Average Rivals Class Star Rankings by Year

[Steelers2012]

Per Chris Person. The 2018 class is shaping up to be the highest rated class, based on Rivals star rankings, ever. Sounds like assigning Cort Dennison to Recruiting Coordinator has paid off big time. We are back to killing it in Florida again.

UofL's avg. @Rivals star rating by year:
'18 - 3.23
'17 - 2.96
'16 - 2.71
'15 - 3.00
'14 - 2.84
'13 - 3.00
'12 - 3.00
'11 - 3.14
'10 - 2.85
'06 - 2.92
'05 - 2.5
'04 - 2.04
'03 - 2.40

 

[TheRealVille]

Rivals class is #40 for the Cards. Not so good for a possible best class ever, UK is at #21 with the same amount of 4 star commits. Like all fans, we long for the day when we have more 4 star recruits than 3. Lamar Jackson and the Heisman hopefully will lead to that but I'm afraid Louisville still is not a big enough name program for most of these recruits. Look at Miami. When was the last time they were a title contender? The Cards have had a more success the last 6 years than the Canes. We are on a 3 game winning streak against them as well. But they have 18 four star recruits committed. Can any Cards fan imagine having 18 four star commits? Miami also has a 5 star recruit.

Now it makes sense how Alabama, OSU, and USC consistently sign loads of 4 and 5 star recruits but Miami is mostly due to their distant past history. They are a big name despite not doing much for awhile now. I want to be as confident as any Cards fan that one day the Louisville name will be along side these blue blood programs. Clemson has done it so can Louisville do it? I like the recruits that have committed so far and I know we have had a lot of success with 3 star guys, but to really be a consistent threat to challenge for the ACC and national titles, we need to average 10 or more 4 star recruits each year.

 

[Steelers2012]

UofL's 3.23 "ranks" #24 nationally in terms of the average star rating for this class.

https://n.rivals.com/team_rankings/2018/all-teams/football

 

[rockycard]

Recruiting is up, I'd be a hypocrite if I started breaking it down in decimals...

 

[JohnCard28]

Recruiting is up, I'd be a hypocrite if I started breaking it down in decimals...

As long as we're near the top 25 I will be happy. We have one of the best developers of talent in the nation with Coach Petrino. He will have his guys ready to play.

 

[Steelers2012]

Going back 10 years, a 3.23 average star ranking would be the highest average we have achieved (2011: 3.14 being the previous high). However...right now, a 3.23 places us behind ACC opponents Miami, Clemson, FSU, and UNC, as well as Notre Dame. What differs in taking the average star ranking as the measuring stick vs recruiting class ranking is it takes out the overall number of recruits as a factor. Some years that we had a higher class ranking, we didn't have as high of an average star ranking (#29 class ranking being the high water marks, with a 2.96 average in 2017, and a 3.14 average in 2011). We were rewarded for a larger class of recruits. I would rather have a higher average rating of all recruits, than a larger number of lower rated recruits. Now, if we can do both, then we are really getting somewhere!

Year; Average; Class Rank
2017: 2.96 (#29)
2016: 2.71 (#36)
2015: 3.00 (#32)
2014: 2.84 (#40)
2013: 3.00 (#52)
2012: 3.00 (#42)
2011: 3.14 (#29)
2010: 2.85 (#48)
2009: 2.07 (#76)
2008: 2.19 (#55)

Note: Yeah...I'm fairly "underutilized" at work today; a tad bored.

 

[Steelers2012]

Rivals class is #40 for the Cards. Not so good for a possible best class ever, UK is at #21 with the same amount of 4 star commits. Like all fans, we long for the day when we have more 4 star recruits than 3. Lamar Jackson and the Heisman hopefully will lead to that but I'm afraid Louisville still is not a big enough name program for most of these recruits. Look at Miami. When was the last time they were a title contender? The Cards have had a more success the last 6 years than the Canes. We are on a 3 game winning streak against them as well. But they have 18 four star recruits committed. Can any Cards fan imagine having 18 four star commits? Miami also has a 5 star recruit.

Now it makes sense how Alabama, OSU, and USC consistently sign loads of 4 and 5 star recruits but Miami is mostly due to their distant past history. They are a big name despite not doing much for awhile now. I want to be as confident as any Cards fan that one day the Louisville name will be along side these blue blood programs. Clemson has done it so can Louisville do it? I like the recruits that have committed so far and I know we have had a lot of success with 3 star guys, but to really be a consistent threat to challenge for the ACC and national titles, we need to average 10 or more 4 star recruits each year.

FTR, UK's average star rating is 3.13 as this point.
Miami is KILLING IT in recruiting right now, having the #1 Rated Class and #2 average star rated class (3.89).

 

[Rollem Cards]

They also have 19 commits. We have 13. Our numbers can go either direction.

And at this point, according to the linked chart, were ahead of Bama, Auburn, Ole Miss, Arkansas, and UGA.

 

[Mike'sMarbles]

Miami has had some hard times due to scandal, but they are still one of the blue blood programs in the sport. They lost a 2OT game to Ohio State for the MNC in 2003. Yes that was over 10 years ago but it's not like it's been 30 years since they did anything. Top programs have ups and downs. Usually after they get caught is a down. Alabama had a tough period between Stallings and Saban, that was about 10 years. Michigan hasn't won a championship since 1997, but they have Harbaugh now so they're considered a factor.

For a program like Miami or Michigan, it's all about getting the right coach in there. Same for Texas, USC, and all the others. When they have great coaching they're the "University of Olde."

