How can we compete with this?

No. 2 QB Malachi Nelson Makes Huge Recruiting Announcement (thespun.com)

LOL we've never gotten a 5 star football recruit and we never will

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

How can we compete with this?

No. 2 QB Malachi Nelson Makes Huge Recruiting Announcement (thespun.com)

---

Art Briles turned 3 and four star players into five stars. The answer to your question is NO! We are Woke and headed to........... Um..... we shall see.

Wasn't Stidham?

I can only imagine being his high school math, English or history teacher.

And many of us believe that we should be more concerned with the ability of our coaches to "evaluate" than Rivals assigned stars......

PartyBear said:

---

Wasn't Stidham?

---

Robbie Rhodes

I'll agree with you there as UT has proven the ratings do not matter. OU on the other hand has become the Gold Standard for the Big 12 and if we want to compete with them we need more heft. The reason Briles was so successful was he knew what style of player he needed for his system.

Quote:

---

How can we compete with this?

---

Depends on who we have that can/will pay for them.

This kid's recruiting decision will be influenced by a combination of who he thinks can best develop him for the NFL and who can generate the most NIL revenue for him. The college part will just be a nuisance he has to put up with.

Again, the NFL needs a minor league. Kids like this would be much better off in that context.

Sammy Bickum..............back in Teaff's last few years... early 90's

Never played....can't remember but he sued Baylor.

Yep Sammy Bickham..............played 76-77...........
i'm getting old........yuk

There just aren't many out there to go around numbers wise. Less than 30 5* players per year with 65 P5 programs

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/5-star-recruits-last-decade/

"In the last 10 years, a mere 287 players have emerged from high school as five-star recruits the best of the best. That's fewer than 30 players per season regardless of position.

By our best judgments, just 97 of those have lived up to the hype and become a star equal to expectations. That's just 33.8 percent, or barely more than one in three.

Granted, that's on the low end of reality, because five-star players from the 2013 and 2014 class haven't had time to blossom into their potential, but even conservatively, fewer than half of the highest-rated recruits ever fulfill their estimated potential."

Yeah, I don't give a rat's about having 5* recruits.

We can win big with a coach who knows what he wants to do, can recognize the talent he needs, and can develop players.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

I'll agree with you there as UT has proven the ratings do not matter. OU on the other hand has become the Gold Standard for the Big 12 and if we want to compete with them we need more heft. The reason Briles was so successful was he knew what style of player he needed for his system.

---

On offense, yes. Defense was asleep.

Robert Wilson said:

---

Yeah, I don't give a rat's about having 5* recruits.

We can win big with a coach who knows what he wants to do, can recognize the talent he needs, and can develop players.

---

Wiscy and Utah have been able to for sure

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

How can we compete with this?

No. 2 QB Malachi Nelson Makes Huge Recruiting Announcement (thespun.com)

---

Raising our historical record in football significantly over an extended period of years, whose prerequisite is definitively discarding our ingrained notion that Baylor cannot simultaneously be both an institution of higher education and an institution of football.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

How can we compete with this?

No. 2 QB Malachi Nelson Makes Huge Recruiting Announcement (thespun.com)

---

How do we compete?.....a Dave Aranda blitz package.

Don't forget the rankings are manipulated based on which schools offer and where they ultimately commit.

I could be wrong, but I have a pretty clear memory of Ahmad Dixon being a 5-star recruit until he committed to Baylor and then was down-graded to a 4-star.

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

I'll agree with you there as UT has proven the ratings do not matter. OU on the other hand has become the Gold Standard for the Big 12 and if we want to compete with them we need more heft. The reason Briles was so successful was he knew what style of player he needed for his system.

---

"The reason Briles was so successful was he knew what style of player he needed for his system."

This is a correct statement. Regardless of Stars someone places on a player coming out of high school, his/her success comes from and is heavily based on the system.

Being a perennial Top 10 (playoff talk) ranked team doesn't hurt either. It gets the player immediate attention and consistent media time on a national scale. And that's what they need for a real future shot at the NFL. And looks like all/most of those teams on his list have that.

Yes developing talent matters but no team ever won a natty in the bcs era nor playoff era without a 5* on the roster. You need a good baseline to build from and a roster full of 4 and 5* players is what it takes to win a natty

The only thing I ever agreed with UT fans on was their cry that "OU gets the best Texans money can buy"!

Now, T-REX, flip that around. Has any team without a 4 or 5* ever won a natty?

Aliceinbubbleland said:

---

The only thing I ever agreed with UT fans on was their cry that "OU gets the best Texans money can buy"!

Now, T-REX, flip that around. Has any team without a 4 or 5* ever won a natty?

---

Nope. It's why a football championship is so hard to accomplish and why really only about maybe 6-8 teams have a possibility of winning on in this era.

