Flanker

x ** Edited by Flanker at 7/3/2026, 10:33:06 AM

x ** Edited by Flanker at 7/3/2026, 10:32:22 AM

x ** Edited by Flanker at 7/3/2026, 10:33:45 AM

x ** Edited by Flanker at 7/3/2026, 10:34:33 AM

x ** Edited by Flanker at 7/3/2026, 10:35:10 AM

x ** Edited by Flanker at 7/3/2026, 10:35:36 AM

x ** Edited by Flanker at 7/3/2026, 10:36:12 AM

x ** Edited by Flanker at 7/3/2026, 10:36:45 AM

** Edited by Flanker at 7/1/2026, 12:37:38 PM

Nick Saban agrees with my contention that recruiting rankings are not reliable. While I argue that recruiting rankings should be reviewed FIVE years later, Nick Saban was quoted as saying that the most accurate way to rank recruiting classes is three years later. Saban declared, “because I really do think that the most accurate way to be able to rank any recruiting class would be three years down the road.” The Athletic re-ranks recruiting classes four years later and I posted a link to the 2016 re-rankings that also had links to 2014 and 2015. The Athletic re-rankings dropped five or more teams from the top ten rankings from 2014 through 2016. The Nick Saban quote along with The Athletic recruiting class re-rankings support my position that recruiting rankings are not reliable. I'm not making predictions about recruiting. I am reviewing the rankings five years later as a historian and auditor. I've audited the recruiting rankings and they failed my audit. RECRUITING RANKINGS ARE BS!!!!!

I wouldn't get too excited about rankings until the recruits actually start practicing on campus. So much can happen on signing day and after that. The Athletic website has re-ranked recruiting classes four years later and Andy Bitter did a few articles on Virginia Tech's recruiting classes. The Athletic re-rankings dropped five or more teams from the top ten rankings from 2014 through 2016. Six of the re-ranked top ten teams were not originally in the 2014 and 2016 top ten lists. Five of the re-ranked top ten teams were not originally in the 2015 top ten. I linked the free 2016 article below. Nick Saban was quoted saying that recruiting rankings should only be ranked after three years. I suspect he stated this because he knows that RECRUITING RANKINGS ARE BS!!!!!!!! From the 2014 article: No coach ever says they just signed a bad class, Saban pointed out. He’d never heard anybody say they didn’t address their needs. “So I’m gonna say the same thing,” Saban joked.And then he moved on to another signing day cliché. At least this one’s far more genuinely true than the rest. “I can’t really comment much about the rankings, guys,” Saban declared, “because I really do think that the most accurate way to be able to rank any recruiting class would be three years down the road.”

My analysis will benefit fans of recruiting who will want to see how accurate the predictions were. The Athletic does the same thing on a larger scale with a better system. They have a huge staff with more resources so they can do a better job. I linked their analysis of the 2016 recruiting classes FOUR years later and they re-ranked them. They recalculated a Top 25 team recruiting ranking and eleven teams displaced other teams in the rankings. You continue to miss the whole point of my analysis. I am not predicting the future so coaches are not going to pay me to offer advice. As an auditor/historian, I am looking at past rankings so I don't offer a "method" for recruiting players. Most coaches do not rely on recruiting rankings. The coaches watch film, call coaches to inquire about potential recruits and they visit various schools and homes to meet the prospects and their families.

This report is using NFL Draft Status and First Team All American Honors as their benchmark. There is a lot of bias involved with both the draft and post-season honors. Players from bigger schools tend to get more attention and they are more likely to get drafted or to be named to post-season all-star teams. There are a lot of NFL busts and a lot of players make the teams as undrafted free agents. I keep track of the number of seasons played by NFL draftees and UDFA's. I have found that the average NFL career is roughly five years for the three, four and five stars. Many of the VA players have not finished their careers so the data is not complete. There are a lot of great players who have been snubbed by both the NFL and the various postseason all-star teams. This report is also from a decade earlier than mine before the transfer portal and NIL.

