2019 recruiting class...so far
- Thread starter King Kong
- Start date
There are always concerns with each class. I won't say names, but there are 4 or 5 guys who I would be shocked ever contribute-- they either did very little against high school competition, or just play soft. I would also be shocked if McCaffrey, given his pedigree, is patient enough to wait for his turn, particularly when considering how transferring is so popular now. With the exception of Benhart, the OL guys all look like long-term projects.
However, there are guys who seem to be in the perfect position to really shine-- Robinson, Henrich, Nance, and our crop of RBs all look mighty good on tape with the physical tools to rise up fast.
However, there are guys who seem to be in the perfect position to really shine-- Robinson, Henrich, Nance, and our crop of RBs all look mighty good on tape with the physical tools to rise up fast.
It is a good class. Top 20 to 25 is good. Not a great class. Many holes filled with a lot of size and speed. Ty and Wandale are difference makers and Benhart has the size to play right away. And it's not done yet. Pola Gates is rumored to be N. Just waiting to make it official.
Last year's recruiting class produced 8 guys who made the 2 deep, per the depth chart for the Iowa game. Nine if you count the an injured Honas. Are there 8 guys in this class that will or can make the 2 deep? Mills, Wandale, Hannah, Nance, Benhart, Ty, Bland if he makes it and Heinrich if he is healthy.
"You're", but this sort of thing always happens when people start saying how correct they are.. :Cool:
Wow, this thread turned into every thread from 3 years ago that cleared 1 page!
Start learning to use the ignore button, lads. It will improve your quality of life.
Start learning to use the ignore button, lads. It will improve your quality of life.
For the first time in how long we are bringing in a full (plus) number of recruits and the quality is very high. I am thrilled with this class for the most part. From 2014 to 2017 we were signing 20 to 21 kids a year by the time we had kids not meet grades or have fallout for other reasons we were really in the 15 to 17 range. That is simply not enough players, now we are signing 25 last year and bringing in 30 this year, and they are quality recruits
I believe if you look even through the TO classes only 50 % on average of any class will contribute that is why signing full classes is so important
I’m not sure I have one person on ignore and I’m fine. No reason to let anything here get to ya.
The sheer math of it dictates this. That's why it's a little dumb when people get on that program of, "Ohhhhh you thought this class was so great well half of them don't even play!!!"
Yeah well there are 85 scholarships and then walk-ons besides, and you are going to get regular playing time out of about 50 of them if you include special teams. So yep, that's about half your roster.
It's mathematically impossible to have more than about half your team on the two-deep.
Does your math account for the fact that the players that make up the 85 are constantly rotating.
Some guys may only contribute for 1 year but it is not impossible for a large percentage of classes to contribute
Some guys may only contribute for 1 year but it is not impossible for a large percentage of classes to contribute
Nothing is impossible just very unlikely. There is fine balance between retention and replacement
Doesn’t even address what I am talking about.
If 50 of the 85 get used in year 1, the next year you will lose some players and add some new. Over a 5 year period, mathematically you will have 250 players play. Over a 5 year period you will typically have between 100 and 125 scholarship players rotate through
We are number two in recruiting in the BIG. Two of the top three can't face us in the conference championship game so they don't count, makes us n umber two.
OSU's ranking is very misleading as they have only a small amount of scholarships to give out this year. Their ranking is based on only 15 recruits. I read where they only have 18 at most to give out this year which will hurt their overall ranking. Their average per recruit, however, is 3rd in the 247 Composite right behind Alabama and Georgia. They have three 5 star recruits. The bad news: they have a ton of returning talent in 2019 which is the reason for their small class.
I shake my head again at these posts. We were a 4- 8 team. The past doesn't hide that . Live in today's reality world. I think it's a really good class of players for our system and a impressive rank to be at for our recent winning records. Check back it a few years for a real ranking on how they produced .I think anytime we get into the top 20 at this juncture in time we should rejoice.
I was thinking similar things. Coaches (head coach, assistants, support), Culture (facilities, AD, history, fan base, etc.), and weight room / nutrition have nearly as much to do with success rather than just pure class rankings. A top 20 recruiting class can turn into a top 10 team by combining the raw talent with the other things. Then, when 1-3 difference makers at the right positions are part of the top 20ish recruiting class, that can catapult into a top 5 team.
