Posted by SJSdude on 1/17/2008, 3:44 pm, in reply to "Re: Beware those multi-star recruits!"
198.246.227.2
Typically there is a difference between those 3 Star and above recruits that sign with PAC-10 schools, versus those that sign with schools outside of the BCS. Usually, the difference is related to academics. A four star recruit that has his act together in the classroom and signs with a school from a BCS conference is probably more likely to be around for four years than would a 4 star recruit that didn't qualify for a PAC-10 school, and ended up enrolling at a WAC school, or went the JC route.
What I'm saying is that there is probably a lot more risk for a school like San Jose State to sign a 4 star recruit than there would be for a school like Cal. The reason being is, a 4 star recruit that would sign with a non-BCS school may have some issues that kept him out of a BCS conference in the first place.
That's not to say that schools like SJSU should'nt go after highly rated players, I only pointed out that we've had more success recently with players not highly regarded than we did with those rated with 3 or more stars.
--Previous Message--
: Dude I see your point but I have to believe
: that there is evidence that suggests the
: opposite. If you look at say the top 20
: teams of this year and then add up how many
: 3 star and above recruits they signed over
: the last 4 years I'm guessing it would equal
: a significant amount. I'm speculating a bit
: here because I'm not going to take the time
: to do that but any ways the point is and I
: believe you may have mentioned this before,
: if someone has a high ranking it most likely
: means they're legit, if they have a low
: ranking it doesn't necessarily mean they're
: not good or lack the potential to be good.
: Personally I think there are only so many
: so-called diamonds in the rough and no team
: comprised entirely of these diamonds in the
: rough is going to win a championship.
:
:
:
Message Thread:
« Back to thread