Meaning 3* who play hard, smart, love the university and are winners.
I saw it in my head…I laughed harder than I should have 
2 Likes
Bet they’d be tough as nails though.
2 Likes
I don’t think anyone would be able to question toughness or effort.
Ed Oliver had a high motor too, plus he was super talented.
Actually, Case was a 2 star and we were his only offer.
4 Likes
I thought he was a 2*, but some on this board said 3*. Goes to show star ratings can be
wrong, when you look at the 5* that wash out at UT, on paper they should win the Natty every
year. Most are not ready to work hard, to get bigger, better and learn the system.
AGREE! Insightful post, CougariDOC.
Counter point. I know we all love to rightly use Texas and Aggie as pretty steady underachievers with highly ranked talent. But you can’t point to those two’s lack of success without acknowledging Bama, Georgia, Clemson, Michigan, OSU’s many successes.
Having lots of top talent is not the be all, end all. They do have to make it to campus and develop to reach their full potential, but there seems to be pretty strong correlations between top drawer talent and top drawer results.
1 Like
Your odds go way up when you max out on talent and 5*, some will wash out but with good coaching you can develop a solid program like Bama, Georgia and OSU. NIL may make it interesting for the A&M’s, when you got tons of money but no coaching, you have to have the right mix.
247 purchased scout.com a decade or so ago which existed back to 2000. That’s part of the rankings used for pre-2010.
More importantly, they do a composite ranking that combines all the sources which is probably what this is based on.
1 Like