My analysis does have real value for people who are smart enough to recognize it. I'm using a Virginia sample to support my assertion that high school rankings are not reliable. I've done the same analysis of Virginia Tech classes over eight years and I've found that roughly half of BOTH the four and three star recruits have not contributed at Tech. Some did contribute elsewhere so I will consider a separate calculation of guys that contributed elsewhere. Roughly half of the recruits are not going to contribute AND it's the same story everywhere. My conclusion can be anything I want it to be as long as I corroborate it with data. I have NiNE years of data from Virginia and I have SEVEN years of data for Virginia Tech. I don't agree that the ranking should be skill based and I don't believe people can accurately rate players who do not compete against each other in the same leagues. I believe classes should be evaluated based on production and that is why I primarily consider starts, snaps and stats. Post-season honors are often biased or arbitrary so I would never assign points based on those honors. I did start adding NFL analysis as well since that is another independent measure. You don't understand the analysis. I'm not doing statistics. I'm a historian, investigator and auditor. Statistics do not apply when I am reviewing the data FIVE YEARS LATER. I know which players are busts and which ones overachieved. Statistics can be manipulated so I wouldn't trust most of the big reports. My analysis includes the portal so I actually keep track of where the players transferred. I will count a guy as a contributor if he has a big season at a G6 school but D3 don't count. Read my conclusion in CAPS so you will understand what I am saying. RECRUITING RANKINGS CANNOT BE RELIED UPON WHEN THE ATTRITION RATES ON AVERAGE EXCEED FORTY PERCENT ANNUALLY. I contend that high school recruits failing to meet expectations in normal since it's not possible to predict future success of high school recruits. I've been following recruiting for over thirty years and I want people to realize that a significant percentage of these recruits will not meet expectations for various reasons. The coaches are often at fault for not developing the player or putting them in the best position.

I didn't see much separation between the top three stars and the top four stars. I would suggest that you compare the top FIVE four stars to the top FIVE three and two star players. I've been arguing that there is more talent among the two and three star players compared to the four star players. This is mainly due to the fact that there are usually ten-ish four stars compared to 50-ish three stars in Virginia each year. The numbers vary each year. I put the main summaries of my findings below. The important stat to note is that a significant percentage of the four stars do not contribute. The three stars contribute at a higher percentage but they are often at lower-tier schools. Having said that, there have been plenty of two and three star players who have contributed at higher-tier schools. The four stars are drafted at a higher rate over the three stars but I would argue that this is mainly due to the fact there are not as many four stars. There are a lot of draft busts so I wouldn't use draft status as the final judgment on a player's abiliites. I've found that a lot of players make rosters as UDFA's and a lot of these studies do not address that. Additionally, I've found that the average NFL seasons of the players is not significantly different. A lot of the players have not ended their playing careers so the season analysis is incomplete. From the analysis: Of the 2012 - 2020 VA Top 25 VA HS recruits on 247 Sports, 92% of the TWELVE five star recruits contributed to their programs. 53% of the SEVENTY-NINE four star recruits contributed to their programs and 59% of the 130 three star recruits contributed to their programs. A review of the 2012 - 2020 VA Top 25 VA HS recruits on 247 Sports reveals that three star recruits have achieved the most NFL success in absolute numbers with TWENTY-SIX NFL draftees and FIVE undrafted free agents who made rosters. The four stars are second with SIXTEEN draftees and THREE UDFA's who made rosters. The five stars are next with SIX draftees. The two star players are last with THREE draftees and FOUR UDFA's who made rosters. On a percentage basis, five stars lead the way with 50% of the TWELVE players getting drafted. The four stars are next with 24% of the SEVENTY-NINE players being drafted or making the rosters as UDFA's. The VA Top 25 three stars are next with 12% of the 130 players achieving NFL success while the overall success rate for the VA three stars is 8% of the 388 players. The two star percentage is 2% of the 295 players. While many of the players' NFL careers have not ended, a review through the 2019 class shows the average playing career of the various recruits by star rating. The SIX five star recruits have averaged 5.3 years in the NFL. The SEVENTEEN four star recruits have averaged 4.6 years. The TWENTY-FOUR three star recruits have averaged 4.4 years. The SEVEN two star and below recruits have averaged 3.0 years. I chose to use the contributor method since it's a relatively simple method and I didn't think I had the ability to assign ratings to each player. My overall philosophy is that most programs are lucky to get one or two seasons of output out of a player so I didn't differentiate between a three year starter vs a guy who started in year two. My overall objective is to warn people to not get too attached to these rankings when 50% of a typical class will not meet expectations. I've also been following recruiting for over thirty years and I realized in the aughts that many of these predictions were wrong. I was also inspired by Andy Bitter's articles that revisited Virginia Tech's classes five years later to evaluate them. I pasted the informal thesis and my conclusion from my analysis below. From the analysis: High school recruiting rankings are not reliable and should only be reviewed five or six years later. CONCLUSION: While the five star recruits have outstanding contribution rates, attrition among the remainder of the Virginia top 25 recruits remains significant. Rankings cannot be relied upon when the attrition rates on average exceed forty percent annually. There are also several players outside of the top 25 who contribute at their programs and achieve NFL success.

