I didn't see a discussion of this brilliant article on recruiting | Page 2 | The Boneyard

I didn't see a discussion of this brilliant article on recruiting

Status
Not open for further replies.
UconnFamily said:
No, this is clearly false promise of some idiots like, well, you!
Expand ...

Still trying to understand what this exchange is about. First no one is making any promises of any kind. The main "physical" characteristic of this recruiting class is they are tall big framed people who have the potential of getting bigger. The coaching staff believes they have RKG's with a positive up sides. I am going with the coaching staff for the time being. So take the star system and place it where the sun doesn't shine!
 
Confident Carl said:
Still trying to understand what this exchange is about. First no one is making any promises of any kind. The main "physical" characteristic of this recruiting class is they are tall big framed people who have the potential of getting bigger. The coaching staff believes they have RKG's with a positive up sides. I am going with the coaching staff for the time being. So take the star system and place it where the sun doesn't shine!
Expand ...

Sure, up Pudge
 
The results perfectly align with the ratings.

Nobody has ever debated that the system is perfectly efficient. Nobody has ever argued that if you have hundreds of two star players over a decade that some percentage of them will end up being good to great players.

In 12 years UConn had exactly two teams with winning records in conference. Their best team was humilated by Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. If you'd like to argue that 2007 was their best team well they got humiliated by West Virginia prior to dumping their bowl game to Wake Forest.

They have had some good players and have put more players in the NFL than you'd expect.

Maybe they can put together a team that can win the AAC by outrecruiting Maine, Monmouth and Bryant - but until it happens it's hardly unreasonable to be skeptical.

To Fuller's point about Davis' offer list that would be about the 3rd or 4th best list in this class - so he might want to come up with a better
example.
 
Our record against the P6 when in the Big East includes our early years when just entering 1A. We struggled as expected. Edsall got things rolling pretty good starting in 2007 and there was a decent string of winning seasons, some nice name wins and we sneaked into the Fiesta. While in the Big East we had .500 or better records against just about everyone except Cincy and WVU. There was no noticeable uptick in the recruiting rankings to speak of as the program began this trajectory.

This program had good talent when P arrived. Some holes for sure, but a good coach would have kept the trajectory in place. The 2012 team was loaded and a JUCO or 5th year transfer big back should have been an absolute priority. With that defense and the ability to pound the football I could have been the quarterback and ended up in a bowl. Just about every starter on that defense was either drafted or ended up in an NFL camp. Griffin and Nick Williams could have provided good offensive options. P let the whole system go to .

The recruiting sites are largely self fulfilling prophecies. They follow the name programs and rate kids accordingly. Do they provide some gage on talent? Sure. But, there is plenty of talent out there that is not properly reflected in those services and Edsall certainly proved that a decent level of success can be achieved without have kids with lots of stars after their names. Ranking the classes is meaningless unless you are the top 10-20 programs. To worry about being ranked 90th or 60th is pointless imo. There is just too much variation and a lot of these kids don't stick anyway.

How anybody can have a meaningful opinion on Diaco's recruiting is beyond me. His coaching on the other hand has be very nervous.
 
UconnFamily said:
Although impressive our tall receivers aren't as talented as Rutgers tall receivers was. Mark Harrison 3*, Tim Wright 3*, Brandon Coleman 4*, DC Jefferson 3*.
Expand ...
Just so I understand the comment - You are basing your opinion clearly on the stars garnered correct?
 
.-.
uconndogs said:
How anybody can have a meaningful opinion on Diaco's recruiting is beyond me. His coaching on the other hand has be very nervous.
Expand ...

Agreed. The recruiting is actually the only thing that gives me hope at this point. Recruiting classes should be judged after 5 years. The staff has a vision in recruiting, I give them that. Athletes that can fill into their frames. Rest assured some of those TEs are going to be O Lineman. And some of the other players look like they can be very good if they move down a position.

Last year's recruits showed potential in spurts. It bothered me to no end that Coach D burned redshirts for no apparent reason, though.

We all know the absolute key - Quarterback. This team desperately needs to hit on a quarterback.
 
