The Official "I Hate our Recruiting" Thread

[Chin Diesel]

Jesus Christmas.

I know who Mike Cummings is and who Eric Fisher is. Stop bragging about what he did at CMU because his performance here has been nothing short of an embarrassment.

So nobody, with any credibility, is willing to go on record, and say Peart IS (not could be, but IS) a future high NFL draft pick.

Got it. Thanks.

Call me no credibility, but I'll go on record today that Peart is at worst a 3rd rounder. I think he may go first or second.

 

[BlueMAB]

Call me no credibility, but I'll go on record today that Peart is at worst a 3rd rounder. I think he may go first or second.

None of us have credibility. He could go first round, sure. Not even really the point. Using Peart (and Fisher) to defend Cummings is mornic. Look at the rest of his body of work. It's like using Noel Thomas' performance to defend Diaco.

 

[Exit 4]

I have no problem taking projects like Tunstall if we are winning some of the regular recruiting battles against AAC schools for other players. The problem here is that this is our weakest position and has been for many many years now and so the fan base is rightfully looking for the immediate solutions that we desperately need. Tunstall could be molded in a draft pick over 5 years, but I think its pretty clear to anyone watching the film he will need some additional development.

 

[Chin Diesel]

None of us have credibility. He could go first round, sure. Not even really the point. Using Peart (and Fisher) to defend Cummings is mornic. Look at the rest of his body of work. It's like using Noel Thomas' performance to defend Diaco.

I defend none of the coaches.

 

[BlueMAB]

I defend none of the coaches.

I know, I wasn't talking about you. Tired of hearing "but, but, Cummings and Fisher and Peart" as if one guy, who could probably be even better under different coaching, is going to turn this around. People are upset with recruiting and he points to one player. One, on a roster of 100+.

 

[#BleedBlueFam]

I know, I wasn't talking about you. Tired of hearing "but, but, Cummings and Fisher and Peart" as if one guy, who could probably be even better under different coaching, is going to turn this around. People are upset with recruiting and he points to one player. One, on a roster of 100+.

People are upset with recruiting because we aren't winning. The recruiting classes were never special even in our best years. Not to mention that playing in a conference with the champion playing in a BCS bowl game and annual games against West Virginia, Rutgers, Pitt, and Louisville helped sell recruits.

This thought that we can automatically recruit kids away from P5 schools 'just because' is wrong. And no new coach will have that ability too unless some guy like Nick Saban walks through the door. He isn't. If you want to say that the coaching staff isn't doing their job developing players that is a fair argument.

What people are currently doing here is trashing a 17/18 year old kid who has just devoted the next 4-5 years of his life to trying to make your beloved program better. Stop doing this, it is .

 

[CTMike]

This thought that we can automatically recruit kids away from P5 schools 'just because' is wrong. And no new coach will have that ability too unless some guy like Nick Saban walks through the door. He isn't. If you want to say that the coaching staff isn't doing their job developing players that is a fair argument.

Why are our conference peers able to recruit against P5 and develop players? Why is it not a problem that we do neither?

 

[#BleedBlueFam]

Why are our conference peers able to recruit against P5 and develop players? Why is it not a problem that we do neither?

It is a problem. It always has been one, and it most likely always will be one.

UConn suffers a serious geographical problems. We're not in Texas. We're not in Florida. We're not in Pennsylvania. We're not in Ohio. We're not in a big city.

This is not the only factor, but certainly is a big one. Every time we recruit a kid we have to convince him (and his family) to leave his state and come to CT. Look at Houston's top 10 commits: all from Texas. UCF's top 10 recruits: 8/10 from Florida.

 

[whaler11]

So based on a lot of comments in this thread why even bother to try?

If we aren't worthy of being more competitive in recruiting - why not shutter the program and see if the ACC wants an even 16 for basketball.

 

[uconnphil2016]

So based on a lot of comments in this thread why even bother to try?

If we aren't worthy of being more competitive in recruiting - why not shutter the program and see if the ACC wants an even 16 for basketball.

This may be in our near future if we don't right the ship very quickly. And by righting the ship I mean buying Diaco a one way ticket to Guam and hiring any other warm body.

 

[Pudge]

Why are our conference peers able to recruit against P5 and develop players? Why is it not a problem that we do neither?

Well ... we had a GREAT run with Edsall then. Lots of kids developed. We won and went to decent bowls. And got kids that --- ooops --- weren't P5 strike zone. It, admittedly, takes a lot of things to make a Program rise. Recruiting certainly. But, I am still convinced that we can win in this Conference and fill the RENT.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

So based on a lot of comments in this thread why even bother to try?

