Jaron Dukes and Deveon Smith Get 3 Stars from Rivals

Submitted by hart20 on

Jaron Dukes and Devon Smith both received 5.7 3-star rankings from Rivals. 5.7 is the highest ranking for a 3-star on Rivals. Dukes is the #43 WR and Smith is the #32 RB. 

Gareon Conley and Khalid Hill are not yet ranked. 

Hopefully we see all of thier rankings improve throughout their senior seasons, because as we all know, recruiting stars are everything.

Link: http://rivals.yahoo.com/michigan/football/recruiting/commitments/2013

redhousewolverine

March 19th, 2012 at 8:26 PM ^

He is a great addition to the team. Rivals isn't discounting that but merely stating they do not think he has elite potential as an NFL prospect. Remember Rivals does their rankings based on NFL potential and, although he might be able to truck kids at the high school level, maybe Rivals does not think that his size is valuable enough to overcome his lack of speed in the NFL. Speed has been becoming more of a commodity these days.

Also, he still has his entire SR year. As someone mentioned below, there is plenty of opportunity to rise just like Pipkens did (I don't think he is a 5 star talent though). Several Ohio recruiting guys are very high on him. He could be a valuable asset at RB for years but not be much of a contributor in the NFL, which is what Rivals attempts to measure. Plenty of kids have careers like that.

Jon Benke

March 20th, 2012 at 12:16 AM ^

So I wouldn't go so far to say it's ridiculous!

We have a few guys that, it seems, one or two sites love, but one or another just aren't that high on, which should make for an interesting senior season.  I am guessing Michigan will have more guys be universal four stars, than universal three stars .. by signing day, and the fun for us, bein' our class will be basically full before the season starts, is watching the rise and fall - though I expect more to rise - of our recruits in said ratings.  I read what scout.com has to say about Patrick Kugler, by the way, and it makes me think that 247Sports just doesn't get it or see it ---- yet, though I think they will.  Scout.com isn't as high as the other two on guys like Taco Charlton, Jourdon Lewis, and David Dawson, just like Rivals and 247 aren't as high on guys like DeVeon Smith and Gareon Conley ... maybe they don't like kids with "EON" in their first name, I don't know, though I suspect these rankings to be more the same by signing day, one way or another.  Signing Day for 2012 was last month, we have 16 commits now, and can easily be at 20 by the end of spring practice, no later than the end of summer/beginning of the season, that's ridiculous.  I bet we have more that'll rise.

umfan323

March 19th, 2012 at 6:02 PM ^

Dont worry he still has his Sr year to show off his talents let us not forget how low Ondre Pipkins was rated then he became 5 star ...

BeatOSU52

March 19th, 2012 at 6:12 PM ^

I know you can't judge someone just from his highlight tapes, but after watching all them, I don't know how this kid can be anything less than a 4 star.

DenverBuckeye

March 20th, 2012 at 11:28 AM ^

Dukes is a good player, but really he didn't light any defensive player up in that game. I was there and Trotwood sent at least 8 guys into the box the entire game. Burrows was crashing on the run 90% of the time. Dukes was able to sit in the holes of the zone matched up against Bam Bradley (safety) for the majority of his catches. He was too tall for Bam to handle on jump balls, but the Trotwood coaches were obviously not worried about losing in the passing game. Duke's QB is not a world beater and missed on a ton of throws. Hence the reason while Trotwood still won even with Dukes going off.

DenverBuckeye

March 20th, 2012 at 11:31 AM ^

This is also why Burrows is still considered a 4-5 star player on all of the services and Dukes is a consensus 3 star. He's a good player, but he doesn't light up any competent secondary. He doesn't have the speed or agility to be a real game breaker. Great red zone target or possession receiver.

Magnum P.I.

March 19th, 2012 at 6:29 PM ^

I don't know if they have an anti-Michigan bias, but I do think that Rivals and Scout dig in their heels big time over recruits for whom there is an early rankings discrepancy (e.g., Deveon). It's like they decide, "oh, Deveon Smith, he's Scout's boy." Each service has to create the impression that they're original and aren't following the other's step. 

Pdeaner

March 20th, 2012 at 1:29 AM ^

You are exactly right.  Also if a player attends one of the combines hosted/attended by a recruiting service they tend to show him more love.  ESPN has the sparq combines, and I have seen Ferrell promoting rivals combines on twitter.  I think if a player attends then they become "their guy."  They also base a lot of their initial rankings before the senior season on these combine results.