UconnFamily said:
We can't compare our tall receivers or players to Texas Tech. TT has three 4* players and one of those players is a WR out of TEXAS, the other WR are all 3*'s. I don't see how you can compare our 2* guys to other tall 3 and 4* WR... Honestly, what your doing is selling other fans hope which only causes fans to be angry. If our 2* players perform like 2* players on the field then the fans get upset cause some people like you try to make some fans believe that our 2* WR's, just because they're tall can be compared to Rutgers 3 and 4* WR's.
Expand ...

No one comparing our guys with Texas Tech recruits. The subject is TALL (which I brought up and the rational therof) The reason Texas Tech went tall was Red Zone scoring. I maintain that those types of match ups mean something. Twenty yards in, makes blazing break away speed less of a factor. Tall with leaping ability and fast enough can go up and get it!
 
After all this time ... we flushed them out.

The POINT being made is that the Edsall years 2003-2010 was an Underachievement. That is far from my point of view. I see the last four years as a correction/aberration - with a clear mistake on hiring Pasqualoni. We may not have had a Winning record while in the Big East (which includes the first years beyond D1aa); but, we WERE successful.

We would not put up with the following:

2-9
0-11
5-6
1-10
3-8
2-9
1-11
5-7
4-7

And that Program, I assure you, got far better Stars than we did ... then & now. UConn's Football Program will rise or fall with the same type of successful recruiting outlined in Fuller's blog. Diaco's capability is, still, an unknown.
 
Depends on what the goals are. If you want to be a perennial top 25 team (which is what this fanbase wants, even if it is unrealistic in the near term) that kind of recruiting might barely be good enough. But not likely. Edsall did a good job finding under-the-radar guys. And he coached them well enough to get us to be a top 40 team. But without better players, it is unlikely you are going to be any better than that.

And the point has been made - it is depth. If we had Cardell Jones sitting behing CC this year would have been much different. Sure we put a lot of guys in the pros, more than expected, but in most cases nobody was sitting behind them on the depth chart.
 
J187Money said:
Depends on what the goals are. If you want to be a perennial top 25 team (which is what this fanbase wants, even if it is unrealistic in the near term) that kind of recruiting might barely be good enough. But not likely. Edsall did a good job finding under-the-radar guys. And he coached them well enough to get us to be a top 40 team. But without better players, it is unlikely you are going to be any better than that.

And the point has been made - it is depth. If we had Cardell Jones sitting behing CC this year would have been much different. Sure we put a lot of guys in the pros, more than expected, but in most cases nobody was sitting behind them on the depth chart.
Expand ...

I actually agree.

We are early in the Process. We cannot be a consistent top 30 Program with Edsall's construct. We were almost a consistent top 40. I do think we aspire to be better than that.
 
.-.
Pudge said:
I actually agree.

We are early in the Process. We cannot be a consistent top 30 Program with Edsall's construct. We were almost a consistent top 40. I do think we aspire to be better than that.
Expand ...

Right. For now this is the best we can do. Hopefully Diaco builds something and doesn't run away at the first hint of success. Or even if he does, let's hope we don't hire another program destroyer in his wake.
 
sdhusky said:
Yeah. Everyone wants big & fast but at UCONN you don't get to pick

Edsall liked fast guys. Lots of recruits with track backgrounds.

Diaco seems to skew more towards big.

AND FAST...Traiq Beals - To quote from Diaco. If UCONN can be big and imposing we can be good. If we can be big and
have some very fast and talented skill players we can be GREAT! No one should misconstrue that Diaco doesn't want to acquire speed. He saw a team that was physically ill equipped to compete. He brought in Matt Ballis and obviously saw the need to become more physically imposing. So size (along with other characteristics was indeed a priority of this recruiting class.
It is pretty obvious with all that has been said and done, the first priority is to establish the run.
Tiraq beals track 1.jpg
Expand ...
 
huskymedic said:
Just so I understand the comment - You are basing your opinion clearly on the stars garnered correct?
Expand ...

Yup, because the star system says so. There's more players in college football that are/were ranked 3, 4, and 5 star players that make more of an impact than 2 star players. How can you compare an Aaron McLean who is 6'6 210 lbs runs a 4.7 forty (2*) to a Mark Harrison who is 6'6 200 lbs runs a 4.4 forty (4*) other than stature? just because they have the same frame doesn't mean they have the same talent.
 