I'm conducting an audit five years later to evaluate the 247 rankings. I'd argue that the reason why the rankings are wrong is because they are using computer algorithms. I'd watch film or talk to a local football coach before relying on an algorithm. I'm not trying to claim to be a genius BUT the recruiting analysts are the ones claiming to be geniuses who can predict the future. I see myself as a historian or an auditor who is examining the accuracy of the predictions made by the recruiting services. I don't believe that recruiting analysts can accurately predict the future success of high school recruits and I've presented enough data to support my assertions.

P&J's post cited the stats from one year but I analyzed NINE years. P&J's data is accurate for one year and that does not match the findings of the nine years. Did you even read the report? I posted the findings below. My overall position is that the recruiting rankings are unreliable when 40% or more of the recruits in a typical class will not contribute. Of the 2012 - 2020 VA Top 25 VA HS recruits on 247 Sports, 92% of the TWELVE five star recruits contributed to their programs. 53% of the SEVENTY-NINE four star recruits contributed to their programs and 59% of the 130 three star recruits contributed to their programs. A player is deemed a contributor if they achieve significant snaps, starts and stats during one or more seasons. I already know about the recruiting ranking star systems. I've been following recruiting for over thirty years. I've analyzed the recruits in Virginia over NINE years and I've analyzed the recruits at Virginia Tech over EIGHT years. I haven't posted the Virginia Tech analysis yet but that should be enlightening. Marcus Vick is a perfect example of an overrated five star recruit. The guy had decent physical skills but he made poor decisions on an off the field. The five star recruited are predicted to be drafted on the first day of the NFL draft and Marcus Vick didn't get drafted at all. Hindsight is 20/20 so I know five years later which recruits are busts and which recruits overachieved. I came up with the contribution system and I'm doing one more year with it. You can develop your own ranking system. People are free to ignore my analysis and look at the lists of players and their accomplishments. I have also added NFL analysis to my reports as an independent measure since a lot of people do not my contribution methods. People might not believe me if I say that a recruit was underrated but they'll take notice is was drafted by the NFL and is preparing for their sixth NFL season. I am not estimating who makes it to the NFL. I can clearly identify who made it to NFL after five years and I'm also attempting to track the average number of seasons by the number of stars. I'm a historian or an auditor review these ranking for accuracy. I don't believe that recruiting services can predict with sufficient accuracy the future success of high school recruits. RECRUiTING RANKINGS ARE BS!!!!!!

85% accuracy is the percentage that would convince me that recruiting rankings are worth following. The five stars are over ninety percent so that tells me that the predictions for five stars are pretty accurate. I take issue with the predictive value for lower rated recruits since roughly fifty percent of the four and three star prospects do not meet expectations. There are also a lot of lower-rated recruits who develop into great players. Overall, I don't think these services can accurately predict which players will develop into successful players at the next level. That's why I assert that the best way to rank recruiting classes is to review them five years later. I was inspired to do this after seeing Andy Bitter's columns that ranked Tech recruiting classes after five years.

I'm just trying to let people know that 50% of these recruits will not meet expectations for various reasons. It could be off-field issues, medical issues or they could have peaked in high school. I'm also pointing out a lot of late bloomers who develop into solid players or superstars. In the academic world, 85 is a solid B while 50 is an F. I would argue that it is not possible to predict human behavior so why bother? Hindsight is 20/20 so I can analyze the recruit lists five years later and state with 100% accuracy which recruits lived up to their expectations. Recruiting rankings are not reliable so I assert that they are BS! RECRUITING RANKINGS ARE BS!

