Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

2 4* O-lineman so far this year. Plus Dontae Williams. Keep that ground game churning!

I'm curious to see how/where he'll fit in. Greatwood has done a really good job of moving guys around to get the best 5 on the field. In his video, he is a huge dude.

It's funny but the extra stars haven't changed my opinion of the guy at all. I was already really impressed with what I'd seen. Of course, I don't know the fundamentals of the OL so hopefully the people who did the analysis know more than I do. He definitely passes the eyeball test.

Oregon's Ground game is starting to make Autzen Stadium feel like a high speed meat grinder for opposing D's...

Seems like with the highly touted O-line recruits we are getting with this class on top of all the depth and experience we have returning, that our O-line will dominate for the next 3-4 years to come. Also, if we can recruit some meanies on the other side of the ball, we could convert a couple O-line guys to Defense since our depth is so solid.

Cool, I know the difference between a 4 star and a 3 star honestly doesn't matter that much. But seeing more 4 stars make me happier haha.

Clanton bulldozes people in his film on almost every snap. I would think that he would play at the tackle position, but then again I am not that great judging O-lineman.

I'm not a huge rankings/stars guy, but it is at least a good indicator that a guy has a better chance of being successful, and the heart of a good team is the O-Line. You simply cannot compete for championships without it. The Steelers are being punished right now for neglecting theirs for the past few years.

Hoagduck wrote:I'm not a huge rankings/stars guy, but it is at least a good indicator that a guy has a better chance of being successful

Exactly. People always say "look at Chung and Byrd" when we get a 3* kid. That's true, but the fact is that 5*s will pan out more often than 4*s, who will pan out more often than 3*s, etc. Statistically, you should get a little more excited about higher ranked kids.

That being said, trust the coaches. They're not perfect, but they're better than Rivals, DT, Scout, ESPN, or any one of us.

Ducks Oline will be scary next 3-4 years, Keep that in mind we still have Everett Benyard that is currently redshirting. Hes going to create alot of holes for LMJ to run through during 3-4 years.

Tray Dub wrote:

Hoagduck wrote:I'm not a huge rankings/stars guy, but it is at least a good indicator that a guy has a better chance of being successful

Exactly. People always say "look at Chung and Byrd" when we get a 3* kid. That's true, but the fact is that 5*s will pan out more often than 4*s, who will pan out more often than 3*s, etc. Statistically, you should get a little more excited about higher ranked kids.

That being said, trust the coaches. They're not perfect, but they're better than Rivals, DT, Scout, ESPN, or any one of us.

Say a team like houston or us get a 3 or 2 star that matches the system exactly, that play can exceede all expectations. Its all about getting the right kid for what you do. Having a huge and great blocking OL could be horrible if he is immobile and only good blocking up the middle or on straight drops. The key is the right player in the right system.

Zyme wrote:

Tray Dub wrote:

Hoagduck wrote:I'm not a huge rankings/stars guy, but it is at least a good indicator that a guy has a better chance of being successful

Exactly. People always say "look at Chung and Byrd" when we get a 3* kid. That's true, but the fact is that 5*s will pan out more often than 4*s, who will pan out more often than 3*s, etc. Statistically, you should get a little more excited about higher ranked kids.

That being said, trust the coaches. They're not perfect, but they're better than Rivals, DT, Scout, ESPN, or any one of us.

Say a team like houston or us get a 3 or 2 star that matches the system exactly, that play can exceede all expectations. Its all about getting the right kid for what you do. Having a huge and great blocking OL could be horrible if he is immobile and only good blocking up the middle or on straight drops. The key is the right player in the right system.

Like I said, it's true lower-ranked kids can be stars. It's just more unlikely.

Here's the way I've learned to look at the star ratings: The top level 4-5* guys are the most talented players in the country. If you happen to land one, you are getting a player that has overflowing talent & potential that will automatically be one of the most talented kids on your roster. Obviously talent doesn't equal a good football player but it sure as hell helps. Just look at the few 5*s we got. All of them started or played a ton as freshman. Colvin & Haloti started and JStew obviously played a ton. Those guys were just on another level.

The 3-4* players are usually a mix of potential filled guys that haven't really developed or guys who are aren't the most talented but are very very skilled at what they do (guys like nick reed).

As long as we get a mix of those types of players I am always happy. We have tremendous coaches that can develop those underdeveloped guys & make them stars (Chung, Byrd, WT3, Unger, etc) but its also nice when you get guys that don't need 2-3 years to develop & become big contributers. I guess you could say the 4-5* guys just make our coaches jobs a little easier.

dthomas=ddixon wrote:Here's the way I've learned to look at the star ratings: The top level 4-5* guys are the most talented players in the country. If you happen to land one, you are getting a player that has overflowing talent & potential that will automatically be one of the most talented kids on your roster. Obviously talent doesn't equal a good football player but it sure as hell helps. Just look at the few 5*s we got. All of them started or played a ton as freshman. Colvin & Haloti started and JStew obviously played a ton. Those guys were just on another level.

The 3-4* players are usually a mix of potential filled guys that haven't really developed or guys who are aren't the most talented but are very very skilled at what they do (guys like nick reed).

As long as we get a mix of those types of players I am always happy. We have tremendous coaches that can develop those underdeveloped guys & make them stars (Chung, Byrd, WT3, Unger, etc) but its also nice when you get guys that don't need 2-3 years to develop & become big contributers. I guess you could say the 4-5* guys just make our coaches jobs a little easier.

Its funny to me that whenever we get a three/two star guy there are alwasy a bunch of duck fans that say trust the coaches, which makes it seem like the coaches are intentional chosing two and three star guys over four and five stars guys because they see hidden talent that makes them valuable. Sure the coaches may see talent, but they are not chosing those guys intentionally, but rather because they are forced to settle.

uo2010 wrote:

dthomas=ddixon wrote:Here's the way I've learned to look at the star ratings: The top level 4-5* guys are the most talented players in the country. If you happen to land one, you are getting a player that has overflowing talent & potential that will automatically be one of the most talented kids on your roster. Obviously talent doesn't equal a good football player but it sure as hell helps. Just look at the few 5*s we got. All of them started or played a ton as freshman. Colvin & Haloti started and JStew obviously played a ton. Those guys were just on another level.

The 3-4* players are usually a mix of potential filled guys that haven't really developed or guys who are aren't the most talented but are very very skilled at what they do (guys like nick reed).

As long as we get a mix of those types of players I am always happy. We have tremendous coaches that can develop those underdeveloped guys & make them stars (Chung, Byrd, WT3, Unger, etc) but its also nice when you get guys that don't need 2-3 years to develop & become big contributers. I guess you could say the 4-5* guys just make our coaches jobs a little easier.

Its funny to me that whenever we get a three/two star guy there are alwasy a bunch of duck fans that say trust the coaches, which makes it seem like the coaches are intentional chosing two and three star guys over four and five stars guys because they see hidden talent that makes them valuable. Sure the coaches may see talent, but they are not chosing those guys intentionally, but rather because they are forced to settle.

So the coaches never ever choose to not listen to the omniscient guys over at Rivals and pick a 3 star over a 4 star? You do realize coaches don't google every player they see, check out their profile, and then go from there, right? That they actually do their own evaluations, and that those evaluations often don't match up with Fetters' evaluations?