Leveon Bell

[TouchdownMyPants]

Only because it’s the news of the day. Here is what rivals thought of the best running back in the world:

That said, his career at MSU never screamed Hall of Famer. Makes me feel good about our guys we have committed and in the RB room, only because two-stars like Evan Sampson and no stars like Mekhi Sargent are very talented but lack mass interest.

 

[Kinnick.At.Night]

Only because it’s the news of the day. Here is what rivals thought of the best running back in the world:

View embedded media

That said, his career at MSU never screamed Hall of Famer. Makes me feel good about our guys we have committed and in the RB room, only because two-stars like Evan Sampson and no stars like Mekhi Sargent are very talented but lack mass interest.

Don't feel good about the guys we have because Bell was underrated. Feel good about the guys we have because our coaches can spot talent and develop it as well as any staff in the country.

 

[NorthDSMHawk]

Can we stop with the constant "two stars can make it big too" stuff all the time? We all know this, everyone accepts that the rating system isn't perfect and that guys fall through the cracks. We know there are a bunch of guys that don't get much interest because they don't attend the right camps.

We also know statistics, and the stats show over and over again that you're much better off with a roster full of 4-5* guys than 2-3* guys. Whether it's All Conference teams, All American teams, Draft Picks, Pro Bowls, etc, they all show that higher rated guys, on average, will have more success. The sheer number of high school players that earn a NR, 2*, or 3* ranking means there should be like 95 (probably well more when you consider NR players) of them in the NFL for every 5* guy. This isn't the case.

I went ahead and found the next best 14 NFL running backs listed by Athlon:

Gurley - 6.0 4*
Elliott - 6.0 4*
Johnson - 5.1 2*
McCoy - 6.1 4*
Kamara - 6.0 4*
Hunt - 5.3 3*
Fournette - 6.1 5*
Ingram - 4.8 4*
Howard - 5.4 2*
Freeman - 5.8 4*
Henry - 6.0 4*
Gordon - 5.8 4*
McCaffrey - 5.9 4*
Cook - 6.1 5*

5* - 2 players
4* - 9 players
3* - 1 player
2* - 3 players

Having said this, I'm excited for the guys in our program. What Kirk does with 2-3* players is nothing short of miraculous. I also have little doubt that if you took his coaching style and player development to a blueblood school, where you can pull in a top 20 class without leaving the house, he would be considered one of the top coaches in the country, year in and year out.

 

[JupiterHawk]

Bell just turned down a big contract from the Steelers. Kind of risky considering his injury history. Big season for him.

 

[ghostOfHomer777]

Only because it’s the news of the day. Here is what rivals thought of the best running back in the world:

View embedded media

That said, his career at MSU never screamed Hall of Famer. Makes me feel good about our guys we have committed and in the RB room, only because two-stars like Evan Sampson and no stars like Mekhi Sargent are very talented but lack mass interest.

Bell was quite the bruiser for MSU. They had him play at a higher weight ... likely to help his durability. Given how big he was and given how many carries he received .... his collegiate production was truly impressive.

What led him to be all the more impressive for the pros is that the Steelers had him lose weight ... and then, to the surprise of many, he ended up being an even more dynamic playmaker. Of course, as some have noted ... the added dynamicism may have been offset some by being somewhat less durable (of course, NFL Ds are a lot better that collegiate Ds too ... so that's probably part of the issue here too).

 

[Wasnt-drunk-didnt-troll]

Can we stop with the constant "two stars can make it big too" stuff all the time? We all know this, everyone accepts that the rating system isn't perfect and that guys fall through the cracks. We know there are a bunch of guys that don't get much interest because they don't attend the right camps.

We also know statistics, and the stats show over and over again that you're much better off with a roster full of 4-5* guys than 2-3* guys. Whether it's All Conference teams, All American teams, Draft Picks, Pro Bowls, etc, they all show that higher rated guys, on average, will have more success. The sheer number of high school players that earn a NR, 2*, or 3* ranking means there should be like 95 (probably well more when you consider NR players) of them in the NFL for every 5* guy. This isn't the case.