If we aren't worthy of being more competitive in recruiting - why not shutter the program and see if the ACC wants an even 16 for basketball.

As inept as our HC and a number of his assistants have been (and yes, I believe that with very few exceptions they have been quite inept) they are trying. They may be misguided in some of their efforts in addition to being inept and I would be willing to start a campaign to fund the buyout if there was a chance I could come close to raising $5 million.

That said, I really need an explanation from the people on this board who are blasting kids they've never seen play as to what this blasting will accomplish. Do you believe that knocking these kids makes you a better fan? Is it an attempt to prove that you know something about the ability of these kids (which, unless you've coached them, coached against them or played with or against them you couldn't know a whole lot) that nobody else does? What exactly is the point of writing off a kid who we truthfully have no idea about? I really would like to know.

 

[CTMike]

Well ... we had a GREAT run with Edsall then. Lots of kids developed. We won and went to decent bowls. And got kids that --- ooops --- weren't P5 strike zone. It, admittedly, takes a lot of things to make a Program rise. Recruiting certainly. But, I am still convinced that we can win in this Conference and fill the RENT.

We were in a BCS conference and competing for kids that had much better "P5" comparable offers. We never lit the recruiting world on fire, but I would take Edsall recruits any day. They were demonstrably better. Not only that, but Edsall clearly had talent to coach kids up. PP or BD can't say the same. If your ability to recruit sinks at the same time your ability to coach kids up sinks - you find yourself in our current predicament. We certainly CAN win, but not until one or both aspects (preferably both) improve significantly.

 

[CTMike]

I am sure James is an outstanding young man and I wish him nothing but success. Again the comments are not directed towards him but our recruiting in general.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Why are our conference peers able to recruit against P5 and develop players? Why is it not a problem that we do neither?

It's a problem, but I don't ever like to see a negative response towards any kid who has just said: I would like to attend and play football at the University of Connecticut. And you aren't the culprit @CTMike, I'm just borrowing your post for convenience. The tone some people have..."aw crap, he only has offers from _______" is a pretty nasty thing to say about a kid who just chose to become a Husky.

Now, aside from that, can we wish, hope and pray that our coaches can somehow recruit a few more 3 star kids with P5 or other AAC offers? Yeah, we can and should. And they damned well should be able to do so. Sadly, I think football is a game where you have to win with the low level guys by coaching them up and getting lucky (usually at QB) to entice the next level guys to come.

 

[Pudge]

We were in a BCS conference and competing for kids that had much better "P5" comparable offers. We never lit the recruiting world on fire, but I would take Edsall recruits any day. They were demonstrably better. Not only that, but Edsall clearly had talent to coach kids up. PP or BD can't say the same. If your ability to recruit sinks at the same time your ability to coach kids up sinks - you find yourself in our current predicament. We certainly CAN win, but not until one or both aspects (preferably both) improve significantly.

Simply not true.

I have watched the UConn Program football recruiting extensively since 2000. You can say that Edsall had a far better evaluating eye ... and that is arguably true over PP and Diaco; you cannot say that he WON recruiting battles over P5 Programs that frequently. Notably, Edsall worked the fringes of the recruiting world. His best Florida kids? Overlooked kids often playing out of position and/or a relationship deal that Terry Richardson brought in. Best DL/LB? Often found early by Edsal or staff. RB? Never won one competing with P5. They were kids that Edsall saw something that no one else saw (Terry Caulley, Donald Brown, Andre Dixon, Jordan Todman)

My view is that Edsall knew the geography FAR better than PP and Diaco. He worked hard to get a Todd Orlando to bring kids from Pittsburgh, a Mike Foley to get New England kids, a Terry Richardson, a Scott Landio to get Jersey kids, Hank Hughes for kids in Quebec.

Then ... maybe some of you remember ... often the last 5 -7 kids the week before NLOI signing day, he brought 80% surprises. Complete kids off all radars. And there he was modestly successful ... and often missed huge.

 

[BUConn10]

I see the football board has caught the same thing a lot of guys on the bball board have.

You know... the "well this one guy back in the day wasn't a highly rated recruit but turned out really good so therefore a recruits rank and other offers don't matter" thing that's going around.

 

[whaler11]

As inept as our HC and a number of his assistants have been (and yes, I believe that with very few exceptions they have been quite inept) they are trying. They may be misguided in some of their efforts in addition to being inept and I would be willing to start a campaign to fund the buyout if there was a chance I could come close to raising $5 million.

That said, I really need an explanation from the people on this board who are blasting kids they've never seen play as to what this blasting will accomplish. Do you believe that knocking these kids makes you a better fan? Is it an attempt to prove that you know something about the ability of these kids (which, unless you've coached them, coached against them or played with or against them you couldn't know a whole lot) that nobody else does? What exactly is the point of writing off a kid who we truthfully have no idea about? I really would like to know.

