Stars
5: 4
4: 8
3: 16
2: 9
Unranked: 7
32/44 (73%) were 3 stars or lower.
Offensive Lines
4-5: 1
3 or less: 9
(no message)
This crap is posted every year.
We've seen this play out numerous times at ND as well.
It's just one data point. Not sure there are any conclusions to be drawn.
Lower round guys have historically had better careers in the NFL. Lower round guys are also generally not the household names that usually are also the high star guys. This is exactly what the data points show as well.
(no message)
Generally speaking 5* guys come with a lot of fanfare and attitude of you should bend over for them. They are overhyped so to speak. They are more interested in the glamor and tend not to work as hard as a 2 or 3 star who really has to work to become a starter.
As the numbers show, the Super Bowl teams (your best this season and usually for several seasons) have more lower star guys. The guys everyone overlooks because they aren't hyped by ranking services, etc.
These guys generally put in more work to earn where they are. When you have a group doing this your team ends up better - as this data indicates.
It's why the Patriots are one of the best teams year in and year out with a bunch of no-names for the most part. Sure they have stars but not the number of stars the rest of teams have. The Patriots do more with less.
(no message)
(no message)
ratings
(no message)
(no message)
Since there are far less 5 stars than 3 stars.
(not to be confused with all purpose backs)
(no message)