https://michigan-football-five-star-analysis.geminilaunch.com/
Was mulling this over yesterday so I threw Claude at it. My goal was to uncover whether my anecdotal feeling (in the aftermath of the new Babalola injury news) that Michigan 5-stars seem to bust at a higher rate than other programs was founded in anything factual.
Look for yourself, but it doesn't seem like the boom vs. bust rate is really the main problem, but rather that Michigan's volume of 5-stars is comparatively low, so within that relatively small sample, the handful of very notable busts stand out in our memory, and the impact of those 5-stars not developing is more keenly felt.
One aspect that came to light that I thought was interesting was that the very top programs don't necessarily all do it the same way. Bama's distribution is "barbell-shaped", that is, they get a lot of elite results and a lot of complete busts, but they stack 5-stars at every position, so they rarely feel the pain of one of them busting -- they just get dumped at the bottom of the depth chart or processed out and the next 5-star takes over. Georgia, on the other hand, doesn't hit the same percentage of elite outcomes that Bama does, but they consistently convert them into above-average, multi-year starters. Clemson (at least through its peak years) didn't match the volume of Bama, Georgia, or OSU, but very rarely completely missed on 5-star recruit; they get something positive out of almost every one.
Anyway, it's just AI garbage so pick it apart, challenge the assumptions or reasoning, etc.