50 SEC players who excelled as three-star recruits

[Cocklover]

Three-star recruits are more or less disregarded as being an instant-impact player. Some are diamonds in the rough; some don’t fully develop until they hit the training table and weight room in college; and some players explode and were notably a huge miss in the rankings.

Note: Johnny Manziel is one of them and he won the Heisman

Just thought all of this was interesting.


South Carolina

DJ Swearinger, DB
Connor Shaw, QB
Devin Taylor, DE
Shaq Wilson, LB

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/201...recruits-2012/

[DiamondGamecock]

Nice! I am an advocate for players that are 3 star. A lot of the best players in CFB history were not 5 star players, or even 4 star. IMO, it isn't the star caliber of a player, it's how you coach em up.

[Smashies_AC30]

The number of 3-star players USC has had in recent years that proved to be outstanding on the field, combined with Spurrier's continued excitement about this recruiting season (seems to be the same as last cycle) gives me plenty to smile about.

Go cocks!

[KC85]

Star rankings are about potential, and not the end of the discussion.

[CoverTwo]

The biggest misconception in the world of recruiting is that a 3 star is an average player. I typically stay out of the star discussion, but that is the one thing that irritates me sometimes.

[Goofyboy]

"Coach 'em up" is an oft-used phrase that can be a huge overstatement. The biggest factor set in a player's further development at the next level is that player's motivation, dedication, work-ethic. Coaches can lead, push, cajole, teach, encourage, and threaten, and trashtalk. Whether any of that sticks and helps a player to develop depends greatly on the player's own attitudes and behavior. A strong program certainly creates the platform for a player's development - and team culture is a strong contributor. The ultimate outcome, however, is mostly in the payers own hands. I would bet most Cocktalk posters could give examples (plus and minus) of players they have followed who grew or shrank under the same "coaching."

[boonyg]

also to be considered is that some kids might be a considered a 4 or 5 star out of high school but maybe they are already close to peaking. some kids are a 2 or 3 star and still not close to their peak ability wise. also, stars don't account for effort. you have to be willing to work hard to be good at the college level and beyond. you may be able to dominate in high school based on ability alone but beyond that a work ethic is needed. Just my 2 cents. to add to your list sidney rice was a 3 star.

[gripitandripit2007]

Thought this was awesome too...one of the articles on the side of this article...

http://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/201...asons-win-100/

"gotta love the ole ball coach"

[MillerTime843]

3 Star means low pro potential but a solid but limited D-1 prospect.

[lakefire]

I was under the understanding that stars were how likely the recruit could play as a freshman, not potential.

IE, a 5* is going to be starting his freshman year, and a 3* or 2* will likely need to RS.

[sc455]

bottom line on the stars is that there are only a certain number of stars given at any level..

there has to be a break between 5 star and 4...same with 4 and 3 and even 3 and 2.

i love the example of pharoh cooper. lets say for example purposes that he twisted his ankle during shrine practice...he would be a 3 star and many fans who follow stars only would discount him as a 3 star run of the mill kid.

a critical part of a coaches job is in evaluation. our coaches evaluated him and wanted him, 3 star or not.

[badfish17]

Eric Norwood, Kenny McKinley, Jared Cook and Jasper Brinkley were all three star recruits as well.

[USCremedy]

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/footbal...ings/rank-1803

check out the first 30, which are all 5 stars... then think about how many of them are in the NFL. Rivals does a pretty good job evaluating talent.

[usc1]

Star ratings are the percentage chance that the player will excel at the next level.

[roosterdude21]

Originally Posted by lakefire

I was under the understanding that stars were how likely the recruit could play as a freshman, not potential.

IE, a 5* is going to be starting his freshman year, and a 3* or 2* will likely need to RS.

That's a fair yet interesting point. Bc it's as if a recruit commits to bama or ND, etc... Those recruits seem to pick up another star or are considered phenoms although they will most likely be buried on the depth chart. However if we were to get that same recruit, for some reason the recruit tumbles down and sometimes out of the top rankings. I enjoy the star rankings but just like anything else NCAAF, I think it's more about pageantry

[BuCockyfan]

Originally Posted by roosterdude21

That's a fair yet interesting point. Bc it's as if a recruit commits to bama or ND, etc... Those recruits seem to pick up another star or are considered phenoms although they will most likely be buried on the depth chart. However if we were to get that same recruit, for some reason the recruit tumbles down and sometimes out of the top rankings. I enjoy the star rankings but just like anything else NCAAF, I think it's more about pageantry

Because Marcus and Jadeveon tumbled out of the rankings right? The whole "if x commits to us he loses a star" argument is only used by those programs that don't recruit well. WE got some solid kids this year, but we didn't recruit well.

[usc1]

I'll say this. If our staff could pick any 25 guys in the country to fill out a class, 95% would be 4 or 5 stars. You have to get the best players you can who also fit the character of your team and our staff does that well.

[GamecockSuperFan]

Wouldnt you have to "coach up" the 4 and 5 star players just as much as the 3's though? I mean most high school players don't come in with alot of knowledge on technique and fundamentals. I guess 4 & 5 stars just have a higher upside? I don't know. I stopped putting a lot of thought into stars.

[gocockswyn]

We will take more of those kind of three star recruits any day.

[gamecock88]

Honestly, I think they've had 5* moments but have overall played like 3* guys, excluding Manziel. Taylor and Wilson probably got the best out of their ability and maxed out but both gave 5* effort. Shaw still has upside and DJ struggled fundamentally at times.