Star check

[BayouTeche]

_ I find it more than ironic that when we had no 3 star athletes on our list of commitments in the past, 80% of us defended the "stars don't really say much" campaign. Now that we've got a few 3 star athletes on our list, we are chest bumping about it. In reality, the star system still has the exact issues its always had. If we had all 3 star recruits... and we were jawing with one of our beloved instate past and current "rivals"... we'd point to our 3 star average and blow and go. I have the same feelings about the star system as I did 5 years ago. I see where it is valid and I see where it isn't... and it is not linear whatsoever from 2 to 5.

Once we start getting a higher star average (coupled with the fact we will compete with and win out over a more respected list of programs than in the past) I'm going to beat my chest over it. Am I going to expect that to culminate in more wins? You better believe it. The only stars I care about are in the shape of Ws.

If we start getting a lot of 3 star athletes... with a couple 4 star guys as well... I am going to pound the drums of the star system like a professional drum pounder. It is going to say positives and create even more positives for our program. The worst reality of the "nothing but 2 star recruit" issue with an FBS school is the lackluster stamp it puts on your program. My drum pounding will be more for removing the lackluster stamp than an admission that a targeted 2 star FBS football player is inferior to a 3 star athlete.

People have pointed out that Boise came to power with 2 and 3 star athletes. There is much more to that point. Boise will now recruit the exact level of talent, but by virtue of that talent stating it has interest from Boise State, a 2.6 star kid will miraculously become a 4.2 star kid. That is the big flaw of the star system. Regardless, I cannot wait for UL to become defenders and benefactors of the star system. _

Just depends what mood this people are in. Stars didn't mean anything, but they do now b/c some kids may commit. Stars don't mean anything it just for some recruiting website to get you to pay money and read about their so called inside scoop.

[Hammer58]

_ WHY?????????????????? _

Because the people doing the ratings have biases, Boomer. They favor the BCS programs. If a recruit is being offered by a BCS program they figure he must be good so they rate him higher. But if that same kid picks UL or some other mid-major they don't rate him as high. In both cases they may not really have much first hand knowledge of the kid's abilities or potential. It is a flawed system. It is virtually the same as having the old AP or UPI polls picking the "national champion". Its all subjective. Thats why you shouldn't spend so much time obsessing over it.

[Boomer]

_ Why does it matter?





igeaux.mobi _

Well if I have a business and the word gets out that it is not performing because of anything and you lose business income because of it---If it keeps up --I am out of business---Why would they allow themselves to be proven wrong and lose their credibility------Again WHY and BECAUSE IT MATTERS!!!!!

[SlappyCajun]

Boomer. BCS schools buy the majority of recruiting site subscriptions.

Therefore, they want to see their name listed at the top. So, bigger schools get more stars, big school fan thinks, wow recruiting is exciting. I better keep my subscription renewed, and tell friends to buy one.

Cajun T does an amazing job following this stuff, but these recruiting services many times because they give deference to big time coaches at big time programs assume rightly or wrongly sometimes that a kid is better because LSU signed him over TCU .

Recruiting is a crapshoot, it always has been. These guys find a way to try to do the same thing that coaches do. Locate the best players, and make money off of it. You know, finding the best player is not an easy task. A lot of these talent "evaluators" have never coached. I'm not saying they are not good, I think Cajun T is great, but for every Cajun T, there may be one or two who spend half the time doing it, and may rank a kid one way or another based on a number of factors that have nothing to do with kids ability.

Here's how you win in recruiting. Your staff has connections, your staff can find players, your staff can sign those players. Until Rivals or Scout starts giving out a crystal ball, I wouldn't lose a wink of sleep over it.

(However, I will admit that generally climbing the recruiting rankings is a good thing. But, I think in order to overcome some perception problems we will have to win with these players before recruiting services think that the guys we sign or as good as some of the guys the big boys sign.)