No one is blasting any individual kid.

No one has written off anyone.

If the idea is you can't judge how your recruiting is going based on the information you have - you are probably on the wrong internet.

 

[whaler11]

You've got to let go of Edsall.

Nobody is going to recreate what Edsall did here because the circumstances have completely changed.

 

[CTMike]

Simply not true.

I have watched the UConn Program football recruiting extensively since 2000. You can say that Edsall had a far better evaluating eye ... and that is arguably true over PP and Diaco; you cannot say that he WON recruiting battles over P5 Programs that frequently. Notably, Edsall worked the fringes of the recruiting world. His best Florida kids? Overlooked kids often playing out of position and/or a relationship deal that Terry Richardson brought in. Best DL/LB? Often found early by Edsal or staff. RB? Never won one competing with P5. They were kids that Edsall saw something that no one else saw (Terry Caulley, Donald Brown, Andre Dixon, Jordan Todman)

My view is that Edsall knew the geography FAR better than PP and Diaco. He worked hard to get a Todd Orlando to bring kids from Pittsburgh, a Mike Foley to get New England kids, a Terry Richardson, a Scott Landio to get Jersey kids, Hank Hughes for kids in Quebec.

Then ... maybe some of you remember ... often the last 5 -7 kids the week before NLOI signing day, he brought 80% surprises. Complete kids off all radars. And there he was modestly successful ... and often missed huge.

I feel like we are splitting hairs because I know Edsall's bread and butter was the overlooked guys, I'm just saying that - could we beat Rutgers occasionally? BC? Cuse? Pitt? Now we aren't even doing that AND aren't coaching kids up.

 

[Pudge]

You've got to let go of Edsall.

Nobody is going to recreate what Edsall did here because the circumstances have completely changed.

how so???

You aren't going to WIN recruiting competition head-to-head with Pitt or Rutgers in their homeland. The point about Edsall is he, with a lot of work and research, learned how to unearth solid Team kids across many positions from the Recruiting geography we need to be in. For instance: We have not been nearly as proficient in Florida since Richardson has been gone. We have NEVER gotten more than one kid per year in Western PA since Orlando left. We went to Georgia and got good kids. Recruiting is about "markets"; and Edsall knew where to look far better than the two that succeeded him.

To your point of "circumstances have completely changed": I do not believe that MOST of Edsall's kids came to UConn to play Syracuse or Pitt or Rutgers. They want a great University and play at the highest level. TV? I think we are on TV a lot; NFL? Kids that are good enough will get developed, strengthened and promoted (Byron Jones?). There is nothing about the conference changes - as far as I can see - that makes this destination less appealing for the kids that came 10 years ago. They weren't coming to UConn over Nebraska or NC State or Miami.

 

[BUConn10]

UConn recruiting in football is futile. It's like starting a 5 player game of Civilization and the other 4 teams start on fertile green hills by the sea and UConn is the landlocked desert surrounded by stronger, more prepared forces on all sides. Kids just aren't going to come here to play football, it's purely cultural. The good guys we do get we have to develop ourselves, but when you realize the elites of the game are developing guys just as well of not better but simply starting with an infinitely better product, it makes following football recruiting exhausting.

 

[whaler11]

how so???

You aren't going to WIN recruiting competition head-to-head with Pitt or Rutgers in their homeland. The point about Edsall is he, with a lot of work and research, learned how to unearth solid Team kids across many positions from the Recruiting geography we need to be in. For instance: We have not been nearly as proficient in Florida since Richardson has been gone. We have NEVER gotten more than one kid per year in Western PA since Orlando left. We went to Georgia and got good kids. Recruiting is about "markets"; and Edsall knew where to look far better than the two that succeeded him.

To your point of "circumstances have completely changed": I do not believe that MOST of Edsall's kids came to UConn to play Syracuse or Pitt or Rutgers. They want a great University and play at the highest level. TV? I think we are on TV a lot; NFL? Kids that are good enough will get developed, strengthened and promoted (Byron Jones?). There is nothing about the conference changes - as far as I can see - that makes this destination less appealing for the kids that came 10 years ago. They weren't coming to UConn over Nebraska or NC State or Miami.

Number 1: The teams that comprise the AAC are taking football a hell of a lot more seriously than the schools that made up the Big East circa 2010. There was also a perfect storm or horrible coaching hires like Stewart and Krags. East Carolina, Central Florida, Houston do not give a crap about basketball - they care about one thing and one thing only - while UConn dedicates resources to more sports than they can afford.

Number 2: Edsall's good teams walked a tightrope that is almost impossible to do consistently.

