CB Delonte Hollowell moved to 3 star on Rivals
Hollowell #21 CB 3*
Dallas Crawford #23 CB 3*
Not sure why Hollowell would take a dip to a 3*, Cass Tech is undefeated and a large part of that is from the play of Hollowell.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/Michigan/football/recruiting/rankings/rank-2663
November 11th, 2010 at 3:39 PM ^
How the hell did it take this long?
November 11th, 2010 at 4:11 PM ^
usually mean nothing. 5 stars can be busts, 2 stars can be All-Americans. Its. how hard he works and how well he's coached.
That being said, ESPN has him as a 4 star still.
November 11th, 2010 at 6:57 PM ^
do actually generally coorelate with success. What you're showing is the exceptions. Chad Henne (5 star) vs Justin Feagin (2 star) is generally what will happen.
November 11th, 2010 at 6:33 PM ^
Personally, I thought Hollowell was overrated from the beginning. I suspected he'd be a 3-star back when they gave out the original rankings. 5'8" corners have certain limitations and, like Boubacar Cissoko, I don't see Hollowell as a big playmaker (one-handed catch in one-on-ones aside).
Not to take anything away from Hollowell, but I've made one-handed catches in competitive situations, too. I think that one-handed catch has given Hollowell more traction amongst Michigan fans than it probably should.
Anyway, a 3-star prospect sounds about right. I like Dallas Crawford a little more, and I'm a big fan of the Countess offer.
November 11th, 2010 at 7:14 PM ^
I'm also weary of little corners after watching BC try to defend Michael Floyd. It must be something in the water that makes Cass Tech corners shorter than 5-8.
November 11th, 2010 at 7:33 PM ^
Yeah, I'm weary of short cornerbacks as well. After all, I live in Minnesota so I watch Vikings games every weekend.
And geez, that midget Antoine Winfield really, really is no good, AND he's only 5'9" (and I've met him before - good luck on that 5'9" business).
November 11th, 2010 at 7:36 PM ^
Well, you've named one good 5'9" cornerback.
I guess they all must be great!
November 11th, 2010 at 8:49 PM ^
Right.
Just like the other guy cherry-picked a recent flame-out recruit.
With a sample size of 1 we can play the game all day long. I'd prefer we let the guy show up, redshirt if possible, and then find out in his 3rd year whether he can contribute. Color me patient.
November 11th, 2010 at 9:09 PM ^
The difference is that his example is more representative of the overall trend.
Yours is not.
November 11th, 2010 at 9:30 PM ^
I don't know if you're right or you're wrong, but I am sure that your argument sucks.
November 11th, 2010 at 10:02 PM ^
Luckily for me, I'm more interested in being right than satisfying your requirements for making a "good argument."
November 11th, 2010 at 10:34 PM ^
Your bad argument means there's no reason to think you're right.
Height is already taken into account by the services. You think height is an under appreciated asset in a corner. The burden is on you to show this. Expecting us to just assume that's the case because you say so is asinine.
November 11th, 2010 at 10:39 PM ^
It should be common knowledge for people who follow football.
I guess it's not.
November 11th, 2010 at 10:43 PM ^
It's already taken into account by the services. Dear Lord.
November 11th, 2010 at 11:14 PM ^
I understand that. But I'm glad you boldfaced it.
Here's a bit of knowledge just to make common knowledge more common. You might be interested in the ideal cornerback size.
November 11th, 2010 at 11:34 PM ^
Bravo for doing this, research is hard and time consuming. But while I applaud you for doing this and think it's interesting, it's far from dispositive on the question of whether the services undervalue height in corners. There are two problems in that regard: one, it shows correlations of success in the NFL rather than college and two, it doesn't speak to the services' evaluations.
November 11th, 2010 at 11:36 PM ^
I think someone got confused somewhere. Maybe it was me. Maybe not.
I'm not arguing whether the services undervalue height in corners or not. I really don't care whether they do or not. I think the recruiting services are a fairly accurate guideline and nothing more. I'm not a part of the 3-star mafia or anything.
The only point I've tried to make in this thread is that a) I'm not a huge fan of Delonte Hollowell's skill and b) I'm not a huge fan of short cornerbacks in general.
Whether Rivals/Scout/ESPN value height or not, I really don't care.
November 12th, 2010 at 5:14 AM ^
You are actually one of the most patient people on this blog. You have the patience not to worry about recruiting until signing day. I usually waste time at work reading up on possible future Michigan players.
November 11th, 2010 at 7:30 PM ^
Right on cue.
November 11th, 2010 at 7:37 PM ^
Why are you even reading this thread? You don't even care about recruiting...right?
November 11th, 2010 at 8:50 PM ^
He's a commit, so now I care.
Yes, I'm parsing.
November 11th, 2010 at 9:11 PM ^
Well, that's a good reason to come here and try to pick a fight.
November 11th, 2010 at 7:06 PM ^
Hollowell's ranking among CB's didn't change at all - which suggests their opinion of him didn't change much either.
November 11th, 2010 at 8:54 PM ^
People focus to much on the "stars" system. He is still the same player regardless of his rating. Especially if people have proof he is playing well, then his rating doesn't really matter. He is still a good cornerback who I believe will help are team.
November 11th, 2010 at 8:57 PM ^
This thread is overflowing with fail.
November 11th, 2010 at 9:41 PM ^
This thread is overflowing with Magnus.
I fixed that for you.
November 11th, 2010 at 9:57 PM ^
Wow, your comments are thoroughly insightful and intriguing.
November 11th, 2010 at 10:06 PM ^
Not to take anything away from Hollowell, but I've made one-handed catches in competitive situations, too.
How can anyone measure up to the brilliance of this comment?
November 11th, 2010 at 10:36 PM ^
You either don't understand the context of the comment, or you're too interested in arguing with me to try. I'm not even going to bother trying to explain anything to you.
November 11th, 2010 at 10:12 PM ^
Cissoko seems to lower our hope for Hollowell, and that may not be fair? Yes, he was short, but that never seemed to be Boubacar's problem as much as he could not ever cover anyone unless he was holding onto them. I'm pretty sure he could have been 6'2" and been still pretty hapless out there.
November 11th, 2010 at 10:40 PM ^
His lack of height might be a reason that he held on so much.
November 11th, 2010 at 10:46 PM ^
I'm sure you're right to some extent. He was "in over his head",
November 12th, 2010 at 5:46 AM ^
For no other reason than just seeing who was the tallest and shortest prospects for the class of 2011, I decided to poke around on the internet. All the chatter above made me curious so, I used the recruit search and database on rivals. (setting it to search anyone taller than 5'5").
The tallest player who is rated by rivals is Keelin Smith @ 6'3" 185lbs, committed to FSU.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/michigan/football/recruiting/player-Keelin-Smit…
The shortest player who is rated by rivals is Kishon Wilcher @ 5'6" 154lbs, committed to Toledo. Interestingly he is from Cass Tech and I believe he is the son of the head coach.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/michigan/football/recruiting/player-Kishon-Wilc…
These are listed heights for rivals so who know how accurate they are. This search only included CBs and not athletes that might project to CB in college.
November 12th, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^
I remember watching the army all american game and watching Cissoko get torched on a couple bombs and I said to myself, This i don't think is gonna work out too good for Michigan
Guess I was right