I went ahead and found the next best 14 NFL running backs listed by Athlon:

Gurley - 6.0 4*
Elliott - 6.0 4*
Johnson - 5.1 2*
McCoy - 6.1 4*
Kamara - 6.0 4*
Hunt - 5.3 3*
Fournette - 6.1 5*
Ingram - 4.8 4*
Howard - 5.4 2*
Freeman - 5.8 4*
Henry - 6.0 4*
Gordon - 5.8 4*
McCaffrey - 5.9 4*
Cook - 6.1 5*

5* - 2 players
4* - 9 players
3* - 1 player
2* - 3 players

Having said this, I'm excited for the guys in our program. What Kirk does with 2-3* players is nothing short of miraculous. I also have little doubt that if you took his coaching style and player development to a blueblood school, where you can pull in a top 20 class without leaving the house, he would be considered one of the top coaches in the country, year in and year out.

 

[Roy-munson]

Can we stop with the constant "two stars can make it big too" stuff all the time? We all know this, everyone accepts that the rating system isn't perfect and that guys fall through the cracks. We know there are a bunch of guys that don't get much interest because they don't attend the right camps.

We also know statistics, and the stats show over and over again that you're much better off with a roster full of 4-5* guys than 2-3* guys. Whether it's All Conference teams, All American teams, Draft Picks, Pro Bowls, etc, they all show that higher rated guys, on average, will have more success. The sheer number of high school players that earn a NR, 2*, or 3* ranking means there should be like 95 (probably well more when you consider NR players) of them in the NFL for every 5* guy. This isn't the case.

I went ahead and found the next best 14 NFL running backs listed by Athlon:

Gurley - 6.0 4*
Elliott - 6.0 4*
Johnson - 5.1 2*
McCoy - 6.1 4*
Kamara - 6.0 4*
Hunt - 5.3 3*
Fournette - 6.1 5*
Ingram - 4.8 4*
Howard - 5.4 2*
Freeman - 5.8 4*
Henry - 6.0 4*
Gordon - 5.8 4*
McCaffrey - 5.9 4*
Cook - 6.1 5*

5* - 2 players
4* - 9 players
3* - 1 player
2* - 3 players

Having said this, I'm excited for the guys in our program. What Kirk does with 2-3* players is nothing short of miraculous. I also have little doubt that if you took his coaching style and player development to a blueblood school, where you can pull in a top 20 class without leaving the house, he would be considered one of the top coaches in the country, year in and year out.

Not only this there is only 2-3 five star runningbacks a year.. now there is prolly 20 4 star rb and 100 3 star so the pool of three stars is much much bigger

 

[NorthDSMHawk]

Not only this there is only 2-3 five star runningbacks a year.. now there is prolly 20 4 star rb and 100 3 star so the pool of three stars is much much bigger

True, I just went with a quick number of 5% of evaluated players were 5* for the example, I think the real number is 1-2%. And that isn't including all the unranked kids out there. Based off how many 4-5* guys are on All [fill in honor here] lists and in the NFL compared to how many potential prospects there are, I'd say recruiting services are doing a pretty damn good job. Here is a good write-up:

A quarter of about a million players would be about 250,000, but the NCAA said in 2013 there were 310,000-some seniors playing football.

Here’s how long their odds are to reach various recruiting ratings, using class of 2018 data from Rivals, if we settle on 300,000 football-playing seniors as a fair estimate:

• 33 five-stars, or 0.01 percent of the class
• 399 four-stars, or 0.13 percent of the class
• 1,409 three-stars, or 0.47 percent of the class
• 1,842 two-stars, or 0.61 percent of the class
• 296,317 unrated, or 98.77 percent of the class

Players rated three-stars and up, who make up almost all of Power 5 recruiting classes, are roughly 0.6 percent of seniors playing high school football.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-fo...ecruiting-stars-rankings-high-school-football

 

[TouchdownMyPants]

Can we stop with the constant "two stars can make it big too" stuff all the time? We all know this, everyone accepts that the rating system isn't perfect and that guys fall through the cracks. We know there are a bunch of guys that don't get much interest because they don't attend the right camps.

We also know statistics, and the stats show over and over again that you're much better off with a roster full of 4-5* guys than 2-3* guys. Whether it's All Conference teams, All American teams, Draft Picks, Pro Bowls, etc, they all show that higher rated guys, on average, will have more success. The sheer number of high school players that earn a NR, 2*, or 3* ranking means there should be like 95 (probably well more when you consider NR players) of them in the NFL for every 5* guy. This isn't the case.

