OT: 0 Star Prospect Has 30 Offers
I thought this was a really interesting article. The sites have caught up to him now and he is rated a 4* prospect. However, he was not rated when he started reeling in offers. This is a really good read for those overly worried about the number of stars our recruits have.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2632277-meet-nick-brahms-the-nations…
April 15th, 2016 at 11:15 AM ^
This is at the bottom of the article. It took an article and about 24 hours for Nick Brahms to go from a 0 star to 4 star.
UPDATE: As of 1:00 pm CT on April 13, Brahms' rating has been adjusted, and he's now a 4-star offensive guard and the No. 189 player overall in the 247Sports composite ratings.
April 15th, 2016 at 12:48 PM ^
You could say that again
April 15th, 2016 at 11:38 AM ^
0 to 4 real fucking quick
April 15th, 2016 at 12:45 PM ^
Not now, Lloyd
April 15th, 2016 at 12:19 PM ^
sure seems to hold quite a bit.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:16 AM ^
There's a difference between underrated and not rated.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:18 AM ^
that someone got noticed for their playing ability after going to camps that were not located at university facilities? Where was his hudl and Youtube videos though?
April 15th, 2016 at 11:19 AM ^
There is some great data science to be done if you could get an accurate and complete order of when kids are offered and then match it with their star rating. I think you could probably correlate some programs offering kids and their rating going up, but also to see which schools offers have the best knock on effect for further offers from other schools.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:30 AM ^
As elementary as this story is, it should be required reading for anyone before they comment on recruiting.
"Bleacher Report" and "required reading" were terms I never expected to see in juxtaposition. Especially from Magnus and the like. Bleacher report has come a long way.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:31 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:34 AM ^
RB Michigan has ever recruited has been a bust.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:39 AM ^
Brandon Minor was a 5-star in my heart.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:40 AM ^
Not sure if they did stars back in the late 90's , but I believe Anthony Thomas was one of the top RB coming out of high school.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:40 AM ^
That suggests there is something wrong at Michigan, not necessarily with recruiting rankings.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:45 AM ^
There was something wrong at Michigan, but we got that coaching thing fixed now.
April 15th, 2016 at 12:23 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:34 AM ^
Right, but the problem is when people start worrying about stars 12 months or 18 months before National Signing Day. The ratings aren't finalized until late January, so fretting now about kids who - for whatever reasons - are just entering the recruiting landscape is largely pointless. As we saw with this kid (and Chase Lasater and others), all it takes is a few hours to get rated.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:36 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:59 AM ^
To sit and hope that the recruiting pundits change their mind about a guy our staff saw fit to offer a year earlier. What they think has no impact on the kid or how well he does at Michigan (other than possibly giving him added motivation for being 'disrespected').
I'm not arguing "recruiting rankings don't matter" but when the sites automatically bump up ever low-ranked kid who signs with Michigan there's a clear lack of objectivity in the rankings.
They are what they are - useful and interesting and fun to follow - but they should also be taken with a grain of salt and considered within the context of offers and how their recruitment played out. The people putting these rankings together are not actually experts. If they were, they'd have been snatched up by NFL or powerhouse college programs. This is for entertainment.
The rankings are often made after sophomore year and adjusted by junior year. There was a time programs didn't offer anyone until their senior year and these are often kids still developing physically.
In short, consider context. And, if the coaches earn your trust, then trust them. Harbaugh has earned it, IMO.
April 15th, 2016 at 12:18 PM ^
I believe it's been shown that preseason rankings are better indicators of NCAA tournament performance than final season rankings (for the AP Poll anyway). Ranking overall are good indicators of player production, but we have no idea if the later rankings are better than the earlier rankings because no one has looked at that (to my knowledge).
Just sayin. Fretting EVER about HS player rankings is largely pointless.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:43 AM ^
This statement is generally true but misleading. As far as I know, these "studies" always use the final recruiting rankings. There's a lot that happens to those rankings in the months/years between the time that rankings are released (and some guys commit )and the time the rankings are finalized. It's premature to focus too much on recruiting rankings if it's still well before signing day, since a lot of recruits will be basically unknown to recruiting services but very carefully scouted by coaches.
EDIT: Just read Magnus's post above. We're saying the same thing.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:59 AM ^
No study (to my knowledge) has ever looked at the rankings at a certain point in time, say the September before signing day or even as of signing day and correlated that with NFL or college success. Every study looks at the final rankings, and who the hell knows how they change after signing day?
Everything he said is a fact. Every study has shown it correlates with success on field. It is a slam dunk case. Another fact is that 9 of the last 10 champions have had at least one #1 or #2 rated class in the immediate past before their championships.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:44 AM ^
The real question is: is Hudl caught up? Because that's what all coaches should use instead of camps.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:52 AM ^
"The Opening". Isn't that particular event banned now?
April 15th, 2016 at 12:20 PM ^
IIRC correctly, The Opening is ran by nike trainers and NFL players, not college coaches so it should be allowed still.
April 15th, 2016 at 12:24 PM ^
Those guys should be allowed to spend time with their families too!
I trust that the NCAA will act quickly to close this dangerous and harmful loophole that is clearly being abused by Nike, a company well known for employing child labor.
April 15th, 2016 at 12:25 PM ^
Correct. The Opening, the Rivals 5-star Challenge, etc. will still exist.
April 15th, 2016 at 11:55 AM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 12:00 PM ^
Are not something everyone needs to trash. They are not, of course, the only determining factor, and yes, they can be off.
But to trash them, or call them wrong is silly. These are guys who do actually SCOUT recruits, go to games, camps, etc, and compile their (and here's an MGBLOG favorite word)--DATA.
I know, I know. If Harbaugh recruits a blind gerbil, it will be OK because well, it's Harbaugh.
But th3e recruiting writers really do know what they're talking about, and again, it might pale in comparison to a message board genius with 12,000 sissy points, but I'd trust them more often than not.
April 15th, 2016 at 12:24 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 12:28 PM ^
Just more proof that the 'star system' is designed for the fans and not for the coaches. I wish more fans would understand that.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I consider offers more important than stars, for sure. I think Mathlete or someone like him has done rankings by this method - I bet they would outperform the rivals/scout/247 rankings as an indicator.
But offers too are limited because of the differences in what constitues an offer and the way the information is received (i.e., some kids are lying or misinterpreting). The other part of it is kids who are offered early and commit will sometimes not get the offers they would have if they waited around till signing day. So you still have to consider the context.
ThatEscalatedQuickly.gif