For reference I just did a quick look at the 2018 Clemson team. They did have a mix of 3 and 4 stars but also probably 5-8 5 stars.

Courtesy_Flush said:

---

LOL we've never gotten a 5 star football recruit and we never will

---

This is factually wrong. In relatively recent history, Robbie Rhodes and KD Cannon were both legit 5 stars, for instance. Jarret Stidham was also rated 5 stars by a few sources, though I think not a consensus 5 star.

A more accurate statement would probably be "we will never be a school that regularly attracts 5 stars." If the circumstances line up, we pick one off occasionally.

CaseyBu72 said:

---

Yep Sammy Bickham..............played 76-77...........
i'm getting old........yuk

---

He threw a long TD pass on his very first play and I thought he'd be a great star. Oh, well...

https://swcroundup.com/news/2018/11/21/a-little-history-1976-baylor-vs-texas-tech

pitchspork said:

---

Courtesy_Flush said:

---

LOL we've never gotten a 5 star football recruit and we never will

---

This is factually wrong. In relatively recent history, Robbie Rhodes and KD Cannon were both legit 5 stars, for instance. Jarret Stidham was also rated 5 stars by a few sources, though I think not a consensus 5 star.

A more accurate statement would probably be "we will never be a school that regularly attracts 5 stars." If the circumstances line up, we pick one off occasionally.

---

The word "never" is a strong term. True, we seldom attract 5 stars now, but that doesn't mean we will never be in a position to obtain them more frequently. Before the last couple of years I'm sure a lot of people were saying we'll never win a Natty in men's bball, and for understandable reason since until last season we hadn't even won a conference title since 1950 - but look what happened. And don't forget we were on our way to attracting at least a few 5 stars in football before our BOI blew everything up 5 years ago (CAB's '17 class would've had at least a couple of them based on the verbals at the point when it was all nuked). So we're obviously not there now, but don't think it's utterly impossible for it to happen someday with the right HC and the right circumstances.

Also, you are responding to an obvious troll if you didn't realize it.

Stars absolutely matter. Anyone who analyzes the stats of teams with those players knows this. The consistent top 10 programs have these guys year in and year out. We were on the verge of this before things imploded. But we are doing ok this year so it gives me hope.

We are getting 4 stars and solid 3 star players. It gives us a chance. The rest is up to coaching and execution and the hope that we find the guys that want to work. 5-star guys like to go to the NFL early. I will take a 4-star or high 3-star Senior over most 5-star sophomores. That's another thing that evens the playing field a little.

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves"

Coach Will Shakespeare

The two cocepts, "never" and "five stars", should be eliminated from football vocabulary IMO.

We recruit players with five star hearts. /s/

You are spot on. The minute I see someone post about stars not mattering is the minute I know that they know little to nothing about college football. All it takes is about 5 mintues to research the teams in the CFP for the past 5 years and you will see they are chocked full of 4 and 5 stars. They are not chocked full of 2 star and 3 star players.

Is there an occasional player who was given a 3 star (and sometimes a 2 star) that was either overlooked, underrated or becomes better and better through hard work and change in body size over his career? Sure. Are there some 5 stars who get drastically overrated because of the school that is recruiting them? Sure (and I'm looking at you, Bevo). But these are more EXCEPTIONS than the rule in college football.

Some of our fans are perhaps confusing college footballl with the NFL, where there are plenty of guys who weren't 5 stars that ultimately develop into good to great NFL players, including former 2 and 3 stars in high school who turn out to be HOF in the NFL. But that's the NFL, not college. The statistics in the CFP easily speak for themselves when it comes to the importance of 4 and 5 stars to win a college football national crown.

DanaDane said:

---

You are spot on. The minute I see someone post about stars not mattering is the minute I know that they know little to nothing about college football. All it takes is about 5 mintues to research the teams in the CFP for the past 5 years and you will see they are chocked full of 4 and 5 stars. They are not chocked full of 2 star and 3 star players.

Is there an occasional player who was given a 3 star (and sometimes a 2 star) that was either overlooked, underrated or becomes better and better through hard work and change in body size over his career? Sure. Are there some 5 stars who get drastically overrated because of the school that is recruiting them? Sure (and I'm looking at you, Bevo). But these are more EXCEPTIONS than the rule in college football.

Some of our fans are perhaps confusing college footballl with the NFL, where there are plenty of guys who weren't 5 stars that ultimately develop into good to great NFL players, including former 2 and 3 stars in high school who turn out to be HOF in the NFL. But that's the NFL, not college. The statistics in the CFP easily speak for themselves when it comes to the importance of 4 and 5 stars to win a college football national crown.

---

Then I know little to nothing about college football.

Grab any Texas Football magazine ever printed and look at the Friday Night Heroes and blue chip ratings over the years. The vast majority never pan out. Ever. You sometimes find a copy with a couple of pages of kids you never heard of.