UconnFamily said:
Yup, because the star system says so. There's more players in college football that are/were ranked 3, 4, and 5 star players that make more of an impact than 2 star players. How can you compare an Aaron McLean who is 6'6 210 lbs runs a 4.7 forty (2*) to a Mark Harrison who is 6'6 200 lbs runs a 4.4 forty (4*) other than stature? just because they have the same frame doesn't mean they have the same talent.
Expand ...

Can you name who are the evaluators (giver out'rs) of these Stars ... and what there qualifications are?
 
UconnFamily said:
Yup, because the star system says so. There's more players in college football that are/were ranked 3, 4, and 5 star players that make more of an impact than 2 star players. How can you compare an Aaron McLean who is 6'6 210 lbs runs a 4.7 forty (2*) to a Mark Harrison who is 6'6 200 lbs runs a 4.4 forty (4*) other than stature? just because they have the same frame doesn't mean they have the same talent.
Expand ...

It was really just a yes or no answer but hey, look @ that... Harrison garnered an extra star in just 32 posts and he hasn't played high school ball in 7-8 years. Must be because Rutty is now B1G.;)
 
I'm curious as to what Nolan Ulizio's rating would have been if he declined the Michigan offer and remained a UConn commit.

I know that he was bumped from two stars to three after committing to Michigan. What I am not fully clear on is this: was the bump due to being offered by Michigan or did it actually require his accepting that offer?
 
.-.
1. It's not the SAT

The evaluators are suspiciously untrained. The skew makes it susceptible to the For Profit motive if bigger members bases. The 4.4? Ridiculous. It's got huge inefficiencies.

2. Mark Harrison?

We all know Edsall backed off. It's not that he wasn't a physical specimen. It was some other qualitative issue. We will never know. I do hope Aaron McLean now becomes a Star. You've made him my rooting interest.

3. Simply no evidence.

Diaco needs to be good as an Evaluator. That's our only way to get better
 
FfldCntyFan said:
I'm curious as to what Nolan Ulizio's rating would have been if he declined the Michigan offer and remained a UConn commit.

I know that he was bumped from two stars to three after committing to Michigan. What I am not fully clear on is this: was the bump due to being offered by Michigan or did it actually require his accepting that offer?
Expand ...

He wasn't bumped on Rivals. He is still a 2-star, 5.3 RR recruit:

http://sports.yahoo.com/connecticut/football/recruiting/player-Nolan-Ulizio-163401
 
whaler11 said:
What years was UConn in the top 40?
Expand ...

The Fiesta Bowl year and the other year we received a couple of top 25 votes.
 
.-.
J187Money said:
The Fiesta Bowl year and the other year we received a couple of top 25 votes.
Expand ...

The Fiesta Bowl team finished 56th in the Sagarins.

Their best finish was 2009. The 2007 team did break the 40 barrier by finishing 39th.
 
whaler11 said:
The Fiesta Bowl team finished 56th in the Sagarins. Their best finish was 2009. The 2007 team did break the 40 barrier by finishing 39th.
Expand ...

They were higher in other polls but yes that was basically the ceiling.
 
This thread, like the many recruiting threads before it, just baffles me. It really does. There are a certain amount of truisms that certain people are simply refusing to understand. Such as:

1) Can a coach find talented players at the 2-star level? Yes.
2) Can those 2-star level players become great players, even NFL-caliber players? Yes.
3) Is a 3-star player inherently better than a 2-star player? No.
4) Can P5 coaches miss out on a talented kid simply due to recruiting areas? Yes.
5) Has a team comprised mostly of 2-star level players ever won the national championship? No.
6) Is it extremely difficult to be a top25 team with a roster full of 2-star players? Yes.

I'm just not sure why #5 and #6 hurt people's sensibilities around here. I really don't get it. There is nothing that precludes a 2-star player from being great, and I hope that Diaco has found more than a couple great ones in this class as well as last class. But the idea that the stars don't mean anything when taken over a large number of players is false. The idea that multiple offers (a.k.a., other top coaching staffs rating the kid highly) don't matter when taken over a large number of players is false. Period.

Having said all that, I'm hoping that Diaco found all the diamonds in the rough, and I truly believe that this year can be a turnaround year for UConn...
 
A quick LOL on acting as if the SAT is more predictive than recruiting rankings.

The SAT has an r of .77?
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,366
Messages
4,568,151
Members
10,472
Latest member
MyStore24


Top Bottom