Our starting lineup Saturday...and their stars.....

[superflyby]

This is not the way it was suppose to go......

How talented is South Carolina’s football team?

That’s become the most asked question of the 2015 football season thanks to the Gamecocks’ 1-2 start. It’s hard to give a definitive answer, but there are several ways to look at it. Here’s one: 247Sports ranks the Gamecocks No. 22 in the country in what it calls “Team Talent Composite.” The measure is based on how each player on the team was ranked at the time of their enrollment.

That ranking takes into account more than 80 players, though. So we thought we’d look at just the 22 expected to start Saturday against UCF. That group features 17 three-star players and five four-star players, giving the lineup an average of 3.23 out of five stars.

Three of the five four-star players are first year players – freshman quarterback Lorenzo Nunez, freshman center Zack Bailey and junior college transfer defensive end Marquavius Lewis.

Of the 29 players who were the most highly ranked by 247Sports entering school, only four are expected to start against the Knights – Nunez, Bailey, Lewis and left tackle Brandon Shell.


Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/sports/coll...ndall-blog/article36500994.html#storylink=cpy

 

[Gamecock Lifer]

This is not the way it was suppose to go......

How talented is South Carolina’s football team?

That’s become the most asked question of the 2015 football season thanks to the Gamecocks’ 1-2 start. It’s hard to give a definitive answer, but there are several ways to look at it. Here’s one: 247Sports ranks the Gamecocks No. 22 in the country in what it calls “Team Talent Composite.” The measure is based on how each player on the team was ranked at the time of their enrollment.

That ranking takes into account more than 80 players, though. So we thought we’d look at just the 22 expected to start Saturday against UCF. That group features 17 three-star players and five four-star players, giving the lineup an average of 3.23 out of five stars.

Three of the five four-star players are first year players – freshman quarterback Lorenzo Nunez, freshman center Zack Bailey and junior college transfer defensive end Marquavius Lewis.

Of the 29 players who were the most highly ranked by 247Sports entering school, only four are expected to start against the Knights – Nunez, Bailey, Lewis and left tackle Brandon Shell.


Read more here: http://www.thestate.com/sports/coll...ndall-blog/article36500994.html#storylink=cpy

That is a pointless article. They use the most obscure of ratings services... DJ Neal and Cooper were both 4* kids on Rivals... Plus a couple more... And they are just looking at the starters this week! Completely ignoring injuries, recent changes and the two deep which is packed with young kids who came in highly rated and are consistent contributors. The "talent level" of this team based solely off the star ratings of it's players is good enough for us to be in the mix in the East this year. Injuries, attrition and ATTITUDES have kept us from achieving the kind of success we may have hoped for so far, but looking at the star rankings of the kids playing one week of the year just prior to playing the worst team we have faced so far, when half our lineup seems to be injured at the moment is just pointless. About what you'd expect from the State I guess. Just talking to hear themselves talk.

 

[superflyby]

That is a pointless article. They use the most obscure of ratings services... DJ Neal and Cooper were both 4* kids on Rivals... Plus a couple more... And they are just looking at the starters this week! Completely ignoring injuries, recent changes and the two deep which is packed with young kids who came in highly rated and are consistent contributors. The "talent level" of this team based solely off the star ratings of it's players is good enough for us to be in the mix in the East this year. Injuries, attrition and ATTITUDES have kept us from achieving the kind of success we may have hoped for so far, but looking at the star rankings of the kids playing one week of the year just prior to playing the worst team we have faced so far, when half our lineup seems to be injured at the moment is just pointless. About what you'd expect from the State I guess. Just talking to hear themselves talk.

If there are 29 players rated higher than the starters regardless of which rating system, then that's a problem....we do not have 29 injured players that created this. We have a lack of evaluation or some other coaching mishap. I will agree that injuries did play a part.....but not all 29......not even close. Attitudes are a coaching problem. They either didn't do their homework recruiting or they created the attitude if they did, or they don't know how to motivate. I am tired of these coaches and their excuses for their failures.

 

[BigTomE]

Just because a kid was rated higher, coming out of high school, does not mean he's a better college player than a kid rated a little lower out of high school. Ratings are based on high school production, and not a predictor of future success.

 

[BigTomE]

Also ratings have a lot to do with which other schools are recruiting a kid, or even which camps the kid attended. It's not like the folks that assign these stars are at high school games each weekend actually watching these players.

 

[theZero]

Is it agreed that the high school football star ranking system, for which there is no standard, no regulating body, no agreement among services, and is consistently decried as biased and flawed is now completely flawless and is now a 100% accurate predictor of success in college? The same system that ranks Texas players higher than average for no apparent reason other than Longhorns have fans who do evaluations? Texas is successful with all those 4- and 5-star recruits, right?

Should Johnny Manzeil ever have played college football at all? He was only a 3-star and there were several 4-star QB;s on the roster.

And why did we ever recruit 3-star Connor Shaw anyway? Look at Florida in comparison. There's no way a lowly 3-star could have had the success of 4-star John Brantley, 4-star Jacoby Brissett, or 5-star #1 QB Jeff Driskel.

