Howdy MGoBlog Community, Genuine question/comment here about recruiting. Was chatting with Univ of Texas grad/friend at work and discussing UA all star game. He mentioned how he didn't watch and how he didn't care to even know about the "stars" coming to UT, including #1 rated safety in 2018. He's so over the hype and just in a genuine "show me" state of mind, like many of us. It got me thinking about the raging debates on here, stars vs "stars" vs 3 stars vs trust the coaches etc. My question is, in the information age of recruiting, now that we have what...15 or more years collected and archived, is there anything that points to a sweet spot of recruiting, or maybe a sweet spot for certain programs? Might be difficult with coaching changes. I.e. in my mind, I could see a mid to low four star rating being a better college player more often for Michigan then a five star guy. Granted, we don't get too many 5 star types each class like other blue bloods. A lower ranked 4 star is talented but maybe he's less inclined to think he's "arrived" already. Do recruits ever get rated on how they fit a particular program or scheme or are these ratings strictly future potential and pro prospects 3-4 years later? Full caveat: I do think recruiting rankings matter and I understand their correlation, over time, with sustained success.