I would be comfortable with the ratings if 85% of the highly-rated recruits became contributors. That would be an acceptable level of accuracy that would eliminate my skepticism. As long as 40% of a typical class does not live up to expectations, I will not have confidence in the accuracy of the rankings.

I don't think there is a significant difference between the four stars and the three stars. My 2012-2020 analysis shows that 53% of the four stars become contributors compared to 59% of the three stars. Many of the players' careers end prematurely due to off-field incidents and injuries that cannot be predicted. In most years, the top five four stars do not overshadow the top five lower rated recruits in Virginia. The four stars get drafted at a higher but that doesn't mean they make the roster. I calculated the average NFL seasons player per star rating and there wasn't a significant difference among the three star categories. Five stars averaged 5.3 years. Four stars averaged 4.6 years and three stars averaged 4.4 years. The two stars averaged 3.0 years. Many of the players' careers have not ended so the numbers would change in future years. I'll take some of the underrated prospects like the ones below. UNRATED VT Jerod Evans, VU Diego Pavia, VT Bhayshul Tuten, VT Marcellous Hawkins TWO STAR IU Fernando Mendoza, UGA Stetson Bennett, VT Kamari Copeland THREE STAR OU Baker Mayfield

I'm not disputing the accuracy of the five star recruit rankings since their contribution rates are outstanding. The problem is that there are only thirtysomething five star recruits per year. I do dispute the reliability of the rankings for the other players since there are a lot of guys that do not live up to expectations and even more that overachieve. A lot of recruits' careers are ended by various off-field issues and these sorts of issues cannot be accurately predicted. My NFL analysis does show that four stars get drafted at a higher percentage than the three stars but that could be a result of them attending higher-profile schools. A lot of guys who get drafted do not make the roster. My analysis of the average numbers of NFL seasons of the various recruits did not find a significant difference in average career length. It's important to note that many of the players' careers have not ended so the average would change over time. Calling them BS may be too harsh but the rankings are certainly unreliable.

Of the 2012 - 2020 VA Top 25 VA HS recruits on 247 Sports, 92% of the TWELVE five star recruits contributed to their programs. 53% of the SEVENTY-NINE four star recruits contributed to their programs and 59% of the 130 three star recruits contributed to their programs. A review of the 2012 - 2020 VA Top 25 VA HS recruits on 247 Sports reveals that three star recruits have achieved the most NFL success in absolute numbers with TWENTY-SIX NFL draftees and FIVE undrafted free agents who made rosters. The four stars are second with SIXTEEN draftees and THREE UDFA's who made rosters. The five stars are next with SIX draftees. The two star players are last with THREE draftees and FOUR UDFA's who made rosters. On a percentage basis, five stars lead the way with 50% of the TWELVE players getting drafted. The four stars are next with 24% of the SEVENTY-NINE players being drafted or making the rosters as UDFA's. The VA Top 25 three stars are next with 12% of the 130 players achieving NFL success while the overall success rate for the VA three stars is 8% of the 388 players. The two star percentage is 2% of the 295 players. While many of the players' NFL careers have not ended, a review through the 2019 class shows the average playing career of the various recruits by star rating. The SIX five star recruits have averaged 5.3 years in the NFL. The SEVENTEEN four star recruits have averaged 4.6 years. The TWENTY-FOUR three star recruits have averaged 4.4 years. The SEVEN two star and below recruits have averaged 3.0 years.

This is a labor of love. I'll do one more year to get a ten year sample.

My analysis is certainly flawed but I do believe everyone would enjoy looking over the lists of recruits over the years.