Maybe nationally other states and schools do a better job of nurturing the kids along than the Texas schools do. We are seeing more and more superstars coming from states other than Texas and then this is further driven home by the lack of Big 12 players getting drafted now days.

I will admit that the "hit" rate has increased over the past 10 or 15 years due to these camps and 7 on 7 programs.

Remember when Chuck Reedy had Baylor making major waves nationally in the recruiting wars? It never produced.

Baylor, over the years and particularly during the Teaff years, produced more NFL players than many of the blueblood schools.

It is unpredictable and it is about to get even more unpredictable with this wooden stake driven into the heart of college football called NIL.

Maybe your point is that Texas High School football is overrated or that no Texas school can recruit very well, because you look at the rosters of Bama, Ohio State, Clemson, Georgia and LSU......and you see rosters full of 4 and 5 star players that "pan out" as a TEAM to be able to qualify for the CFP and win. When you recruit that many on one roster, chances are that not all are gonna be flops. Obviously when you only sign a few 4 or 5 stars, there's a higher probability your school may experience flops that make you think all 4 and 5 stars are flops. But, they're simply not.

And, you cite Baylor's ability to put people in the NFL during your day? That's the exact argument that has nothing to do with who wins in college football, nor did it have anything to do with who won the Natty even in YOUR day. How many national championships did we win in your day with all those players who ultimately had good to great NFL careers? We won a SWC championship in 74 and you won in 80.....and we got drilled in both Cotton Bowls by those "blueblood" programs. As I said in my post, the NFL is full of 2 and 3 star players, many of whom turn into HOF. But that has nothing to do with a college football TEAM who plays in the CFP in this day and age nor even in your day.

DanaDane said:

---

Maybe your point is that Texas High School football is overrated or that no Texas school can recruit very well, because you look at the rosters of Bama, Ohio State, Clemson, Georgia and LSU......and you see rosters full of 4 and 5 star players that "pan out" as a TEAM to be able to qualify for the CFP and win. When you recruit that many on one roster, chances are that not all are gonna be flops. Obviously when you only sign a few 4 or 5 stars, there's a higher probability your school may experience flops that make you think all 4 and 5 stars are flops. But, they're simply not.

And, you cite Baylor's ability to put people in the NFL during your day? That's the exact argument that has nothing to do with who wins in college football, nor did it have anything to do with who won the Natty even in YOUR day. How many national championships did we win in your day with all those players who ultimately had good to great NFL careers? We won a SWC championship in 74 and you won in 80.....and we got drilled in both Cotton Bowls by those "blueblood" programs. As I said in my post, the NFL is full of 2 and 3 star players, many of whom turn into HOF. But that has nothing to do with a college football TEAM who plays in the CFP in this day and age nor even in your day.

---

Not saying that THSF is overrated but you have to pay attention to where these supposed 5* are coming from and ask yourself how and when Texas lost our luster of being the hotbed of high school football talent.

My point remains.........multi-star badges or bluechip ratings are fun for alumni to brag about and it may or may not pay dividends 1, 2 or 3 years down the road. All the schools you mention above have been getting the best players in the nation for YEARS. They earned that right and make certain they keep the pipeline open. UT, for all their mediocrity, will ALWAYS secure the best talent year in and year out. Facilities, traditions, wealthy alumni, fun cities to live in for 4 years, TV exposure, NFL preparation and prestige lure these kids.

Talent alone does not translate into National Championships. There is not that big a total difference in the talent levels of the Top 20 year in and year out. Player development, attitude, team chemistry, injuries, etc can widen that gap and does so every year. With NIL it is going to be an influence on these recruiting trophies.

NFL talent has a tremendous influence on college teams that have solid, proven COACHING in place. Coaching is key. Having kids with superior attitude, work ethic, TEAM first thinking along with coaches that have been on the national stage and have been mentored by the best will take 2, 3 and 4 stars and beat pure talent every day.

The talent gap between your hallowed 5* kids and Baylor's 2, 3 and 4*s is not that wide. Coaching is where you win National Championships.

Isn't there a circular argument between a recruit being a 5* and blue-bloods whose recruits become 5* because they are being recruited by a blue-blood?

It seems like Baylor gets 5* recruits more often than Texas wins Big XII titles.

Texas has one more title than:

• Baylor: who, we have established doesn't get as many 5* recruits
• K-State: who has probably never seen a 5* recruit walk across campus
• Nebraska: who has about half as many years in the Big XII as the whorns

Now, if you want to say that my argument doesn't apply because Texas is a unique piece of crap and isn't really a real blue-blood anyway, I'd be happy to say, "Yeah, the whorns disappoint their fans more than any other school in the nation," and happily walk away.