January 23rd, 2013 at 4:24 PM ^
I'm excited to see how San Francisco's offense does against the 5-3-6 defense the Ravens are apparently planning on playing.
January 23rd, 2013 at 6:46 PM ^
I believe there is a joke here I am missing...
January 23rd, 2013 at 6:44 PM ^
1. NFL finds talent regardless of pedigree. If you can play, then you have a shot.
2. Michigan has just 1 starter as the last 5 years were thin with elite talent. We do have 50% of the coaches, though.
3. Miami's glory days were 10+ years ago. Lewis, Reed, Gore, McKinnie are some old dudes who were badasses in their prime.
January 23rd, 2013 at 6:45 PM ^
Nice to look at but means nothing. Ridiculously small sample size.
Maybe if someone can take all the teams 2-deep rosters that made the playoffs and check their star ratings. It would expand the sample size quite a bit and assumes that we all agree that a team making the playoffs indicates a "good" NFL team. Do this over the past 5-6 years depening on how long it's reasonable to give a drafted college student time to crack the starting spot on an NFL team. Also, I'm not sure how far back we should go because star ratings didn't always exist.
Cross check Rivals/Scout/Espn and give the player an "average" star rating and also do it for each individual star rating. This will give us a chance to see which site, possibly, is slightly better at evaluating talent projected into the NFL. The average star rating could tell us if ratings mean jack squat in the NFL.
This would take a lot of work, but I would REALLY like to see this done.