Do you mean Maryland's 2 stars are definitely no good but our 2 stars are definitely great?
I think the point is that a couple of 5 star players will disproportionately elevate the value of a recruiting class on these websites as compared to the team on the field. Fans get excited when a 5 star signs, but it doesn't always have a huge impact, as Rutgers fans should know. Its far better the get 22 high 3 stars, than it is to get 3 5 stars, and then a bunch of 2 stars and low 3 stars. Another relevant point, especially relevant to Flood's classes, is that there is very little difference between the high 3 stars and the 4 stars. Very little. As long as we are getting the kids the staff wants within that area, we as fans should all be happy, until proven otherwise. So far, I have not seen any evidence that our staff has issues evaluating talent within the vast realm of 3 star land -- in fact the early indicators are that they are quite good at it. Our fans should take pleasure in knowing that we may not need to land the NJ prima donnas with this staff, because the on the field product will be just as successful with the high 3 type kids they identify who want to be here.
Where the fans have a right to be concerned is when kids are committing who are 2 stars (and some low 3's) without any offers from other P5 programs. Of course Flood and staff may have recognized talent in those kids that others are missing, but it easier to get excited about a "diamond in the rough" when they are infrequent (like 2-3 per class). That may be where this class winds up, and I will be fine with that, especially if the projects are big huge linemen with a mean streak. You have to take risks there in the Big Ten, since the big huge linemen who are not projects are very, very difficult to recruit for a number of reasons.