So the new reality is that a freshman 4- star OL should start over a senior 3-star lineman because his pedigree is better, no question. We should rush a 4-star freshman who has been practicing for 2 months and make him a starter over a veteran 3-star player who understands the plays. Stars mean all.

 

[garnetwhiteandblack]

I for one thinks this article matters and is very enlightening OP. To think that the highest 29 players rated only 4 are starting. Anyway I look at it there is a problem with that stat. It's either lack of the school doing homework on the kids and just looking at how they are rated or coaches not being able to develop players. I would like to know this stat on every team in the country. That would show us a lot and how good the rating system actually is.

 

[superflyby]

Just because a kid was rated higher, coming out of high school, does not mean he's a better college player than a kid rated a little lower out of high school. Ratings are based on high school production, and not a predictor of future success.

Yea I know...the coaches recruited from a list that Rivals provided them....no ? They actually went and watched these kids and then offered ? Well dude...either way they screwed up with what were 29 ranked kids.....If they recruited kids that were 4 stars because they were 4 stars, they were wrong. If they evaluated these players and missed on personal evaluations...they were wrong. What damn part of "they were wrong " do you not understand ?

 

[BigTomE]

I for one thinks this article matters and is very enlightening OP. To think that the highest 29 players rated only 4 are starting. Anyway I look at it there is a problem with that stat. It's either lack of the school doing homework on the kids and just looking at how they are rated or coaches not being able to develop players. I would like to know this stat on every team in the country. That would show us a lot and how good the rating system actually is.

So then, are you a proponent of playing the kids with the highest star rating regardless of the outcome of games?

 

[BigTomE]

Yea I know...the coaches recruited from a list that Rivals provided them....no ? They actually went and watched these kids and then offered ? Well dude...either way they screwed up with what were 29 ranked kids.....If they recruited kids that were 4 stars because they were 4 stars, they were wrong. If they evaluated these players and missed on personal evaluations...they were wrong. What damn part of "they were wrong " do you not understand ?

The University of SC does not use any recruiting services, at all. Yes, our coaches recruit kids that have seen play, either in person or on film. Just because a kid is a 4 star out of high school doesn't mean is automatically better than a 3 star senior that's been in the system for a few seasons. Do you not agree high school football is totally different from college football? Most of these kids were the best players on the field in high school. Well, when they step on a college field, they arte no longer the best player. It takes time to develop at the college level.

 

[superflyby]

So then, are you a proponent of playing the kids with the highest star rating regardless of the outcome of games?

OMG.....I am a proponent of signing kids that can play SEC football and hiring coaches that can teach them how to do it. You do have better success with a higher rated kid because of the potential but some lower rated kids can surprise. If you don't have coaches that can evaluated and coach them up then it doesn't matter what their stars or potential is. That is where in the Hell we are at......

 

[BigTomE]

OMG.....I am a proponent of signing kids that can play SEC football and hiring coaches that can teach them how to do it. You do have better success with a higher rated kid because of the potential but some lower rated kids can surprise. If you don't have coaches that can evaluated and coach them up then it doesn't matter what their stars or potential is. That is where in the Hell we are at......

OMG.... "coaching them up" and recruiting are tow totally different acts. I disagree with your thoughts on our recruiting and player rankings. However, I agree our coaching staff is not getting enough production from our players, regardless of the players' recruiting rankings.

 

[superflyby]

OMG.... "coaching them up" and recruiting are tow totally different acts. I disagree with your thoughts on our recruiting and player rankings. However, I agree our coaching staff is not getting enough production from our players, regardless of the players' recruiting rankings.

That is exactly what I said...do you not read....I said it doesn't matter what their stars are or their potential because we don't have coaches that can coach them. I am not sure we missed on the kids....but we damn sure missed on the coaches !

 

[BigTomE]

That is exactly what I said...do you not read....I said it doesn't matter what their stars are or their potential because we don't have coaches that can coach them. I am not sure we missed on the kids....but we damn sure missed on the coaches !

Perhaps you should reread your original post before throwing out insults?? Your original post is about recruiting rankings, and recruiting rankings only. At no point, in your original post, did you mention our staff's ability to "coach them up".
I'm happy to exchange opinions about recruiting or our staff's ability to get the most out of our players. But those are two totally separate issues.

 

[superflyby]

Perhaps you should reread your original post before throwing out insults?? Your original post is about recruiting rankings, and recruiting rankings only. At no point, in your original post, did you mention our staff's ability to "coach them up".
I'm happy to exchange opinions about recruiting or our staff's ability to get the most out of our players. But those are two totally separate issues.

Well you tagged the post where I did say we had a coaching problem, so you don't get a pass on that.....lol.

 

[BigTomE]

Well you tagged the post where I did say we had a coaching problem, so you don't get a pass on that.....lol.

Noted.... things were a lot less frustrating just a couple of years ago!
Good back and forth though. I like hearing opinions from other Gamecock fans.

 

[garnetwhiteandblack]

So then, are you a proponent of playing the kids with the highest star rating regardless of the outcome of games?

No but you would think the kids rated higher should be better and the problem is where that has not been true according to who the coaches start.