I went ahead and found the next best 14 NFL running backs listed by Athlon:

Gurley - 6.0 4*
Elliott - 6.0 4*
Johnson - 5.1 2*
McCoy - 6.1 4*
Kamara - 6.0 4*
Hunt - 5.3 3*
Fournette - 6.1 5*
Ingram - 4.8 4*
Howard - 5.4 2*
Freeman - 5.8 4*
Henry - 6.0 4*
Gordon - 5.8 4*
McCaffrey - 5.9 4*
Cook - 6.1 5*

5* - 2 players
4* - 9 players
3* - 1 player
2* - 3 players

Having said this, I'm excited for the guys in our program. What Kirk does with 2-3* players is nothing short of miraculous. I also have little doubt that if you took his coaching style and player development to a blueblood school, where you can pull in a top 20 class without leaving the house, he would be considered one of the top coaches in the country, year in and year out.

I only mention it because this is literally the lowest volume sports period of the year, not because I am constantly thinking of it. Started some dialogue and research though, so I am happy for the end results.

 

[onionman1]

Can we stop with the constant "two stars can make it big too" stuff all the time? We all know this, everyone accepts that the rating system isn't perfect and that guys fall through the cracks. We know there are a bunch of guys that don't get much interest because they don't attend the right camps.

We also know statistics, and the stats show over and over again that you're much better off with a roster full of 4-5* guys than 2-3* guys. Whether it's All Conference teams, All American teams, Draft Picks, Pro Bowls, etc, they all show that higher rated guys, on average, will have more success. The sheer number of high school players that earn a NR, 2*, or 3* ranking means there should be like 95 (probably well more when you consider NR players) of them in the NFL for every 5* guy. This isn't the case.

I went ahead and found the next best 14 NFL running backs listed by Athlon:

Gurley - 6.0 4*
Elliott - 6.0 4*
Johnson - 5.1 2*
McCoy - 6.1 4*
Kamara - 6.0 4*
Hunt - 5.3 3*
Fournette - 6.1 5*
Ingram - 4.8 4*
Howard - 5.4 2*
Freeman - 5.8 4*
Henry - 6.0 4*
Gordon - 5.8 4*
McCaffrey - 5.9 4*
Cook - 6.1 5*

5* - 2 players
4* - 9 players
3* - 1 player
2* - 3 players

Having said this, I'm excited for the guys in our program. What Kirk does with 2-3* players is nothing short of miraculous. I also have little doubt that if you took his coaching style and player development to a blueblood school, where you can pull in a top 20 class without leaving the house, he would be considered one of the top coaches in the country, year in and year out.

Why should he stop reminding people of the 2 and 3 star players that turn out to be great just because you’re tired of it? You went on and filled our heads with all the 4-5 star stuff, and we’ve all heard that too... can you stopl that, too?

 

[anon_gjzkhykcp9iuj]

Why should he stop reminding people of the 2 and 3 star players that turn out to be great just because you’re tired of it? You went on and filled our heads with all the 4-5 star stuff, and we’ve all heard that too... can you stopl that, too?

The difference is in is a fallacy, the other is not.

 

[NorthDSMHawk]

can you stopl that, too?

 

[NorthDSMHawk]

I only mention it because this is literally the lowest volume sports period of the year, not because I am constantly thinking of it. Started some dialogue and research though, so I am happy for the end results.

No worries, not necessarily directed at you. Summer sucks.

 

[grayhair81]

There was a really good article about a corrollary between stars and making an NFL roster in the "on twitter today" thread yesterday. It was one of the most poignant articles I have seen about this. As someone said earlier in the thread, it is a tribute to the coaches that they can consistently turn out NFL players from 2 and 3 star athletes. Don't forget that the star rating is not intended to be an absolute predictor of a recruit's potential-it is meant to show how ready he is to perform at the collegiate level. Accordingly, a 4 star is more ready than a 3 star. Some examples of this would be AJE, Daniels, and Bulaga (going back a few years). They all played extensively as true freshmen. Bulaga and Daniels left college a year early largely because they started so early in college.

 

[Jim4edwards]

There was a really good article about a corrollary between stars and making an NFL roster in the "on twitter today" thread yesterday. It was one of the most poignant articles I have seen about this. As someone said earlier in the thread, it is a tribute to the coaches that they can consistently turn out NFL players from 2 and 3 star athletes. Don't forget that the star rating is not intended to be an absolute predictor of a recruit's potential-it is meant to show how ready he is to perform at the collegiate level. Accordingly, a 4 star is more ready than a 3 star. Some examples of this would be AJE, Daniels, and Bulaga (going back a few years). They all played extensively as true freshmen. Bulaga and Daniels left college a year early largely because they started so early in college.

Is this 100% true? I feel like it's a mix of both potential and readiness - though it may also be a difference between football ratings and bball ratings considering the pace of development for the two sports varies?