I think for us, at this stage, we just need to keep winning. Beat the people in front of us, especially the middle of the pack schools. Occasionally take down a power program, like last year. Consistently finish 3rd or higher in our division.Go to high profile Bowls. Maybe we can't get in the Playoff yet but making a top tier Bowl is definitely an achievable goal. Winning bowl games against P5 teams helps. Those are some of the things that will make us attractive to top recruits.

 

[zipp]

Steeler's OP is the right slant on things IMO... The Rivals point totals are class-size dependent and somewhat abstract when that's not necessary. Everyone understands the concept of the average quality (no. stars) of your recruits...

 

[Cardlink]

Just looking at the recruiting stars doesn't tell the whole story. Transfers were the keys to some of our most valuable players that don't show up in the star stat's.

 

[zipp]

Just looking at the recruiting stars doesn't tell the whole story. Transfers were the keys to some of our most valuable players that don't show up in the star stat's.

The issue is simply average stars vs the class-size bias. No one's saying either takes everything into account...

 

[Mike'sMarbles]

I agree with the arguments that stars don't tell the whole story. But I think in the long run, if we really want to compete at the highest levels, we're going to have to start bringing in more of the top rated players.

 

[WildCard]

If you are going by "average recruit" (a methodology I think better than "points") I suggest you use the Rivals Rating (RR) and not the star rating.

The problem I find with the star ratings is insufficient distinction. There are no 1* "grades" and very, very few 5* grades. There are so few 5* grades I tend to think of them as the very best 4* prospects. So, in that sense, you really have only 3 ratings (i.e., 2, 3 and 4 stars). Probably not enough "grades".

OTOH, the RR ratings offer 10 grades (5.2 - 6.1). But 10 grades is probably too much distinction for such a subjective evaluation. Still I think it a better indicator than the star average.

FWIW, I toss out kicking game specialists (never rated more than 3*) then average the RR of the remaining players. If my math was correct the RR average of the current class is 5.66. All JMO

Peace

 

[zipp]

If you are going by "average recruit" (a methodology I think better than "points") I suggest you use the Rivals Rating (RR) and not the star rating.

The problem I find with the star ratings is insufficient distinction. There are no 1* "grades" and very, very few 5* grades. There are so few 5* grades I tend to think of them as the very best 4* prospects. So, in that sense, you really have only 3 ratings (i.e., 2, 3 and 4 stars). Probably not enough "grades".

OTOH, the RR ratings offer 10 grades (5.2 - 6.1). But 10 grades is probably too much distinction for such a subjective evaluation. Still I think it a better indicator than the star average.

FWIW, I toss out kicking game specialists (never rated more than 3*) then average the RR of the remaining players. If my math was correct the RR average of the current class is 5.66...

I don't disagree with that take... In fact, I've looked at both stars and the Rivals index for a nominal class of 25 or so players. The star approach is more blunt, but it tracks the index. For example, your number of 5.66 equates to a star value of 3.20. Our current star average is reported as 3.21.

So, it really doesn't much matter for a class average whether you use stars or the index. Where I would prefer the index is for an individual player which is but one observation. A more discriminating "grading scale" is probably best...

 

[gocds]

The issue I have with football recruiting ratings is the same today for me as it was several years ago. How accurate are these so called star ratings? How do they get out and see so many of these kids? Although I must say that they are fairly accurate while grading these kids from the Deep South as opposed to from rural places like Kentucky or southwestern Ohio or southeastern Indiana. But fwiw this is just my opinion.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

 

[Cardinal Cash]

The issue I have with football recruiting ratings is the same today for me as it was several years ago. How accurate are these so called star ratings? How do they get out and see so many of these kids? Although I must say that they are fairly accurate while grading these kids from the Deep South as opposed to from rural places like Kentucky or southwestern Ohio or southeastern Indiana. But fwiw this is just my opinion.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

As you said, the ratings aren't foolproof. However, they do get out and see nearly all of the kids at some point because they put on camps for the recruits to compete at. That is why they are at least fairly accurate. It is also why they miss on the guys who don't have the connections or funds to go to these camps or travel around the country to camps that schools put on. It's why I am always impressed that U of L can grab guys from south Florida in poor parts of Miami. How do these guys afford to take unofficial visits all around the country? The officials are paid for, but I know it can't get expensive to travel all of the time like that when you aren't taking officials.

 

[gocds]

As you said, the ratings aren't foolproof. However, they do get out and see nearly all of the kids at some point because they put on camps for the recruits to compete at. That is why they are at least fairly accurate. It is also why they miss on the guys who don't have the connections or funds to go to these camps or travel around the country to camps that schools put on. It's why I am always impressed that U of L can grab guys from south Florida in poor parts of Miami. How do these guys afford to take unofficial visits all around the country? The officials are paid for, but I know it can't get expensive to travel all of the time like that when you aren't taking officials.

This brings up another question. Perhaps the "equipment manufacturers" get involved with these so called expenses. But WTH do I know.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

 

[zipp]

The issue I have with football recruiting ratings is the same today for me as it was several years ago. How accurate are these so called star ratings? How do they get out and see so many of these kids? Although I must say that they are fairly accurate while grading these kids from the Deep South as opposed to from rural places like Kentucky or southwestern Ohio or southeastern Indiana. But fwiw this is just my opinion...

Subjective measures are always scrutinized more than something that's measurable. But I can tell you from experience, subjective measures are reliable as long as those doing the measuring are straightforward in their approach. That is, there's a procedure, replication, validation, etc. Unfortunately, your eyes are all you have in many instances...