newburg has us at #38 nationally...............

Originally posted by law_bee:

I would say this is probably just 8-12 spots where we usually are. And notice that maryland is just a few spaces ahead and there are spending $300 per recruit.
Click to expand...
<font size="2" face="Arial, Verdana, Sans-Serif">law_bee,

Didn't quite catch that,8-12 spots "lower" than where we usually are?

For those that follow the recruiting rankings closer than I do, where does insiders stack up?

I understand there is considerable difference between recruiting rankings and team rankings 2 to 3 years down the road, but is there a composite source or a more creditable source than this?
 
Well lets see if I have this right. 38th, I think that keeps us in bowls for the near future. A lower tier bowl a very lower but at least we go bowling. A BCS bowl with the 38th best class someone please tell me how we get 38th and expect a BCS bowl. This is not a negative post just curious thats all.
 
Top 10-15 means something IMO. After that, it gets real dicey to grade out classes. There are just too many variables. As far as BCS bowls, if you make the assumption that you need a top 10-15 class every year to make it, we've never had a chance. But luckily you have to play the games to see who goes.
 
I'm probably in the minority here, but I believe after the top 2-3 teams , in terms of recruiting rankings is a crapshoot at best...I mean, how in the world can there be any "accuracy" in comparing, say, #38 and #28 in rankings ? Its almost silly. Did these rankings experts r eally sit down and watch the appropriate amount of film on a HS player in order to make these assessments ? If so, then the amt of film required would be staggering.

I think, as many folks do, that the experts have to be "in house" , with the staff, who, IMO are FAR FAR better able to judge talent.

Then, after they arrive there are added variables, like adjusting to college, adjusting to the speed of the game, enthusiasm with the rigors of college FB, being in the best position for your abilities, strength and conditioning, etc etc etc...There are just too many variables to deal with, to assess where an 18 year old will be mentally and physically over the next 4-5 years...Again, there are obvious exceptions, like the top 2-3 teams, who might have more "no miss" SAs than, say comparing between most schools recruiting..
 
GoldRush.. I couldnt have stated any better myself.. there are just too many variables.. you never know how a 17-18 year old kid is going to turn out sometimes.. I doubt Kelly Rhino had many stars coming out of high school, but am damn glad he played ball at Tech.
 
This is why I have been saying all along its who offered the kid that counts, and the top 10 classes generally have 10 or so that were recruited by several of the big boys. We have I think about 4 to 6 that had multiple offers like that. And folks thats not too bad for us. On the other hand what brings this class down a few notches is that some of the recruits didn't many offers at all, but at least these guys in my opinion can all run, and had good hi school careers!
 
Good post, Goldrush. I've never doubted that CG can recognize talent, and now it looks like he can sell GT too.
 
And furthermore imo I think under all kinds of things going on what with the losses at the end of the season and the questioning of Chans ability to coach and the qb situation well I believe Chan did a remarkable job of recruiting. He gota few impact players, a few sleepers, but also good students with good character. My hats off to him and the entire staff! By the way when I say impact player I mean one that can turn you into winning not one that you can win with, although you do have to have those that will help win.
 
Goldy, That's a dandy post, and this recruitnic agrees with you.

I'm not concerned with the overall rankings. We'll see how this all pans out down the road.

Techrod makes some good points as well. What I've noticed through the years is signing 5 or so top notch high profile prospects is a big deal. Seems we've done that. When you get 2 that are BIG TIMERS it helps a great deal. Recruiting is such a none exact science.

A key is regognizing talent as Belly has pointed out. There are always key players that are PLAY MAKERS at the next level that never were recruited hard by a lot of programs. Get a hand full of the ones everyone is banking on while doing a great job of evaluating and filling the needs in your program with the kids that fit, and you're set. That's way I see it anyway.

Go Jackets!
 
VERY VERY seldom do we sign nationally ranked top 100 players. This year alone Grant is #64 and scott is #37. For us that is unbelievable and you can take that to the bank!
 
Good perspective, gold rush and ncjacket; we have some quality athletes to work with.

I'm not sure if your assessment of top 2-3 teams or ncjacket's top 10-15 is more accurate, but the vein in which you both speak rings true.
 
Also interestng that Emmfinger (or however he spells it) has us at #30, while Rivals has us at #50. Emmfinger has all our recruits at least 2 star while Rivals has 2 with 0 stars. If these recruiting rankinge mean anything, then somebody tell me how that can be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top