Mike Leach's latest rant bashes the star rankings in college football recruiting
Most college football coaches will tell you they don’t much care or pay attention to the star rankings in college football recruiting. While many coaches will leave it at that, as we all know, Mike Leach is never one to hold his tongue.
The Washington State coach has such little regard for recruiting/star rankings that he recently went on a mini-rant regarding his thoughts on the subject.
“If a program from a big media base or a big following recruits a guy, then all of a sudden they get voted to have a bunch of stars,” Leach said to ESPNU Radio.
Leach then went on to tell the story of how one of his recruits somehow lost stars after committing to him at Texas Tech.
Here’s the full clip of Leach’s thoughts on recruiting:
.@Coach_Leach cares not for your ___-star rating @wsucougfb #NSD18
LISTEN: pic.twitter.com/nmgY5HR0ib
— ESPNU Radio on SiriusXM (@ESPNUonSiriusXM) February 8, 2018
Wait…. Is wolfman Mike Leach?
he is right. the stars are overrated. all the stars do is get you more attraction for schools. you may be 5 stars but suck in college. Or be a NR that only DII or DIII schools wanted but become an NFL superstar (Malcolm Butler).
I could be a predictable MIZ fan & say I agree, but all of the recent NCs were populated with 4 & 5 star guys. For the none blue blood schools like mine, where there is little chance of landing those kind of kids in numbers you better have great positional coaching to be competitive.
“Predictable Mizzou fan”? I only know of one Mizzou fan who gripes about the star ratings…..it’s Wolfman.
To me, star ratings are more of a probability. Sure, there might be a five star that doesn’t pan out or a three star that makes the first round of the draft, but a 4/5 star player is much more likely to make an impact in a game than a 3 star.
I’m guessing Leach would trade in his 3 stars for a few of the 4/5 stars that landed in the SEC.
Right on agdawg….I think I recall reading the same thing once. That the stars indicate how likely a player is to be successful.
He’s correct about recruiting sites rating guys based on who’s recruiting them and where they commit to. Some of the player rankings are pretty laughable. While it’s easy to say it doesn’t matter and he should be doing his own evaluating, recruiting sites are used as recruiting tools themselves. Players recruit other players and like you’ve seen several times recently, the rankings are used to promote the momentum of a school or class.
Look, if you are a good coach, you will do your own homework, watch video coverage and visit the potential recruits whether they are 3-star, 4-star or 5-star. There are certain metrics and skill sets that coaches look for to provide the best fit for each position for their team.
I think too many people look at the ratings in the wrong way. The system is just there for entertainment purposes. I can’t imagine any coach having success if he rely on recruiting services for players. Any coach worth his salt will do his own evaluation of players.
Mike Leach is just one of hundreds of college coaches who laugh at Star-ratings. Bill Snyder and Gary Pinkel are other names every fan can recognize. Now there are college coaches who are more name, fluff, and bluff, who fear the development process. Few of them survive long but some just get lucky to be associated with successful programs for a decade or more. You have to be extremely simple minded to think that quality coaches don’t have a process in mind for the growth of all 22 positions. These coaches are looking for foundation athletic talent, not previously annointed personalities. Nearly zero 4 and 5 star recruits can still be recognized at the top of their class is the don’t follow the program of a top college coach about 200 days a year. Some even hire 2nd and 3rd top coaches to keep their edge.
Recruit rankings and pre-season polls are both fallible. Neither is a science, but both are the best predictors we have. As a ratio of their group populations, four- and five-star recruits fare better in college than 3-stars and are more likely to have a professional contract after their college days are over. The P5 teams with the most blue-chip recruits on their roster typically play for their conference championships and virtually always play for the NC. These are undeniable facts.
Is there noise in the two systems? Absolutely. Neither can predict with 100% certainty, but that’s one of the ingredients that makes CFB our favorite sport. The variables of coaching, motivation, behavioral issues, team dynamics, work ethic, fit to scheme, injuries, and adaptation to college life all play a part in how a player responds once he’s on campus. Coaches are much, much better at predicting these vagaries than recruiting analysts, which is one of the reasons you often see stars follow offers. It only makes sense. No honest recruiting analyst believes they have the predictive acumen of an FBS coordinator or position coach, and should be swayed by how coaches are reacting to a given prospect. But again, it’s imperfect. It is, however, the best system we’ve got.