On The Subject of 2 Star Safeties

Submitted by Robbie Moore on February 1st, 2010 at 5:23 PM

I draw your attention to a noted two star recruit from North Miami Beach. Got no major offers and wound up at Western Michigan. Went first in the second round of the 2009 NFL draft. Yes, Louis Delmas. Think Dantonio or Tressel or Paterno would like to pickup a Delmas in this years recruiting? If they listen to Mike Valenti and the other assorted masters of the universe, they wouldn't becaue he has only two stars.

Now, I doubt Ray Vinopal will become Delmas (certainly in the dreadlock department) but if you thought he had a chance of becoming half of Delmas, would you gamble your 25th scholarship of the class on him? Thought so.


these wolverines

February 1st, 2010 at 5:34 PM ^

give the cat a chance to put on a helmet before you say hes not worthy. the last two years we have struggled, now if we won the national championship the last two years then maybe but we need all the help we can get.

go blue


February 1st, 2010 at 5:43 PM ^

If Michigan and Florida were to trade recruiting rankings places, I have a feeling all these "Stars don't matter" threads and diaries would go away very quickly.


February 1st, 2010 at 5:53 PM ^

Florida just stole a 2-star recruit away from Temple. With 2 national championships in 4 years, who are you trusting Urban Meyer or Star Rankings. Odds are the kid can play football.


February 1st, 2010 at 6:10 PM ^

According to that data, anyway. But I think the bar for us is actually, um, quite a bit lower than "Delmas". Like, what are the odds he can be substantially better than Mike Williams and Jordan Kovacs? No math available for that, AFAIK, but subjectively most any safety we recruit seems to have a decent chance of reaching that standard.


February 1st, 2010 at 6:01 PM ^

Blake Gideon, starting Texas safety who dropped an easy interception against Texas Tech was a two star safety.

.....Crabtree then pulled free and touchdown Red Raiders!


February 1st, 2010 at 6:44 PM ^

Did you guys know that Terrell Davis got picked in the sixth round? He was successful, so every sixth round running back will be! If I were an NFL general manager, I'd trade away all my 1st through 5th round picks to try to get every single pick in the 6th.


February 1st, 2010 at 6:58 PM ^

Magnus, I know this whole "stars don't matter" rhetoric is overdone around these parts, but your counter-argument is just as much so

The point is, it is possible that a low-ranked athlete can outperform expectations. And unless the ability to do so is random, it can be predicted.

We loyal RR supporters do not believe that every 2 or 3 star is going to be a stud muffin. We do zealously (perhaps to a fault) believe in Rich Rod's ability to find those "sleeper" athletes with characteristics which give them a higher probability of panning out over the long term than their peers. We believe it is part of his master plan, not mere scrounging and desperation.

Bringing the opposing polar side of the argument is not productive because it is not relevant.


February 1st, 2010 at 7:15 PM ^

Of course low-ranked athletes can outperform expectations. That's obvious.

As such, why does it need to be pointed out 10,000 times?

I don't see a bunch of threads insisting that the forward pass is legal.


February 1st, 2010 at 7:17 PM ^

...for the record, I don't think *anyone* will disagree with your point that "it is possible that a low-ranked athlete can outperform expectations." But thats about all this OP demonstrates. So this OP is either entirely anecdotal (and basically useless) or taking on a straw man.

Your next point, which is distinct from the one I just mentioned, is that *RichRod* is particularly good at systematically identifying low-ranked athletes who will outperform expectations. That's likely true to some degree (we might differ in how much weight we give a RichRod offer vs. scouting services' evaluation...and we have, over and over again on this blog...but anyone who completely ignores either is, well, not smart). But this OP has little to nothing to do with that argument--it doesn't say anything about RichRod recruiting/identifying Delmas.

So while I agree generally that arguing the "polar sides" is silly, I think Magnus's point is appropriate in this thread.


February 1st, 2010 at 8:32 PM ^

As someone pointed out on another thread, consistently outrecruited all or most of his counterparts in the Big East. The true anomaly of his system was winning two bowl games over supposedly more talented teams in Georgia and Oklahoma. But the FACT remains that he had trouble with the Big Three Who Left the Big East, and was only 4-3 vs Pitt.

His system has yet to prove itself at Michigan.

And there is NO EFFING WAY Rodriguez wouldn't love to recruit more talent (as would every coach who has ever coached).

We are coming into Year 3--now is the time when Rodriguez's much championed ability to spot under-the-radar talent should begin to display itself with better results.

I think many Michigan fans are guilty of feeling giddy over recruits just because they've signed on with the Wolverines.


February 1st, 2010 at 8:54 PM ^

Yeah anecdotes are mostly BS. While it's good that we don't call in to Valenti's show when he spouts off, it is unfortunate that we endure the same counter-points to Valenti's arguments on this site over and over. I agree. I'm thinking if we just neutralized the arguments (i.e. find the happy medium) it will all go away....

Blue boy johnson

February 1st, 2010 at 7:29 PM ^

I think the OP is cool and anyone who is critical is acting like an anal retentive douche bag. How is that for a fresh innovative approach.

I hope we sign only ** from this point on, it would still be better than what that Doucheameiser LLoyd brough in.

It should be clear from his days at WV that RR has no clue on how to build a pogrom. RR needs to hear from all you expets irrguardless of what yall really know.


February 1st, 2010 at 10:31 PM ^

have some innate ability (or I don't know are really good coaches/ talent evaluators) and can pick out the future All Americans?

This (and virtually all) star arguments always assume that all 3*s are created equal and doesn't assume that certain coaches have the ability to pick out the future All Americans, which is clearly an oversimplification.

Moreover, even if the 3* kid turns out to be a serviceable backup with a strong work ethic, isn't that a good thing? As Michigan found out last year, depth is almost as important as All Americans.



February 2nd, 2010 at 1:36 AM ^

I say let the kids come in, work hard, and do their talking on the field. Whether you were a 5-star or a 2-star when you hit college you're just a freshman. Obviously you can have more natural ability, refined technique, or a higher ceiling but kids that want to be better will. Save the comparisons, Ray Vinopal just needs to be Ray Vinopal and show us what he can do.