Something I don't get: (2004 recruiting class)

beej67

beej67

new around here
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
56,569
Why are you comparing 2004 to 2008?

4 year cycle or something?
 
It just seemed like we were always on the radar screen for the highly sought after guys the last few years, but we just couldn't seal the deal. Last year, we finally sealed the deal on a lot of those guys. Relative to 2007, the 2008 class isn't shaping up to be as good, but there are still a lot of good prospects that have yet to commit.

2008 is still a top-25 recruiting class. I'm still happy.
 
Wow, I was looking over all our commits over the years. Basically our entire starting OL and DL were 2 star prospects. Either we're finding a lot of hidden gems or coaching them up very well.
 
GTKyle said:
Wow, I was looking over all our commits over the years. Basically our entire starting OL and DL were 2 star prospects. Either we're finding a lot of hidden gems or coaching them up very well.
Click to expand...
They're tough positions to evaluate. If they are "college"sized coming out of HS, they'll be rated higher but that doesn't account for continued growth, football smarts, work ethic, etc.
 
Richard, M Johnson, and Robo were definitely not 2 star prospects. Walker flew under the radar because he went to a small school until the All Star game, but definitely not a 2 star guy regardless of what the sites say. Walker's film was really, really, really impressive.

Now our OL on the other hand does not really have anyone that was that highly recruited.
 
To be fair to the coaches the stars for OL are somewhat misleading. Scout, and I believe Rivals too, have the same set number of 5* and 4*'s for each position. In other words, there's the same number of 5* QB's and OL's even though there's a whole lot more OL's than QB's.
 
GTKyle said:
Why are you comparing 2004 to 2008?

4 year cycle or something?
Click to expand...

Umm, yeah. Like, 4 years of eligibility, takes 4 years to graduate, the 2004 guys are our seniors now, etc. Everyone around here, including myself, is freaking out about how much talent we're losing at the end of this year, but then I started to remember the 2004 class wasn't considered to be all that super-talented to begin with, except for Calvin who's already gone. So either the recruiting services were way wrong, which is usually the case to a degree, or we've actually got some pretty good backups that just haven't seen the field yet, which is what I'm hoping.
 
beej67 said:
Umm, yeah. Like, 4 years of eligibility, takes 4 years to graduate, the 2004 guys are our seniors now, etc. Everyone around here, including myself, is freaking out about how much talent we're losing at the end of this year, but then I started to remember the 2004 class wasn't considered to be all that super-talented to begin with, except for Calvin who's already gone. So either the recruiting services were way wrong, which is usually the case to a degree, or we've actually got some pretty good backups that just haven't seen the field yet, which is what I'm hoping.
Click to expand...
SOME of the 2004 guys are seniors. Others are RS JRs.
 
Redshirting tends to blur the line a little, but nevertheless, I find it strange that we're so worried about losing so much. We recruited 5 OL in 2004, but we recruited more in 2005, 3 of which were 275+ in high school. They've been eating cheeseburgers too, haven't they?

Man, I hardly remember the 2006 class. lol.
 
I don't think there will be a dropoff in the OL play. Next years starters are more talented just not as experienced. We are also losing the 2003 class who are the red-shirt Seniors.
 
Why do you say the 2008 class isn't shaping up as well as last year's? Currently we're ranked 17, with a number of high profile guys still considering us strongly. Isn't 17 good enough for you?
 
In defense of Kyle, that's not what he said. He said this:

Relative to 2007, the 2008 class isn't shaping up to be as good, but there are still a lot of good prospects that have yet to commit.

2008 is still a top-25 recruiting class. I'm still happy.
Click to expand...

Which clearly means at this point in 2007 we were further along than we are now, which is true no matter how you slice it, but I'm happy with where we're at now by comparison to previous years, and clearly so is Kyle.
 
You would have to say that 2008 is not going to be a down year compared to 2004 because we're getting consistent 3 stars instead of the previous 2 stars. So according to the stars our recruiting has improved dramatically.

But, I also assume they give out higher stars to more teams to get more people interested to buy there subscriptions.
 
Why is this year behind last year? Were we ranked 17 this time last year? We had one less commitment last year as well.
 
ncjacket said:
Why is this year behind last year? Were we ranked 17 this time last year? We had one less commitment last year as well.
Click to expand...
We had a quite a few more big name guys, more 4 stars, more top 100 guys.
 
Maybe, but looking at the commits we have so far and where they are ranked in Scout, there's certainly nothing wrong with this year's class. All 3 star + isn't anything to turn you your nose at.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top