Neal is not a 4-star because he is not an athletic freak. He won't post a fast 40, does not have a big vertical, and is not a big guy. What he does he does it well...which is simply play very good football. He is a smart player who is already very polished and sound in the fundamentals of the game.
I am not really well versed with the ranking methodologies so help me out here.
You have defined Neal as a normal specimen who is a very good player with football smarts.
Are the other "freaks" ranked higher because they have all of his qualities in addition to their athleticism? Or is it based on potential because of their athleticism?
In either case it makes sense to rank them higher right?