ChiCityWolverine

March 19th, 2012 at 6:20 PM ^

I'm okay with these guys getting high 3-star initial ratings. The difference between a high 3-star and a low 4-star on these sites isn't earth-shattering, the 5-star system is merely an arbitrary way to grade recruits. Not everyone Michigan recruits that has a nice highlight tape will be a 4 or 5-star, and not every impact player on Michigan is a 4 or 5-star. We've taken skilled players across the board (5-stars or 3-stars), and with the depth that we should have in the coming years, the top guys will rise to the top and Michigan will be Michigan again, period.

Bo Knows

March 19th, 2012 at 6:32 PM ^

Hopefully this isn't a Wormley situation where rivals chooses to give a monster talent who could step on a college field today a 3 star, but it very well could be

GRBluefan

March 19th, 2012 at 6:38 PM ^

I watch smith I can't help but think of another similar rb coming out of high school named Kevin Grady. Physically dominating inferior athletes, but how will it translate? I think the wait and see ranking from rivals is prudent.

colin

March 19th, 2012 at 9:48 PM ^

Kevin didn't show a whole lot of shake and between the tackles skill in his highlight. Just straight trucked kids with his size. I think Smith shows a lot more vision/shake/understanding of what he's doing. I still don't think that necessarily means definite 4 star skills, but he's hard not to like. Reminds me of a bigger Iowa back.

Dailysportseditor

March 20th, 2012 at 2:55 AM ^

If you look at his videos and the comments by the recruiting analysts, Smith has (1) a great initial burst through a hole and (2) good lateral movement to avoid tackles. True, like Grady he doesn't have top-end sprinter speed; on the other hand, he has faced decent competition and averaged over 10 yards per carry as a junior.

WolvinLA2

March 19th, 2012 at 7:00 PM ^

Both of those guys are relatively close to getting 4-star rankings when you look at their position rankings.  Smith is the #32 RB and they have 26 RBs with 4 stars.  Dukes is the #43 WR and they have like 35 WRs with 4 stars.  Especially since Rivals usually increases the number of 4-stars over the course of the year, both of these guys could be in 4-star territory before it's all said and done. 

Also, I feel like a RB with early offers from both M and OSU should get 4-stars on that alone.  Especially in a year like this when both schools are so hot on the recruiting trail.

EDIT: Offers are a good way to determine which site's ranking to trust.  Look at the last few 4-stars on Rivals' RB list and who has offered them.  The last 4-star has one offer, from Arizona, and he's a SoCal kid from a school that pumps out talent.  Another crazy one is the #21 RB, Alvin Kamara, barely a 4-star and not a Rivals 250 member, has offers from Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Georgia and USC (Southern Cal), among others.  He should probably be higher than he is.

bklein09

March 19th, 2012 at 7:33 PM ^

I have been thinking about this for a while, but if we could ever get to a place in recruiting where we had 100% accurate data on who had what offers, it would be possible to put together some kind of ranking system that is based solely on the quality of offers.

Coaches are the best possible evaluators of talent, and that makes offers a better inidication of talent than the opinion of some guru for scout, rivals, etc. 

You would have to find a way to quantify the "quality" of each offer. But it is something that I am sure someone on here *cough* Mathlete *cough* could probably pull off in a weekend. 

Just an idea I had. 

turd ferguson

March 19th, 2012 at 8:33 PM ^

Yeah, I think this is the biggest problem.  There are other issues, too, like the fact that equally good recruits in two different areas won't get equally good offers.  For example, a good recruit in Florida might have offers from UF, FSU, Miami, Alabama, Auburn, LSU, etc., while an equally good recruit in Colorado could have a really modest list.

denardogasm

March 19th, 2012 at 9:20 PM ^

I don't see the problem here, since even though the recruits would appear to the untrained eye to be equally good, the one from SEC country would actually be better.  The bonus points for living in the south are already factored into the current system.  You really can't have an accurate ranking system without this.

TheGeneral

March 19th, 2012 at 8:00 PM ^

The ratings seem about right. Let's hope the recruits don't feel that way and it adds fuel to the fire. And that in turn pushes them to exceed said ratings.
Go Blue!