You are ignoring the off-field issues that often derail a career. I'm mainly referring to academics, legal troubles, medical retirement, etc. There are also a lot of players who peak in high school and there are many late bloomers. I do agree that a scheme that fits the player's talents can make a difference. Another guy was saying in the last analysis that VA three star players would not contribute at P2 programs but that is not true. I listed below the three star and under players that did contribute at P2 schools. 2012 3 star Tyrell Chavis and 3 star Derek Dowrey 2013 3 star Daesean Hamilton 2014 3 star Wilton Speight, 3 star Trace McSorley and 2 star Cole Herdman 2015 3 star Felton Davis 2016 3 star Kyree Campbell, 3 star K'Von Wallace plus 2 star Andrew Vastardis 2017 3 star Chris Pierce, 2 star EJ Jenkins, 2 star Diamonte Tucker-Dorsey 2018 3 star Chris Collins, 3 star Billy Kemp 2019 3 star Jakai Moore, 3 star Cameron Allen, 3 star E.J. Horton, 2 star Dequece Carter, NR Antwane Wells You misinterpreted what high school recruiting rankings are. These high school analysts state that they are projecting the future performance of these recruits. You assert that rankings are a snapshot but they are supposed to be a projection. That is why I contend that recruiting rankings cannot be relied upon due to the large percentages of recruits who do not contribute. I linked below an interview with a 247 Sports official who explained what the recruiting rankings are supposed to represent.

It's true that a player who signs with a top-tier program will probably have to wait longer to get on the field but that is factored into my analysis. I generally count a guy as a contributor if he starts as a senior. Penn State had a really good record with VA recruits for a while but the running backs did not do well. You are also ignoring the off-field incidents that tend to derail careers. It can involve academics, arrests, medical retirement, etc. Many guys peak in high school and others are late bloomers. Some players thrive in different schemes. Joe Burrow might have been a bust if he hadn't transferred to LSU from OSU. Ben Bell was a stout player who was picked on by the ACC refs. They even stole a sack from him vs CAl with some crazy roughing the passer call. Bell is a sixth year player who took advantage of the covid year and the portal to put up decent numbers at a higher level. Ben Bell was a three prospect who did well but I've been more impressed with the unrated transfer portal guys like Marcellous Hawkins and Bayshul Tuten. Another guy was saying in the last analysis that VA three star players would not contribute at P2 programs but that is not true. I listed below the three star and under players that did contribute at P2 schools. 2012 3 star Tyrell Chavis and 3 star Derek Dowrey 2013 3 star Daesean Hamilton 2014 3 star Wilton Speight, 3 star Trace McSorley and 2 star Cole Herdman 2015 3 star Felton Davis 2016 3 star Kyree Campbell, 3 star K'Von Wallace plus 2 star Andrew Vastardis 2017 3 star Chris Pierce, 2 star EJ Jenkins, 2 star Diamonte Tucker-Dorsey 2018 3 star Chris Collins, 3 star Billy Kemp 2019 3 star Jakai Moore, 3 star Cameron Allen, 3 star E.J. Horton, 2 star Dequece Carter, NR Antwane Wells

I don't think you need 4 and 5 star players if the coaches can identify lower-rated recruits who play at a higher level. I refuse to believe that recruiting analysts can accurately evaluate every player in the nation. There are kids who peak in high school and kids who are late bloomers. Give me some players like UNRATED Diego Pavia, Jerod Evans, Bayshul Turen and Marcellous Hawkins. I'll take three star QB Baker Mayfield or I could settle for two star QB's Fernando Mendoza or Stetson Bennett. I've done the digging and I know the dirt. The board terms prevent me from dishing the dirt but getting kicked off the team for rules violations is usually a euphemism for getting arrested. Holmes' career was cut short due to a "rules violation" and he was convicted of a serious charge. It's always fun to see which players lived up to the hype or overachieved. People can ignore my analysis and look at the players who exceeded expectations.

Ten years is a good stopping point. High school recruiting is also less relevant in the modern era of NIL combined with the transfer portal.

