Off-topic posts formerly found in recruiting profiles

[BobbyMac]

To be fair, they had a #11, #10, #24, #23 and #6 classes leading up to that year. What that #6 class doesn't tell you, is that they also added a juco player some of you may know... Cam Newton. I think we can all agree that adding Cam Newton to a #6 overall class is at least equal to a #5 overall class. lol

According to 247, he was counted.

Auburn 2010 Football Commits

Also the #6 Auburn ranking (.9333 juco transfer Cam Newton included) goes directly to what Lucky's original point is about rankings being overrated... They had 43 commits. Basically, they took commitments from TWO classes worth of recruits whose avg. rating was .8379 to get that finish.

 

[BobbyMac]

They list him separately as one of the three LOI, he's not listed (nor calculated in their avg ranking number) with the actual class.

According to this page he was. They are listed at #6 with 43 commits, not 39.

2010 Football Team Rankings

 

[NDdomer2]

I suppose I disagree. Cam had one good year in college. That's it.

Bradford won the Heisman, the BIG12 three consecutive years, broke the OU all time passing record, won a National Title and was the #1 overall pick in the draft.

If we are just talking about college success and dominating that level of the game, then I would say all of those guys are on par or better than Cam.

If...which I'm sure koon was. But the player is the player and we know their NFL results. So I don't put Bradford/Tebow anywhere near the talent of Newton/Luck. (Winston NFL career yet to be determined)

Might as well say Manziel was a generational talent too if we're going college only.

 

[woolybug25]

Also the #6 Auburn ranking (.9333 juco transfer Cam Newton included) goes directly to what Lucky's original point is about rankings being overrated... They had 43 commits. Basically, they took commitments from TWO classes worth of recruits whose avg. rating was .8379 to get that finish.

It doesn't change the fact that the class won a title. I guess they did add Cam and they were #6, missing the top five by almost nothing. You don't like that they got there because of numbers... cool... did they still win a title?

What's your point here, man? Does this small indescrepency change literally anything?

 

[NorthDakota]

Huh? I don't get your argument at all in comparison to what is being talked about.

We are comparing players that played in similar times (so not comparing 1975 vs 2010) and about their ability to be a generational QB. What does it matter who was picked where by a NFL team?

Jimmy Clausen and Stafford came from different times?

My point was that if we look at Bradford vs. Newton or Luck or whomever...stats are not going to paint a good enough picture.

 

[woolybug25]

If...which I'm sure koon was. But the player is the player and we know their NFL results. So I don't put Bradford/Tebow anywhere near the talent of Newton/Luck. (Winston NFL career yet to be determined)

Might as well say Manziel was a generational talent too if we're going college only.

We are talking about college players. That point has been made several times. You even said Tebow was the closest, who wasn't a good NFL player. Not sure what point you are trying to make.

 

[pkt77242]

Jimmy Clausen and Stafford came from different times?

No, I was making the point that comparing Bradford vs Newton was within close proximity (time wise) and that that is an important factor when comparing stats.

My point was that if we look at Bradford vs. Newton or Luck or whomever...stats are not going to paint a good enough picture.

It is part of the picture, but as Wooly said already, look at how Oklahoma did with Bradford there. Bradford was an amazing college QB and is right there in the discussion for best college QB of the last 15+ years.

 

[pkt77242]

We are talking about college players. That point has been made several times. You even said Tebow was the closest, who wasn't a good NFL player. Not sure what point you are trying to make.

^This.

I don't understand why people are struggling to understand this point.

 

[Ndaccountant]

The bolded was never my or his original point. He said that team recruiting rankings are over rated. That's verbatim. My point, was that most of the top teams and all title winners have had top five classes. That is fact. Plain and simple.

He didn't say that explicitly, but his points and teams suggest that playing at a playoff level, or close to it, you don't need top 5 classes. I would say that the assertion that champions have great recruiting is true, but I would not say that all top teams do, since the list I provided of the best teams in the last 5 years or so show mixed results.

 

[BobbyMac]

It doesn't change the fact that the class won a title. I guess they did add Cam and they were #6, missing the top five by almost nothing. You don't like that they got there because of numbers... cool... did they still win a title?

What's your point here, man? Does this small indescrepency change literally anything?

I don't feel one way or the other about it. I just posted some facts.

