01-22-2013, 12:20 PM
To clarify my earlier comment--if our coaches discovered an undervalued two-star recruit six or seven years ago, it didn't provoke attention from other schools and recruiting services. I believe that is why we had a number of players perform at a higher level during their time at Stanford than their star rating would have predicted. By the same token, it is more likely that U.SC, Alabama and other traditional powers would end up with more players with inflated value, due to their mutual interest in said player. A player that Stanford shows interest in today is going to get a closer look from other top programs than he would have a decade ago. This also means that a player with a scholarship offer from Stanford who keeps a rating of two stars is probably a two-star prospect, at best, while a four-star is more likely to be overrated than he was in the past. We are going to have much better athletes now, than at any time in the past, but we are less likely to find as many overachievers as we have seen the past few years.