I'm not an expert but I'm a historian. Hindsight is 20/20 and I can state with 100% certainty which recruits were busts five years later. I've done an unposted analysis of Virginia Tech's 2012 - 2018 classes and I found that roughly half of the four and three star recruits did not contribute at Tech. Some of them transferred elsewhere and did contribute. Of the 2012 - 2018 Virginia Tech recruits on 247 Sports, the lone five star recruit contributed, 53% of the 30 four star recruits contributed and 49% of the 130 three star recruits contributed. The lone two star recruit contributed while neither of the unranked recruits contributed. I think the recruiting analysts at the major services are clueless. I'll highlight the major misses below. Marcus Vick was a five star Jerod Evans, Bayshul Tuten and Marcellous Hawkins were UNRATED IU Fernando Mendoza and UGA Stetson Bennett were both two stars Clemson's DJU and Cade Klubnik were both five stars

I should probably use a better term for guys that do not contribute. When the contribution rate is 70%, I was saying that the attrition rate is 30%. That's not entirely accurate since a lot of guys graduate without becoming a starter. They might play on special teams. A player is deemed a contributor if they achieve significant snaps, starts and stats during one or more seasons.

I would just argue that the attrition rates are too high in order for the aggregate rankings to be relied upon. A 29% attrition rate among the 2020 four stars is too high and the 53% attrition rate among the 2020 VA Top 25 three stars is abysmal. The 2020 NFL analysis shows that TWO four stars were drafted but FIVE three stars were drafted and TWO three stars made NFL rosters as undrafted free agents. There were also a record number of contributors outside of the 2020 VA Top 25. The attrition rates are a lot higher for the four stars over the 2012 - 2020 period. The five stars are reliable but both the four and three stars have attrition rates over forty percent. Of the 2012 - 2020 VA Top 25 VA HS recruits on 247 Sports, 92% of the TWELVE five star recruits contributed to their programs. 53% of the SEVENTY-NINE four star recruits contributed to their programs and 59% of the 130 three star recruits contributed to their programs. I still contend that there is too much attrition among the players for rankings to be used as a predictor. My overall position is that rankings should only be looked at five or six years later.

** Edited by Flanker at 7/1/2026, 12:30:39 PM

I try to Keep It Simple Stupid with my ratings of plus or minus. It would be tough to quantify potential. I don't think rankings are worth much anyway. The rankings are thrown out when two teams play each other on the field. I've seen a lot of experts say that QB play in college football is more important for a team's success since most offenses cannot function without a competent QB. I would bet that most championship teams have a capable QB.

I haven't done a thorough analysis but I did notice some discrepancies between the 2025 team recruit rankings and the actual on-field results. LSU and Clemson were ranked sixth and seventh in overall talent and they had mediocre seven win seasons. Penn State was ranked tenth and they had a mediocre seven win season. Florida and Auburn were ranked 12th and 13th in the talent rankins and they had horrible losing seasons. South Carolina and Florida State were ranked 18th and 19th in the team talent rankings and they both had horrible losing seasons. Vanderbilt was ranked 55th in the talent rankings and they had a strong season. There are many factors that impact a season. The games aren't played on paper. Coaching also plays a role in developing the talent and making the right decisions during games. I still say that RECRUITING RANKINGS ARE BS!!!!!!

I think it can be done but the coaches would have to be able to identify the lower-rated players who overachieve. Recruit a few unrated players like Diego Pavia, Jerod Evans, Bayshul Tuten, Marcellous Hawkins. One big problem is that these playoff committees tend to snub programs that lack a national profile. I attached a link below to the 247 Sports Football Team Talent Composite that calculates a rating of teams based on the number of 5 stars, 4 stars and 3 stars on the team. Out of the last eight national champions, 2025 Indiana and 2023 Michigan are the only national champions that are outside the top ten in the Team Talent Composite. It's interesting to see which teams underperformed based on their supposed talent levels. 2025 Indiana / 72nd / Fernando Mendoza 2 star QB 2024 Ohio State / 3rd / Will Howard 3 star QB 2023 Michigan / 14th / J.J. McCarthy 5 star QB 2022 Georgia / 2nd / Stetson Bennett 2 star QB 2021 Georgia / 2nd / Stetson Bennett 2 star QB 2020 Alabama / 2nd / Mac Jones 3 star QB 2019 LSU / 5th / Joe Burrow 4 star QB 2018 Clemson / 6th / Trevor Lawrence 5 star QB ** Edited by Flanker at 6/17/2026, 9:36:17 PM

You can't really get too attached to players under the existing portal/NIL situation. If a player is really good, you have to worry about him bolting for other programs. It used to be that guys hit the portal to start somewhere but starters are leaving for greener pastures. Calling rankings BS might be excessive but it's an eye-catching title. I dont' think recruiting rankings are reliable when 40% of a typical recruiting class does not play much.