[HoustonCajun]

_ Because the people doing the ratings have biases, Boomer. They favor the BCS programs. If a recruit is being offered by a BCS program they figure he must be good so they rate him higher. But if that same kid picks UL or some other mid-major they don't rate him as high. In both cases they may not really have much first hand knowledge of the kid's abilities or potential. It is a flawed system. It is virtually the same as having the old AP or UPI polls picking the "national champion". Its all subjective. Thats why you shouldn't spend so much time obsessing over it. _

A lot of non AQ schools have had recruiting classes in the 50 - 70 range including Troy, MT and LA Tech. Yet, UL always seems to be ranked around 112 - 120. They don't downgrade every non BCS program, but UL sure doesn't ever get its players with high ratings. And, it shows in our records. I for one would love to see us get 3 & 4 star players and get in the 50 - 70 range and watch our winning success parallel our recruiting success. That would only spur additional success in recruiting and bragging rights vs. our competition. That would not be a bad thing.

[SlappyCajun]

_ A lot of non AQ schools have had recruiting classes in the 50 - 70 range including Troy, MT and LA Tech. Yet, UL always seems to be ranked around 112 - 120. They don't downgrade every non BCS program, but UL sure doesn't ever get its players with high ratings. And, it shows in our records. I for one would love to see us get 3 & 4 star players and get in the 50 - 70 range and watch our winning success parallel our recruiting success. That would only spur additional success in recruiting and bragging rights vs. our competition. That would not be a bad thing. _

Of course not. I think its plain to see, from the program records that recruiting is not in the top 50-70 in the country.

[ManAboutTown]

What was LaDarius coming out of High School? He's a 5 star athlete now!

igeaux.mobi

[Zeebart21]

_ A lot of non AQ schools have had recruiting classes in the 50 - 70 range including Troy, MT and LA Tech. Yet, UL always seems to be ranked around 112 - 120. They don't downgrade every non BCS program, but UL sure doesn't ever get its players with high ratings. And, it shows in our records. I for one would love to see us get 3 & 4 star players and get in the 50 - 70 range and watch our winning success parallel our recruiting success. That would only spur additional success in recruiting and bragging rights vs. our competition. That would not be a bad thing. _

We will win next year with that #112 ranked recruiting class.

[GetTheFacts1st]

_ A lot of non AQ schools have had recruiting classes in the 50 - 70 range including Troy, MT and LA Tech. Yet, UL always seems to be ranked around 112 - 120. They don't downgrade every non BCS program, but UL sure doesn't ever get its players with high ratings. And, it shows in our records. I for one would love to see us get 3 & 4 star players and get in the 50 - 70 range and watch our winning success parallel our recruiting success. That would only spur additional success in recruiting and bragging rights vs. our competition. That would not be a bad thing. _

Do we need really need to mention Louisiana Polytechnic Institute in any of this? Don't compare us to them in any wanna-be regard...they have sub-par facilities in comparison to ours (except for a scoreboard) and a few obnoxious followers who make the whole an equal to a vacuum in outer space. That said, HUD is THE MAN and I'd take him over Loly's guy in a moment. !

[Cajun90]

We will win next year with that #112 ranked recruiting class.

I believe we will.

Maybe the point (stars) can be explained a little better on recruting from this perspective. It is fairly easy to quantify some of these kids who are 4 or 5 star athletes being recruited by the BCS schools. Any monkey could do it and they often do.

That next layer becomes a lot more difficult. Some kids mature differently, some saw limited playing time because of..... playing behind the superstar, injuries, started playing late etc. Limited or no exposure equals fewer stars.

Realistically that is what this program needs to get over the hump. Then we can start picking up a few of the easy ones.

[J-Town Cajun]

We can all remember when Tyrell Fenroy was a 3 star recruit when he was offered by Ole Miss then fell to a 2 star when he committed to UL.

Another example is a WR Williams who UL was recruiting last year up until the end he was a 1 star recruit and jumped to a 3 star when he signed with LSU on the last day as a fall back player.

[Johnboy4713]

dont just happen to you guys, anytime we lose a kid to Bama or LSU he grows stars too.

Like I said earlier in this post, its all subjective and depends on who is pushing for the kid. Heck, our hometown newspaper did a story on Larry and Shaun commiting to you guys and Shaun shrunk 2 inches. All i know is thats the tallest 6ft 2 kid I have ever seen.