Pac-12 Talent Rankings: Enough to Move Up?

Chris Charbonnier

Chris Charbonnier

Chris was born in Montevideo, Uruguay, but made his way to Oregon by the age of five, when he attended his first game at Autzen Stadium. A huge sports fan at a young age, Chris grew up playing football, basketball and golf. Although realizing he isn’t likely to play in the NFL or NBA, Chris still holds on to hopes of being a professional golfer should his unfortunate putting woes take a turn for the better. A bit of a platypus, he attended both Oregon State and Oregon during his collegiate days where he earned a business degree in Finance and Business Administration. Chris works for Daimler Trucks North America in Portland, and plans to get his MBA from the University of Oregon. Chris has been an active member in the recruiting community since 2005. He studies the intricacies of recruiting and is particularly intrigued by talent evaluation techniques. He is currently working on developing his own scouting reports for every scholarship player on the UO roster. Chris lives with his wife, Katrina, and his two-year-old son Lucas (a future dual-threat QB).

  • Big Duke

    This is awesome.

  • Itsjesseduh

    Great stuff. Love the tier system. The only thing is what makes recruits 3 or 4 stars? I feel like OSU and Riley seem to get the diamonds in the rough. Riley sees a 4 star recruit in the deemed 3 stats that no big school take. Riley knows what he wants an what he needs to make his system work and to beat teams that are ‘better’. The same people that say those teams are better are the ones that call the 4 star players Riley recruits ‘3 star’ recruits. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. No hate for the ducks, just the obnoxious, unrealistic, ‘head in the clouds’ fans in every sport for all teams including the Beavs. Great well thought out article man. Go Beavs.

    • Big Salad

      So you’re saying that every 3-star Oregon State gets is really a 4-star because Riley has a specific use for them? If so, you’re logic is laughable.

      True, not every “good” college player is ranked highly by recruiting services in high school. That said, the various scouting services have been around long enough to be credible.

      If someone is a 2 or 3-star instead of a 4 or 5-star, there’s probably reasons why. For example, they may be a good “fit” in Riley’s system, but maybe they steal gay sheep, run from the cops, try to tackle cops, or are convicted kidnappers, too.

      Bottom line? There’s no National effort or conspiracy to downgrade the rankings of Oregon State recruits. The numbers are what they are Oregon State, like most people in Corvallis, are among the least talented in the Pac-12.

      • Itsjesseduh

        So you would fit in the obnoxious column I was talking about. I didn’t say every 3 star is actually a four star. Which now also ads you to the ‘head in the clouds’ column. I said that Riley does a good job with finding 3 stars and revealing their true value. Not everyone is like that. Most 3 stars are in fact what they are. It’s also obvious that the factors that go into ranking the recruits is credible, but all I said was that there will always be the few that get undervalued and Riley does well a finding them, especially ones that fit the pro style game at OSU.

        Among the least talented? Now that puts you in the unrealistic column which makes you the worst fan type for any team. I expect you to say OSU isn’t as good as us or whatever, which is true…but among the least talented? Pffff. Now you just made yourself sound stupid.

        I can admit when a team is better or has talent, but your one of those duck fans who thinks you’re superior to all teams and no one else can touch you in the SEC…but you should probly try to beat Stanford and then move one the SEC.

      • 1000tacos

        Lemme guess Big Salad… you go to a community college or are unemployed (or both) and love the ducks cuz they win a lot and it makes you feel good inside to like a team that wins to boost your self esteem?

  • Mike

    The idea that Rich Rodriguez was just put in a bad position at Michigan is laughable. He simply wasn’t able to compromise and did a horrible job.

    • Football fan

      You might want to pick-up a copy of “3 & Out” by John Bacon.
      There was plenty of fault to be shared at Michigan including a big piece attributable to Rodriguez. But, I think what the author wrote is prety fair. There was a very large contigent of Michigan fans as well as players who were unhappy that Carr was shown the door and plenty of them didn’t give Rodriguez a chance.
      Rodriguez was held responsible for the lack of documentation that resulted in too many extra summer supervisor practices which got UM some NCAA sanctions, but that was ruled neither intentional or malicious. Mistakes happen in large organizations and in the world of everchanging NCAA Rules, they can occur even when you think you are doing all the fit things.

      Rodriguez certainly played a role, but most level headed UM fans know that the entire episode was very dramatic and sensatinalized.
      UM fans are please with their new coach and frankly have moved on from the RichRod Era.
      Read the book.

  • Football fan

    Wonder if you will update this write-up based on recent transfers out, transfers in, and recruits who didn’t show up…? Talent is talent.

    From my POV most of the scouting services evaluate players based on how they might fit into the prototypical offense & defense that most have grown up with watching Ohio State, LSU, USC, Notre Dame, Penn State, Michigan, and Florida State. The problem is that in his day and age with Spreads, Read-option, Hybrid-Defenses and uptempo play…that many of these 4 & 5 star players are getting out-played on the field by 2 & 3 star players.

    Oregon under Kelly and WVU when Rodriguez coached there are good examples of programs which overachieved at the beginning without the 4 & 5 star talent. Only after some success did those coaches attract higher ranking recruits.

    The Scouting Services evaluations are not perfect gauges and often the expectations don’t meet reality.

    I like your write up. Good work!

  • Luscious

    Great article my man. Always on point with recruiting trends

  • Biro Hero

    These assessments are dead on, I have to give it to you. I do disagree with the location part though. Boise Idaho and Lincoln Nebraska are desirable locations? CU was a premier national powerhouse 20 years ago, and a very competitive team on ten years ago. I’m biased as a CU fan, but on behalf of the schools located in an “undesireable” area, have faith. Good coaches, good administrations, and good opportunities bring in good teams. Unfortunately, CU, WSU, Utah, havent had those luxuries lately, but we’ve had them before and those schools are trying to turn things around. Blaming failure on location lets awful coaching and poor talent off too easily. That said, the bottom dwellers have work to do.
    Sidebar – CU Boulder football = undesirable / Boulder = desirable.