Hindsight is 20/20 so I believe that my evaluations are pretty solid looking at production after five years. I'm also just assiging a plus or minus to each recruit based on performance so that's easier than assigning a score to each recruit. I don't think anyone can accurately predict the success of a recruit at the next level since many of them peak in high school, get kicked off teams for rules violations, have to medically retire and lack the smarts to pass their classes and learn the playbook. I copied my overall conclusion from the analyses and pasted it below. I'm going to try to release the 2020 VA Top 25 Analysis in the next few days. High school recruiting rankings are not reliable and should only be reviewed five or six years later. While the five star recruits have outstanding contribution rates, attrition among the remainder of the Virginia top 25 recruits remains significant. Rankings cannot be relied upon when the attrition rates on average exceed forty percent annually. There are also several players outside of the top 25 who contribute at their programs and achieve NFL success.

I'm always trying to point out that recruiting is BS and that's certainly offensive to those who work in the recruiting industry. It would also be distressing to people who have spent a lot of time and money following recruiting. It can certainly be interesting but a large percentage of these guys will leave you disappointed. My overall message is to don't get too excited until the players show up for practice on campus.

I post my analyses of the VA Top 25 recruits and I label some players as contributors and a lot of posters disagree with my rating system. The troll has been bringing up the NFL for three years and I've been trying to explain that my analysis is more about college success but I did include some NFL data as an independent measure. I linked a post below where I replied to him THREE YEARS AGO.

Hendon Hooker wasn't getting good QB coaching at Tech so his play was inconsistent. He transferred to Tennessee and Josh Heupel turned him into a Tennessee legend. Joe Burrow was sitting on the bench at OSU and he became a legend at LSU. I still think a lot of talented guys don't get noticed in high school and then the prove themselves at the next level.

A player is deemed a contributor if they achieve significant snaps, starts and stats during one or more seasons. That means that a contributor played well instead of just remaining on the roster. A lot of guys cannot stay eligible for various reasons. I also recently added the NFL analysis to provide an independent measure of success since some people doubt my ability to evalutate players. I would definitely prefer Tech's contributors over those from Ohio State. You should go root for Ohio State or Alabama since you are such a fan of the P2. Tech has had good players over the past few years but the coaching staff was thoroughly incompetent.

That sounds like a good theory but I suspect there is more variability year-to-year. A class would be overrated if the 1/3 that did not meet expectations were the four and five stars. In my VA Top 25 analysis, 89% of the NINE 2012 four stars were contributors while only 33% of the SIX 2018 four stars were contributors. 86% of the FOURTEEN 2014 three stars contributed while only 33% of the EIGHTEEN 2018 three stars contributed. i linked my 2019 analysis of the VA Top 25 below and prior years can be viewed by clicking the link at the bottom of each page. My analysis of the Tech classes from 2012 - 2018 revealed that the contribution percentage hovered around 50% but the 2013 class had a contribution percentage of 72%.

I've been trying to prove for a while that high school recruiting rankings are unreliable due to the high attrition rates. Classes cannot be properly ranked when 40% or more of a class will not contribute. My analysis of the VA Top 25 recruits from 2012 - 2020 revealed that 53% of the four stars contributed while 59% of the three stars contributed. My analysis of the Va Tech classes from 2012 - 2018 revealed that 53% of the four stars contributed at Tech while 49% of the three stars contributed at Tech. In a typical class, 50% of these recruits will not play so I contend that the rankings are not reliable. RECRUITING RANKINGS ARE BS!!!!!! There are also too many exceptions. There are so many lower-rated players that outperform the vaunted four stars. A lot of these guys peak in high school, medically retire or they get kicked off the team for off-field issues. I maintain that you cannot properly evaluate players until they are in the same league playing against the same teams. There are also a lot of late bloomers. Texas Tech / OU Heisman Trophy Winner QB Baker Mayfield was a three star recruit Cal / Indiana QB Fernando Mendoza was a two star recruit. UGA QB Stetson Bennett was a two star recruit. Virginia Tech DT Kamari Copeland was a two star recruit. Virginia Tech RB's Bayshul Tuten and Marcellous Hawkins were UNRATED. Virginia Tech QB Jerod Evans was UNRATED. Virginia Tech QB Marcus Vick was a FIVE STAR. Of the 32 first round picks of the 2018 draft, 14 were 3 star prospects or lower with three former walk-ons

