With signing day, there is as always a lot of talk about relative class strength based on the various services star rankings.
A question I have never seen addressed it how accurate the ratings are at predicting success by position group. It has seemed to me that for some positions, strength and skill development during the college years could trump the analysis available at age 16 or 17. A player playing a position largely dependent on speed and agility would seem to be easier to pick than one that requires strength and leverage, where diet, weight programs and good coaching can make a huge difference. Positions that require field vision and decision making ability, like safety and inside linebacker, would be harder to predict, though a floor level of skills would be needed. Interestingly, to me, the multi skills required for QB do seem to lend themselves to a solid predictive analysis at 16 or 17, since a successful QB needs base levels of arm strength, quickness, height and identifiable decision making ability that can be identified by measurement and scouting. I would also guess without data that players with decent speed and height would, in high school, be more likely to be placed on offense rather than defense, and that defensive back is a position where players most often play a position that is different from their high school position, e.g. LB to safety, QB to CB.
Heuristically, Wisconsin and Iowa always seem to build excellent O-Lines despite not always recruting 4 and 5 star linemen. Over the last 6 or 7 years, the Cats D-lines have also been an indication of this: the Cats consistently have produced solid D-line players (see Lancaster, Lowery) who were not high stars.
A way of figuring out of there is a disparity in the value of star ratings among the position groups would be to analyze playing time as true freshman among the power 5 conferences. My guess is that true freshman most often contribute at 1)running back 2) outside receiver 3) QB 4) Linebacker with few linemen, tight ends and Dbacks playing their freshman year.
If anyone is aware of an analysis of this, I would be really interested. Again, my intuition is that star rankings mean more at RB, QB and WR than at other positions.
A question I have never seen addressed it how accurate the ratings are at predicting success by position group. It has seemed to me that for some positions, strength and skill development during the college years could trump the analysis available at age 16 or 17. A player playing a position largely dependent on speed and agility would seem to be easier to pick than one that requires strength and leverage, where diet, weight programs and good coaching can make a huge difference. Positions that require field vision and decision making ability, like safety and inside linebacker, would be harder to predict, though a floor level of skills would be needed. Interestingly, to me, the multi skills required for QB do seem to lend themselves to a solid predictive analysis at 16 or 17, since a successful QB needs base levels of arm strength, quickness, height and identifiable decision making ability that can be identified by measurement and scouting. I would also guess without data that players with decent speed and height would, in high school, be more likely to be placed on offense rather than defense, and that defensive back is a position where players most often play a position that is different from their high school position, e.g. LB to safety, QB to CB.
Heuristically, Wisconsin and Iowa always seem to build excellent O-Lines despite not always recruting 4 and 5 star linemen. Over the last 6 or 7 years, the Cats D-lines have also been an indication of this: the Cats consistently have produced solid D-line players (see Lancaster, Lowery) who were not high stars.
A way of figuring out of there is a disparity in the value of star ratings among the position groups would be to analyze playing time as true freshman among the power 5 conferences. My guess is that true freshman most often contribute at 1)running back 2) outside receiver 3) QB 4) Linebacker with few linemen, tight ends and Dbacks playing their freshman year.
If anyone is aware of an analysis of this, I would be really interested. Again, my intuition is that star rankings mean more at RB, QB and WR than at other positions.