 

[NDdomer2]

We are talking about college players. That point has been made several times. You even said Tebow was the closest, who wasn't a good NFL player. Not sure what point you are trying to make.

that a Cam Newton level QB does not come around every 5 years.

Does a kid at the college level dominate his peers that often yes. Does that person go on to do the same at the NFL no way.

So while everyone wants to talk about college ONLY. I am taking all levels into account.

With that said, it doesn't happen every 5 years. i hope you can follow along.

 

[Luckylucci]

Again, ZERO NATIONAL TITLES. You are trying to use every outlier to prove you're right while ignoring the majority of teams. Let me give you some examples.

2010 Team Recruiting Rankings
Florida - 5 Straight bowl games, including one BCS Game victory (Sugar Bowl). Meyer leaves.
Texas - Outlier. Another top five class coming from a school with 9 straight 10-win seasons and coming off a Title game appearance. This class may be an outlier, but all of their prior success was led by top 5 recruiting classes.
USC - Also coming off prior years of success. This class finished #6 in the country in '11, won the PAC12 and had two double digit win seasons.
Oklahoma - Went to 4 straight bowl games, including two BCS victories. Two top 10 finishes.
Alabama - Two national titles. Nuff said.

2011 Team Recruiting Rankings
Bama - Three national titles. Nuff said.
FSU - Two BCS games and one BCS National Title
USC - 1 PAC12 championship, one top ten finish
Texas - Outlier
Auburn - One #2 finish and a BCS Title Game loss

2012 Team Recruiting Rankings
Bama - Three national titles. Nuff said.
Texas - Def a weird outlier
FSU - Four straight 10 win seasons, two BCS games and a National Title
Florida - One BCS game loss
OSU - National Title, two undefeated seasons, four straight 12+ win seasons

I was going to go all the way to this class, but it'll take too long, the '13 class is current and well... you should get the picture. If not, lets look at the last ten title winners.

Bama - Several top five recruiting classes
OSU - Several top five recruiting classes
FSU - Several top five recruiting classes
Bama - Several top five recruiting classes
Bama - Several top five recruiting classes
Florida - Several top five recruiting classes
LSU - Several top five recruiting classes
Florida - Several top five recruiting classes
Texas - Several top five recruiting classes
USC - Several top five recruiting classes

See a trend?

The funny thing is, you say I'm looking at outliers when in reality you are looking at the smaller group of teams. You are looking at the top 5 of what 100? So you looked at 3 consecutive recruiting cycles for ONLY the top 5 recruiting teams and because they were successful over that stretch that constitutes success or accuracy for the process? You think that depicts accuracy across an entire process that ranks over 100 teams?

Obviously top 5 finishes are going to yield success. Nobody is saying it always wrong or never right, etc. Its just not accurate.

Again, 60% of last years top 10, don't recruit top 10 classes or to the level of their respective finishes, period. Some don't even come remotely close. Not an accurate process.

To be honest, this has also gotten a little off topic as the original point was that the team rankings take into account numbers more so than quality. Therefore teams that don't bring in 25 players each cycle with be at a disadvantage in those rankings, regardless of the talent they actually brought in.

 

[koonja]

Are bonita fish big?

 

[Booslum31]

Are bonita fish big?

Not really...but they put up a nice fight.

 

[Bogtrotter07]

Wow, mods cleanup on aisle # 9!

 

[woolybug25]

He didn't say that explicitly, but his points and teams suggest that playing at a playoff level, or close to it, you don't need top 5 classes. I would say that the assertion that champions have great recruiting is true, but I would not say that all top teams do, since the list I provided of the best teams in the last 5 years or so show mixed results.

He did say it explicitly, that's what verbatim means.

that a Cam Newton level QB does not come around every 5 years.

Does a kid at the college level dominate his peers that often yes. Does that person go on to do the same at the NFL no way.

So while everyone wants to talk about college ONLY. I am taking all levels into account.

With that said, it doesn't happen every 5 years. i hope you can follow along.

Then you are having a conversation with yourself; as Koon's original post, nor any post thereafter, had anything to do with the pros. Thanks for letting us follow along...

The funny thing is, you say I'm looking at outliers when in reality you are looking at the smaller group of teams. You are looking at the top 5 of what 100? So you looked at 3 consecutive recruiting cycles for ONLY the top 5 recruiting teams and because they were successful over that stretch that constitutes success or accuracy for the process? You think that depicts accuracy across an entire process that ranks over 100 teams?

