Rivals looks back at the careers of the top recruit at each Big Ten school, including Northwestern's Ifeadi Odenigbo.
Inside look at the top recruit at each Big Ten school
Inside look at the top recruit at each Big Ten school
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Rivals looks back at the careers of the top recruit at each Big Ten school, including Northwestern's Ifeadi Odenigbo.
Inside look at the top recruit at each Big Ten school
Lots of 5-star busts.
Still the success rate of the 5 stars (and 4 stars) out performs the success rates of the 2 and 3 stars.
Yes, but there always are going to be a ton more three-stars than five-stars. When you recruit a guy who is supposedly one of the top three-dozen players, the expectations for a high performance are much greater.
Yes, of course. What's your point?
I'd say that 3 stars also follow the same curve in terms of exceeding, living up to or failing to meet expectations. It's just that the expectations are lower.
My point should be very clear. There aren't many five-stars to begin with, and there obviously is a fairly high chance they'll fizzle out even if you get one. I'd certainly would love to get more five- and four-star athletes, but I'm not going to go crazy over any of these guys until we see what they do at NU. Of the last five four-stars we've recruited who are beyond their redshirt year only one (Jackson) looks like a guaranteed star at this point. Westphal has been hampered by injuries, others (Thorson, Dickerson) have flashed some potential, and Alviti has barely seen the field. The most interesting thing about the article above is that it demonstrates again how often "can't-miss" prospects do, in fact, miss.
Our defense was awesome last year, primarily with a bunch of two and three star guys. What more could you have wanted out of that unit? We're not talking hypotheticals here - that was a very strong group of players. With some help from the offense, they could have been super awesome.Nobody ever said they can't miss. And imagine if we recruited a class with the 4/5 stars on that list. Excepting the criminal aspects (which I would assume Fitz would filter out), the production of such a class would be far greater than any we have ever had. We'd be awesome.
Our defense was awesome last year, primarily with a bunch of two and three star guys. What more could you have wanted out of that unit? We're not talking hypotheticals here - that was a very strong group of players. With some help from the offense, they could have been super awesome.
Speaking of super awesome, Wisconsin's defense was indeed that last year. I haven't checked the star ratings on that Badgers team defense, but I'm thinking they were a lot more two and three star guys than four and five stars. They absolutely shut down the vaunted USC "Five Star" Trojans in the bowl game. It was pretty cool to watch.
What you usually fail to mention is NU does NOT recruit randomly, so that our lower rated recruits are NOT some random sample of the population.
Nobody ever said they can't miss. And imagine if we recruited a class with the 4/5 stars on that list. Excepting the criminal aspects (which I would assume Fitz would filter out), the production of such a class would be far greater than any we have ever had. We'd be awesome.
This is another reason stability in the coaching staff is a plus. The longer the history a coach has at NU the better his understanding of the kind of guy that can be successful in the program, community and school. Some of that kind of choice when dealing with 100's of possibilities is based on a gut feeling. We don't offer everyone, we build relationships with the guys we think could be a good fit.This is especially true in the Fitzgerald era. He considers the "whole man", when recruiting. All of it. And not just academics. Work ethic, leadership, lack of entitlement, the company you keep. He'll help shape you, but he's not going to fix you. Or force you into a "good guy" mold. Something other than football has to be there already.
This is why there are few "average" two and three stars in the NU program. Which is the point of Glades' observation.
Why should they be "can't miss?" All they are are prospects that have a higher chance of being successful at the next level. And statistics play that out. Why should it be any more than what it is?
Because you're basing all these recruiting rankings, hoopla etc. on these guys, which is one problem I have with recruiting rankings. Yeah, if you're Alabama and a couple of other programs and get four-five of these guys plus a raft of four-starts, you're certainly going to have some who will hit. If you get one of these guys, there's about as much of a chance he'll be a bust as a star. Do I think we should go for these guys? Sure. But I refuse to get too worked up about it until I see them play.