Correction on Previous Post. More Thoughts on Recruiting

I wrote that the Spartans 2012 recruiting class was the highest rated in the Dantonio era when looking average stars per recruit. Although it doesn't alter the main point, it should have read:

Did you know that this year's average "star ranking" is the second highest in the Dantonio era?  [Rivals: 2012 = 3.11 is second to 2009 = 3.30. Scout: 2012 = 3.17 is second to 2011 = 3.19] Take that tid-bit and add this: The combination of the thoroughness of this staff's recruiting process, their player evaluation skills, the emphasis on character and intelligence, recruiting for position need, selecting players that fit MSU's scheme, player skill development once on-campus, quality strength and conditioning, lack of player attrition (forcing all but one of last year's freshman to red-shirt in 2011) and successful development of team leadership is enough to close the gap with programs who have recruited, on average, higher rated players.
_____________________

More thoughts on star rankings...
I will say though that if MSU continues to win 10+ games each year, it would be fair to expect that the ratings on a per recruit basis should rise to new heights. It would be disappointing for Spartan fans if it appeared that we reached our level in the recruiting game despite consistent winning and competing for championships. Then again, if the Spartans keep winning, who cares what the recruiting services say?

I really don't expect that we will ever be the program that 4 and 5 star recruits in the midwest gravitate toward. Even Tom Izzo has recognized that for the hoops program. He plans accordingly develops a team vs fielding a group of highly rated individuals. It's not inferiority thing - it just the way it is set up geographically and where the population centers are located.

My interest in this stuff is not that I think there is a 1:1 correlation between recruiting service "star-rankings" of recruits and winning - there are so many more variables. It is more that the chUMps brand and marketing machine allows to them use the easy method of skimming the cream off the top by focusing only on 4 and 5 star recruits while their fans think they "settle for a 3-star". I just like that when we get a four or five star recruit, it means that chUMps did not get them. What's bad for them is good for us. That's just the way it is. Like The Doctor (MD) says, "It isn't over. It will never be over..."