Obviously top 5 finishes are going to yield success. Nobody is saying it always wrong or never right, etc. Its just not accurate.

Again, 60% of last years top 10, don't recruit top 10 classes or to the level of their respective finishes, period. Some don't even come remotely close. Not an accurate process.

To be honest, this has also gotten a little off topic as the original point was that the team rankings take into account numbers more so than quality. Therefore teams that don't bring in 25 players each cycle with be at a disadvantage in those rankings, regardless of the talent they actually brought in.

Someone else previously showed how all of the teams you posted were just outside the top 10 consistently (sans MSU) and I just showed you how roughly 80-90% of the top 5 teams end up highly successful and even showed you how the last 10 national title winners had multiple top 5 classes.

If none of that proves my point, and you are just going to rehash your previous incorrect comments, then we don't really have anything to talk about. You can go on making incorrect statements if you want. But top 5 classes equal titles. It's pretty fucking simple.

 

[BeauBenken]

Are bonita fish big?

Well, Koonja, they're what's called a trophy fish so...yea, they're pretty big.

 

[NDdomer2]

Then you are having a conversation with yourself; as Koon's original post, nor any post thereafter, had anything to do with the pros. Thanks for letting us follow along...
.

Man, sure seemed like people were responding. But I have been working crazy hours, wouldn't doubt conversing with myself.

I agree we were talking about college class recruiting rankings/qbs but his statement didn't specifically state not considering only college or not considering pro careers. So, when I asked if he really felt that way, the question was asked with full career taken into consideration.

And to think when I joined this convo it was about how PJ could potentially boost our 2018 recruiting to another level, then to just recruiting class rankings (which I agreed with you on iirc), then to past college qbs (pro career excluded), to step brothers quotes.

Bogs you ain't kidding.

Wow, mods cleanup on aisle # 9!

 

[IrishLion]

I'm on vacation in Fort Walton with only a phone and iPad.

I will clean this mess from the iPad later if another mod hasn't checked in.

 

[BeauBenken]

I'm on vacation in Fort Walton with only a phone and iPad.

I will clean this mess from the iPad later if another mod hasn't checked in.

It's pretty big...

 

[GowerND11]

I think he was referring to:
Peter "I stopped at this quaint bistro off of 3rd avenue on the upper east side and had a wonderful lightly bodied Ethiopian brewed decaf" King.


It's sad that so many kids only play one sport anymore. I agree that playing multiple sports makes the kid a better athlete. Not only do they uses their muscles somewhat differently, but they have to think differently. Keeps them sharp and more focused IMO.

It's a real problem at small schools, like the one I coach. We've been trying to get some of our talented basketball players out for football. A, we need the numbers. B, they are so athletic. The problem is they are worried they'll get hurt for basketball. Caused 5 truly athletic kids to not come out/quit early in the season.

 

[IrishLion]

It's a real problem at small schools, like the one I coach. We've been trying to get some of our talented basketball players out for football. A, we need the numbers. B, they are so athletic. The problem is they are worried they'll get hurt for basketball. Caused 5 truly athletic kids to not come out/quit early in the season.

^True that. My Alma mater is the same way, and always has been. There's a limited pool to pick from, so the coaches start to get very pushy about their athletes playing other sports.

Stud basketball players are discouraged by their coaches from going out for football. They don't want them hurt, and the football team makes the state finals almost every year, which keeps the football/basketball kids off of the basketball court for an extra three or four weeks. The coaches hate that, so they make the kids feel like they won't get any playing time if they play football.

Similarly, there are some kids that play football that also want to play baseball, but the football coaches do a really good job of making sure that the kids know how disappointed they would be if the kids miss the all-important June "voluntary" practices. So, a lot of football players feel too guilty about missing June practices and don't try out for baseball.

It's a bunch of bullshit, really. One of my biggest regrets is not playing baseball in high school, and it was because the coach told me that I was needed as a "leader during spring conditioning and June practices." I was a sophomore when I was thinking about trying out, and it took me some time to realize that it was just my coach subliminally guilt-tripping me.

 

[EddytoNow]

It's a real problem at small schools, like the one I coach. We've been trying to get some of our talented basketball players out for football. A, we need the numbers. B, they are so athletic. The problem is they are worried they'll get hurt for basketball. Caused 5 truly athletic kids to not come out/quit early in the season.

