Ok, that works unless the 85% guy plays at or above his level and the 75% guy plays at or below his level. Then you have blowouts (i.e. U of L vs OHIO). I still say I'd rather start with a bunch of 3 or 4 star guys and get him to play at or above their average level. The higher quality you strat with the higher the potential. My guess is that's why the Alabama's etc. win National titles. They probably start with a much higher base than the non AQ guys and get them to play at or above their average.
There are so many things we don't see. Many of the three/four star kids are just ahead of some other classmates. They might be high school redshirts or from hs programs with superior player development. Many three/four star kids are closer to their full potential with less upside. What the Ohio staff seems to be skilled in is finding the more unheralded player with the bigger upside who will eventually equal or better the higher rated player out of high school. Soo much more to this than stars.
Totally agree with you, Bcat.
Plus, these ratings only look at how these players perform on the field or court. Another recruiting skill is locating guys with good character who can gradually improve their athletic skills and surpass some of the guys who were rated higher in HS.
It takes maturity to make it through a college program.