In the end it is overrated in some instances...look at these programs with 5 and 4 star recruits that are not able to win consistently a la Cal, Texas, Ole Miss, Michigan State.My3Cats wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 2:12 pmAlso I think that evaluations come from participation in the higher visibility clinics, which cost a lot of money to attend, and which would have the right people in attendance to do the evaluations. I don't believe that stars are awarded based on games played because you can't get scouts out to all high school games around the country.Palolo_2LA wrote: ↑Sun Mar 03, 2019 4:56 amRankings are based on cumulative evaluations of the players. Higher stars don't equate/guarantee these guys being better players down the road...just a higher likelihood. However, that's all nullified by players who fit in your system, are coachable and driven to get better.
For UH, it's strictly about the right guys being plugged into their system...the best slots have been shorter, quicker guys that would not be valued targets for bigger programs. For the OL, they need to be able to hold point for 3-4 seconds, so you need stout guys. For QBs, since Rolo is running a RnS blend with RPO, they need QB that are also can run.