As a teacher and a basketball coach, I've observed a change in the attitude of athletes in the last 15 years or so. At the middle school level the number of athletes coming out for major sports, like football and basketball, has remained pretty constant. For example, I've seen as many as forty 7th grade boys come out for the basketball team. That number is quite large considering we are a small school with only about fifty boys per class. Since there is only one team, as many as 25 athletes get cut during try-outs. Of the remaining 15, everyone wants to be the next Michael Jordan or Steph Curry. By 9th grade, they've established a sort of pecking order based on their skill level, willingness to work hard, and individual development. If they can no longer realistically see themselves blossoming into a star, they leave the basketball program and begin to focus on the one or two sports where they have had the most success. This attrition continues until the 12th grade when there are only four to five athletes from the original 40 remaining. The varsity coach is forced to bring up underclassmen to put a team on the court. So we end up with a freshman, JV, and varsity team with about 10-12 players per team. Our high schools coaches seldom have to make any cuts, frequently taking players with no previous experience because the others have dropped out of the program to focus on something else.

The bottom line goes back to the unrealistic expectation that everyone is going to be the next star player. No one wants to be a substitute or bench player. They want to win and be part of a successful team, but not as a substitute. If I'm not a starter on the middle school basketball team, I'm done. If I'm not going to be the star on the team by high school, I'm done. If there is a younger player that's better than me, I'm done. Why waste my time with basketball when I can start on the football team, or the soccer team, or the track team, or the cross-country team, or the golf team, or the baseball team, or the wrestling team, or the bowling team, etc.

 

[NDdomer2]

It's a real problem at small schools, like the one I coach. We've been trying to get some of our talented basketball players out for football. A, we need the numbers. B, they are so athletic. The problem is they are worried they'll get hurt for basketball. Caused 5 truly athletic kids to not come out/quit early in the season.

Our school wasn't "small" necessarily by numbers but the amount of quality athletes were still pretty slim.

Our coaches didnt have to try and get the basketball kids to play football. Most of us were football guys first. I think the one year 4 of the 7 guys who played varsity also started on the football team. 3 of those went on to play some level of college ball.

Our bball coach didnt exactly want us playing football (injuries as you mention) but he really appreciated the intensity and aggressiveness we brought to the team. Typically bball practice started before football season was over (deep playoff runs), and he couldnt wait until we got back to practice to ramp things up again. He also said our non FB guys were soft and could learn from us.

We were physically stronger and were able to play through contact better than our non FB teammates.

We didnt have too many bball only guys ever come out for the team, but the skills do transition from bball to fball, just not as good as fball to bball. if that makes any sense.

 

[GowerND11]

As a teacher and a basketball coach, I've observed a change in the attitude of athletes in the last 15 years or so. At the middle school level the number of athletes coming out for major sports, like football and basketball, has remained pretty constant. For example, I've seen as many as forty 7th grade boys come out for the basketball team. That number is quite large considering we are a small school with only about fifty boys per class. Since there is only one team, as many as 25 athletes get cut during try-outs. Of the remaining 15, everyone wants to be the next Michael Jordan or Steph Curry. By 9th grade, they've established a sort of pecking order based on their skill level, willingness to work hard, and individual development. If they can no longer realistically see themselves blossoming into a star, they leave the basketball program and begin to focus on the one or two sports where they have had the most success. This attrition continues until the 12th grade when there are only four to five athletes from the original 40 remaining. The varsity coach is forced to bring up underclassmen to put a team on the court. So we end up with a freshman, JV, and varsity team with about 10-12 players per team. Our high schools coaches seldom have to make any cuts, frequently taking players with no previous experience because the others have dropped out of the program to focus on something else.

The bottom line goes back to the unrealistic expectation that everyone is going to be the next star player. No one wants to be a substitute or bench player. They want to win and be part of a successful team, but not as a substitute. If I'm not a starter on the middle school basketball team, I'm done. If I'm not going to be the star on the team by high school, I'm done. If there is a younger player that's better than me, I'm done. Why waste my time with basketball when I can start on the football team, or the soccer team, or the track team, or the cross-country team, or the golf team, or the baseball team, or the wrestling team, or the bowling team, etc.

Our school wasn't "small" necessarily by numbers but the amount of quality athletes were still pretty slim.

Our coaches didnt have to try and get the basketball kids to play football. Most of us were football guys first. I think the one year 4 of the 7 guys who played varsity also started on the football team. 3 of those went on to play some level of college ball.