Frost = Osborne in this philosophy, and that turned out pretty good. If HCSF can get even close to the succeeding in this formula, better days are ahead.
Not trying to be snippy here but you lost me over a five year period you will have first year players, but players and multiple year starters along with injuries. The way you posted this sounds like there are 250 different players over five years
50ish players will be used every year. This is kind of like an FTE in employment. 50 x 5 is 250. And it is a rolling number.
yes some will be the same, some will get injured, some will be replaced mid season. But the need for 50ish is an every year thing. Considering you only bring in 125 or so scholarship players over that same period, it is possible, as players rotate in and out.
If this guy were head of recruiting in a Bo regime, we'd have been Top 10 year-in-year-out.
Bo sucked at recruiting. Good HC
Good HC? Hated recruiting and hated media and fans. Also, teams repeatedly blown out of the water, multiple times in a given year. His teams often times looked totally unprepared and completely outmatched. How many P5 jobs has he turned down?
When he had a lot of NFL talent on defense he had a really good defense, and when he didn’t, well, you know the rest. There are
plenty of coordinators out there that do well when they have lots of talent.
Avg. HC, at best. Maybe a good coordinator? Definitely a good positions coach
Last edited:
That's what 2.5 years will get you usually. Especially when you change schemes so drastically which will create higher turnover.
Name another coach who was given 3 years but still killed it in recruiting. It's just not going to happen.
Agree. I watched the minute-long breakdown Greg Sharpe had with the position coach for each player. Reoccurring themes: winners, played on good teams; long with frames Duval can build on; love football; quality kids, many coach's kids; hard workers, etc. Combine all that with decent star power after a 4-8 season and call me a "rose-colored glasses" guy if you want, but I'm pretty jazzed about this class.
Hey, everything is possible, Jesus Christ may come see you next weekend, want to go for burgers (no pork sausages) but that doesn't mean I am counting on it. Get a ******* clue. This is the same board that expected an 8 or 10 win season. Take a deep breath and look at expectations.
There is nothing wrong with "Wishing & Hoping" but don't act like this is a some doom and gloom, not meant to be, just trying to pull people back into reality.
You obviously didn't even get my point. You said we can compete with the West, and will win it more often than not with Frost's coaching. So if we are(as you said) winning the West(with Frost's coaching or however we are doing it), that means we are playing in the conference championship game. At that point, you need one win to win the conference title. One win. That's all it takes. But then you turn around and say we can't even compete for the conference title. So by that, you are essentially saying that if we make the conference championship game(which you already conceded we can do-since you said we could win the West with Frost's coaching), that we should automatically expect to get blown out in the championship game regardless of opponent. If not, then what else do you mean by not even being able to compete for the conference championship? You didn't say we couldn't win it, you said we couldn't even compete for it. I am simply saying that it makes no sense to say we can win the West, but can't even compete for the conference title when the only difference between winning your division and winning the whole conference is one game. You act like winning the whole conference is so much more incredibly tougher than winning the division. But it isn't. It's just the difference of one game.
If you want to talk about expectations, I'm not sure where you're at as a whole. You talk about how this class is a little disappointing(which I completely disagree with-there is nothing disappointing about a class this good after a 4-8 season), but then you turn around and say you'd be surprised and disappointed if we don't get at least 10 wins next year. A class that is a little disappointing is supposed to help get us to 10 wins minimum? I'm about as optimistic as they come, but even I think that's a bit high.I think 10 wins could be doable, but as an absolute minimum baseline-no.
Last edited:
Kids like Adrian Martinez seem to be the exception rather than the rule recruiting out of California these days. There is a lot of talent out there, but there are more kids that give up and transfer when adversity hits than kids that work harder and push through to become better. Plus I think a lot of them are overly hyped by recruiting mags. USC, UCLA, etc are no longer pushing teams of elite athletes and I think that is reflective of a statewide decline in work ethic and rise in progressivism and sheltered lifestyles. It sounds weird but it's something an ex-Californian has seen in person.