when one of them is suddenly sought by a number of top colleges. It is amazing how fast their ratings jump from a 2 star to a 4 or 5 star based just on who is recruiting them.
    You should see the shady **** they do. It's really incredible and sad. My school (Temple) received a verbal from a quarterback out of Virginia this year. He is a 2 star according to Rivals and Scout. His only other offer (I believe) was from Ohio U. Well after Ohio State lost out on all the top QBs in this year's class, they started to go after less heralded recruits. They were then denied by a few less heralded recruits, who stuck with the schools they verballed to. Ohio State then contacts the guy from VA we had a verbal from and offers him. Scout and Rivals learned that he was offered by OSU, and his ranking shot up to a four star (or maybe it was a three star, I'm not sure). Anyway, the QB told OSU that he was sticking with his commitment to Temple, since he knew they were just using him to back up Pryor and didnt really value him like we did. After Rivals and Scout learned that he was sticking with Temple, his ranking dropped back down to a 2 star.

    This happens pretty often. Outside of really top top prospects, it's a terrible way to gauge recruiting classes since there is so much shady **** and political **** involved with more 'major' schools.

    We see this happen a lot at Temple with players we're recruiting who sign with Penn State and suddenly shoot up rankings in increased stars.

    Leave a comment:


  • JHG722
    replied
    Originally posted by OneToughGame View Post
    I personally love when 2 & 3 "star" recruits become top 5 picks (like Curry.) I just like cheering for the underdogs I guess.
    http://temple.scout.com/a.z?s=186&p=8&c=1&nid=1634235

    :) :) :)

    Leave a comment:


  • YAYareaRB
    replied
    the Top players in 2003 were horrid.

    Leave a comment:


  • EricCartmann
    replied
    Originally posted by gsorace View Post
    What a ridiculous thing to say
    Can you find it in your heart to forgive me?

    Leave a comment:


  • gsorace
    replied
    Originally posted by EricCartmann View Post
    I am only seeing 2 Potential NFL Hall of Famers
    What a ridiculous thing to say

    Leave a comment:


  • BamaFalcon59
    replied
    Originally posted by Iamcanadian View Post
    You make a good point about major programs using Rival's ranking to secure a lot of hype for their schools by signing a few of their 4 and 5 star prospects. Rivals may be way over hyped but that doesn't mean every prospect on their ranking doesn't have some real talent. It's just that Rivals rankings aren't a guarantee of future success and their star system is weak if you examine their total results.
    It's definitely not a fullproof (or is it failproof? Haha) system, but at this time they do better than the other major recruiting services (ESPN and Scout). The higher stars have a higher success rate than lower stars, and players in the 100/ 250 have higher success rates than those not in the 100/ 250. That's a good sign.

    Also, it's not like the NFL where a player's character factors in as well. Considering how many players there are, that would be very difficult. So that doesn't affect the rankings initially but affects their final results.

    Same deal with grades, Rivals has the GPA of many kids but it doesn't factor into ratings. This often either carries a kid to the next class, to a lower division school, or prevents them playing baseball ever.

    Then there are things like coaching changes; players may be adversely affected by a coach leaving or coming in or by a coach leaving. Do you think Ben Tate (Rivals100 2006, #41 in the nation) knew that the great tradition of Auburn tailbacks was going to be put on hold by a spread offense? Or that John Dwyer (5.9 4 star RB) or Steven Threet (5.8 4 star QB who just transfered) knew that they were going to be put in a triple option? It looks good for Dwyer now, but I'm sure he was apprehensive at first.

    And then some times players are hyped, but it is near impossible to get good film on them, making evaluation difficult.

    Injury is also often a big variable.

    That's not to say Rivals is perfect. They are notorious for giving rating bumps to players committed to schools with more subscriptions to Rivals, and don't adequately scout some states (VIRGINIA!) in comparison to the big ones (Florida, California, Texas).

    There are just so many factors that play into these kids succeeding, it's extremely difficult to even do what they do.

    Leave a comment:


  • Iamcanadian
    replied
    Originally posted by BamaFalcon59 View Post
    No, major programs have been known to use Rivals ratings as a source of recruiting. It makes them look better to get hyped players. VT's Rivals guy, one of the better and unbiased ones there are, has even said he has heard of multiple schools doing it. Not VT, maybe one reason our recruiting classes are chronically underrated, but other programs. I've heard UNC, for example.

    And yes, they spend a ton of money. But that doesn't mean they don't do some idiotic things or give into hype.
    You make a good point about major programs using Rival's ranking to secure a lot of hype for their schools by signing a few of their 4 and 5 star prospects. Rivals may be way over hyped but that doesn't mean every prospect on their ranking doesn't have some real talent. It's just that Rivals rankings aren't a guarantee of future success and their star system is weak if you examine their total results.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X

Debug Information