I don't know but I will count this as #3 recruit we could have had this cycle that we will not get.
I'm not sure the context, but if it's about losing someone we could have had because we didn't pursue early or hard enough, I don't agree. This one IMO isn't on the coaches (and don't get me wrong, our coaches do make mistakes - everyone does). They tried to get after Hollins for a long time...but he committed to UCLA very early, so we were always playing catch-up. From what my UCLA friends told me (not sunshine pumpers) I never thought we'd get him and I wrote that here.
And then recently someone unnamed texted me some info that really showed me we weren't going to get him, which was quickly debunked 2 nights ago when the II poster said Hollins was about to commit and Sampson pretty much agreed (ahhhhh, recruiting). Turns out my UCLA friends were right all along as was the person that shall remain unnamed for the good of this thread. Soooooooo, I don't consider this someone we could have gotten, personally.
We've had some tough luck the past 2 cycles but overall the staff and team are doing great! Players are developing nicely and the coaches are working their asses off. Maybe we'll get a good surprise but if not and we hold onto everybody I will still be thrilled.
In Hollins case, it's not tough luck bro. Folston would be tough luck, but Hollins was a kid who committed to a school a long time ago that came on an OV at the last minute (at the coaches' behest) without his parents. It's not tough luck that he didn't flip bro. Some poster on II got everyone's hopes up, but the reality is that he was always going to be a tough pull.
Agreed though, still a phenomenal class sitting at #2 on Rivals. We'll probably drop a few spots if no one else signs, but that doesn't make the class any worse. It's just that getting EV would put a bow on this mother-effer cause he's such a bad-a$$ in a position of need. But we're still sitting on a damn good class regardless...