So I thought this was an interesting thing floating around that tied into a few thoughts I had on posts here the I hadn't had time to reply to.
https://twitter.com/brianherrienn/status/1148028894894837762?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5EtweetThat's UGA tailback Brian Herrien. What he doesn't mention is that until more than three months after signing day, he didn't have any offers at all. He had to get As in high final three HS classes and hit an ACT number that semester just to qualify, and since has played behind ... well four- and five-star guys.
I was interested because we often discuss recruiting rankings, and when someone is underrated, I always say ask why because the why often makes a little sense and that's more interesting than anything else.
I was thinking of the vectors that make a change and applying them to a few topics that came up in recent weeks. These seem to be some of the factors
-Size: If you're not big enough, you better put up big numbers. TThis also seems to include frame, especially for when tall, willowy quick pass rushers get four stars at 215 pounds as sophomores.
-Film: This can be tricky because of quality of opponent, but it always helps to have a smattering of wow plays to show someone in the first minute of a clip. The junior stuff and maybe sophomore stuff carries more weight than later. What's interesting is this is usually divorced from being an effective football player.
-Testing numbers: This isn't what you do at Rivals camp, but it's what you do at team camps. If you go to UW, they probably make you run or jump, and that can make a difference.
-Offers: If no P5 schools are trying to get you, chances are it says something. Not everything, but in many cases something.
Things that are applied less evenly.
-Grades: These days they can keep a kid off the board, though sometimes they get blessed with a ranking before issues become clear
-Position changes: Sometimes this totally derails a kid, but often not.
I was thinking about this when we discussed Jonathan Taylor's ranking and Purdue football commit Michael Alaimo, who MSU was after.
Taylor was an interesting case. He was 22 spots out of being a four-star. He got a little local interest before his junior season, when he put up modest, but not great numbers. He seems to have started getting more traction when he put up some big testing numbers (workout warrior) committing to Rutgers and then getting offers from VT and UW. The best case for a fourth star was the insanely productive last season while adding some weight, but he also didn't seem to get anymore interest. Maybe that's an indictment, but it to a degree explains the 30ish spot difference.
The
Alaimo thing was interesting because for as much as we like to rail against the recruiting industrial complex, ELA was interested and Purdue fans are happy despite getting a kid who wasn't all that effective a football player. In 12 games, he had 120.8 yards a game, completing 54 percent of his passes. The talent around him seems good and the schedule most robust, but he doesn't seem to produce all that much.Anyway, sorry for the book. 