Our bball coach didnt exactly want us playing football (injuries as you mention) but he really appreciated the intensity and aggressiveness we brought to the team. Typically bball practice started before football season was over (deep playoff runs), and he couldnt wait until we got back to practice to ramp things up again. He also said our non FB guys were soft and could learn from us.

We were physically stronger and were able to play through contact better than our non FB teammates.

We didnt have too many bball only guys ever come out for the team, but the skills do transition from bball to fball, just not as good as fball to bball. if that makes any sense.

I coach both football and basketball there. (I also did 2 years of baseball haha) I agree that some coaches can be tough on kids playing multiple sports, and it can be detrimental to the team. I will say we are fortunate enough that we coaches amongst both programs communicate really well and push the kids to play both sports. Ultimately it's their decision not to play one or the other that is hurting the programs. (Basketball is a good program, but could be better if they had that toughness)

 

[EddytoNow]

Five years ago I took over as the JV basketball coach. We had a very successful team going 15-5, 18-1, and 16-1 over the next three years. One particular class went 57-3 over a three year period from 7th grade through 10th grade. Of the 15 girls who comprised that team in 7th grade, only one was still playing basketball as a senior. The girls who had started in middle school or had been key substitutes were still part of the program as 9th graders. The rest had quit playing basketball.

Starters on team that went 57-3 over four years from 7th grade through 9th grade:

6 foot 1 inch Center - Quit team between her freshman and sophomore seasons when she was not asked to play on the varsity.

5 foot 8 inch Forward - Captained the JV team and then quit the program because varsity coach only played 6 to 7 players per game and she determined she wouldn't be a starter.

5 foot 10 inch Forward - Played her sophomore year as a JV and junior year as a varsity substitute. Quit when she thought she would not start as a senior.

5 foot 2 inch Guard - Moved up to varsity as a freshman, but played very little. Substitute on the varsity team during her sophomore and junior years. Startered her senior season. Sole remaining member of the team that went 57-3 from 7th grade through 10th grade.

5 foot 2 inch Guard - Started as a freshman and sophomore on the JV team. Quit before her junior season when she determined that she would not be a starter. She was also a twin sister of the one player whom remained in the basketball program through her senior season.

6th Man - Continued as 6th man on JV team. Quit the team when she determined she would never start on the varsity team.

 

[NorthDakota]

Five years ago I took over as the JV basketball coach. We had a very successful team going 15-5, 18-1, and 16-1 over the next three years. One particular class went 57-3 over a three year period from 7th grade through 10th grade. Of the 15 girls who comprised that team in 7th grade, only one was still playing basketball as a senior. The girls who had started in middle school or had been key substitutes were still part of the program as 9th graders. The rest had quit playing basketball.

Starters on team that went 57-3 over four years from 7th grade through 9th grade:

6 foot 1 inch Center - Quit team between her freshman and sophomore seasons when she was not asked to play on the varsity.

5 foot 8 inch Forward - Captained the JV team and then quit the program because varsity coach only played 6 to 7 players per game and she determined she wouldn't be a starter.

5 foot 10 inch Forward - Played her sophomore year as a JV and junior year as a varsity substitute. Quit when she thought she would not start as a senior.

5 foot 2 inch Guard - Moved up to varsity as a freshman, but played very little. Substitute on the varsity team during her sophomore and junior years. Startered her senior season. Sole remaining member of the team that went 57-3 from 7th grade through 10th grade.

5 foot 2 inch Guard - Started as a freshman and sophomore on the JV team. Quit before her junior season when she determined that she would not be a starter. She was also a twin sister of the one player whom remained in the basketball program through her senior season.

6th Man - Continued as 6th man on JV team. Quit the team when she determined she would never start on the varsity team.

Thats sad. I get the "wanting to be the best" thing but goodness gracious.

 

[ginman]

So was this Phil guy cut from the girls JV bb team too? If so, I don't see him having much chance of being a football player.

 

[NDdomer2]

So was this Phil guy cut from the girls JV bb team too? If so, I don't see him having much chance of being a football player.

This threads beeen due for a cleanup, ur attempts may go unheard.

 

[koonja]

ND should recruit everyone of them and be ready when there'a a fall out. It's embarrassing that OSU'S leftovers would be a game changer for our class considering how bad we need big time DTs, but I'll take it.