I'm not going to read your hypothetical pearl/oyster BS. I've done the research and I will do two more years of analysis. We will have to agree to disagree on this issue. I'm mainly focused on college performance of high school recruits but I do add the NFL success to provide an independent measure. Many college all-stars do not make it in the NFL and I would still prefer them over some of these entitled NFL players. We had a similar debate almost three years ago and I'm going to repost my reply below. We will have to agree to disagree on this issue.

Your article is from 2018 so it's a bit outdated. My research is current so I can back up what I say. Your article shows that the bulk of the players drafted were rated below 4 stars. Your article is also incomplete since it only counts players drafted AND a lot of draftees do not make the team while many UDFA's make the roster. Your article even points out that Baker Mayfield was the number one pick and he was a three star recruit. The article also notes that of the 32 first round picks of the 2018 draft, 14 were 3 star prospects or lower with three former walk-ons. A simple review of the total NFL draft picks in your article show that the bulk of the draftees are ranked below four stars. There is more talent among the recruits rated three stars or below. RECRUITING RANKINGS ARE BS!

You can't find any data to back up your claims but I've got the data. For the record, I've been following recruiting for over thirty years. I noticed the high attrition rates in the aughts and I want to make sure other people don't get too excited about players before they even step on the practice field. I do watch the Super Bowl but I don't follow games regularly. My analysis mainly concerns college success but I did add the NFL data as an independent measure. My lack of interest in the NFL is not a logical fallacy when one considers that my analysis mainly covers college success of high school recruits. Many of Tech's greatest players didn't accomplish much in the NFL and I would still want them playing for Tech. I disagree that having more NFL talent on a team is better. There are some college legends that never make it in the NFL. The NFL is a separate league that is significant different from the college football landscape. Coaching and teamwork also play a role in a team's success so talent does not always produce wins. You can't prove any of your claims because you haven't done the research. I've done the research. I don't care about the recruits that are SIGNED. I care about players that CONTRIBUTE on the field. RECRUTING RANKINGS ARE BS!

I don't even watch the NFL and I previously ignored NFL data. I just introduced NFL data recently to add an independent measure of success. I previously focused on the percentage of VA Top 25 players in each star ranking that contributed at the next level and I identified contributors outside of the VA Top 25. The main point of my analysis is to show that recruiting rankings are not reliable since 40%-50% of the prospects do not contribute at the next level for various reasons. A lot of these guys medically retire before they even play in a game. I also enjoy finding the lower-ranked players who should have been in the VA Top 25. I"m identifying trends in VA and I'm confident that a similar pattern will emerge in other states. My 2012 - 2019 analysis show that 27% of the SIXTY-THREE VA HS four stars were drafted or made the rosters as UDFA's. The VA Top 25 three stars are next with 13% of the NINETY-SEVEN players achieving NFL success while the overall success rate for the THREE-HUNDRED TWENTY-TWO VA three stars is 7%. My review of the 2012 - 2019 VA HS recruits on 247 Sports reveals that three star recruits have achieved the most NFL success in absolute numbers with TWENTY-ONE NFL draftees and THREE undrafted free agents who made rosters. The four stars are second with FOURTEEN draftees and THREE UDFA's who made rosters. The five stars are next with SIX draftees. The two star players are last with THREE draftees and FOUR UDFA's who made rosters. You pulled your stats from some website. Next time, post a source to support your stats. Many excellent players do not make it in the NFL so that's not the primary focus of my analysis. Any viewer of my response should click on the link below to see for themselves that the talent among the three and four star players exceeds the talent among the four stars in Virginia. Just pick the top five four stars and compare them to the top five three stars. There aren't as many four stars and football is a team sports that requires many players. RECRUTING RANKINGS ARE BS AND YOU'RE OVERRATED!