The Fiesta Bowl team was THREE plays from not even being bowl eligible.

Look at Diaco with a great turnover ratio and then look at this year.

Number 3: The energy around the program is dead. Edsall had the energy around the upgrade and stadium to help build. It is going to take YEARS to bring people back after the last 6 (7).

Number 4: Since revenue is about to decline even further while the team continues to get worse - when they finally pay Diaco to go away...

The voices to shut down football are going to get very loud very fast and you are going to have a hard time coming up with why they aren't right.

 

[BlueMAB]

People are upset with recruiting because we aren't winning. The recruiting classes were never special even in our best years. Not to mention that playing in a conference with the champion playing in a BCS bowl game and annual games against West Virginia, Rutgers, Pitt, and Louisville helped sell recruits.

This thought that we can automatically recruit kids away from P5 schools 'just because' is wrong. And no new coach will have that ability too unless some guy like Nick Saban walks through the door. He isn't. If you want to say that the coaching staff isn't doing their job developing players that is a fair argument.

What people are currently doing here is trashing a 17/18 year old kid who has just devoted the next 4-5 years of his life to trying to make your beloved program better. Stop doing this, it is .

Bullspit. I never said "we can automatically recruit kids away from P5 school". Literally nobody has made that argument. I said we should at least be able to recruit against the MAC since we're in a conference better than the MAC. We need to recruit at least at an AAC level since we're in the AAC. There are very few MAC/AAC offers among our commits relative to the number of FCS/Southland/Ivy League etc. offers.

The 17/18 year old kids didn't commit to UConn FOR me, I don't owe them anything. I respect the fact they earned these scholarships, good for them, they should be proud; most importantly my opinion has no bearing on their future and they'll get every opportunity to prove me wrong. I hope they do. But I'm going to be honest. I'm not going to pretend to be happy that we beat out Fordham, Columbia, Brown, Army, Houston Baptist and Tennessee Tech.

No, the recruiting was never special. I'm not asking for special. I'm asking to compete with our peers more than we do the Ohio Valley Conference.

If these guys can't handle someone questioning their ability to compete at this level based on the fact that very few, if any, other coaches offered them the chance to compete at this level then they committed to the perfect coach. Because no matter how badly they screw up, he'll be right there to pat em on the back and tell them how much he loves and trusts them to do better next time.

If feelings are hurt, that's too bad. They can address their complaints with the 3500 people in the stands watching.

 

[BlueMAB]

That said, I really need an explanation from the people on this board who are blasting kids

Can you quote some of the posts blasting kids?

 

[jazyj]

UConn recruiting in football is futile. It's like starting a 5 player game of Civilization and the other 4 teams start on fertile green hills by the sea and UConn is the landlocked desert surrounded by stronger, more prepared forces on all sides. Kids just aren't going to come here to play football, it's purely cultural. The good guys we do get we have to develop ourselves, but when you realize the elites of the game are developing guys just as well of not better but simply starting with an infinitely better product, it makes following football recruiting exhausting.

Everybody knows the best starting locations are on rivers

 

[sportsart]

Smh... so because he has 15 offers and his biggest offer is Toledo that's a good thing? No wonder we suck. How can you be ok with how bad the level of talent is in this roster?

@WingU-Conn Go back and see this guy's other posts. I'd say it qualifies blasting, bashing and insulting.

 

[BlueMAB]

@WingU-Conn Go back and see this guy's other posts. I'd say it qualifies blasting, bashing and insulting.

Thanks. Another poster replied to me with a complaint about people disrespecting the kids, it's hard to keep track of who is responding/calling out who, when we don't use the reply button. This one would definitely qualify, but I don't believe I've picked out any one kid. I have no idea how any individual recruit will do. I've said (several times I think) that some will pan out. There are 1-2 posters who are being disrespectful, but I'm trying to be respectful but honest about our situation.

Not everyone who is critical of the recruiting thinks "these kids suck". But based on the information we have, we're recruiting well below our peers. I'm not asking to beat out P5 programs. I'm asking him to beat out G5 programs, that isn't too much to ask. Other posters can save the "Nick Saban isn't walking through that door" speech. He didn't walk through the door at Temple either.

 

[FAIRTIDES]

And people say those critical of the recruiting are being disrespectful. The "realists" hand out back-handed compliments left and right.

Congratulations to any kid good enough to make the team, scholarship or not, they are better athletes than 99% of the people here. That's not the point. They need to be better than the athletes on the teams we play. We play in the AAC, we need to outrecruit the AAC, not the Southland, or the MEAC.

I'm sick of the "we aren't getting 4/5 star commits" straw man argument. We aren't asking for us to beat out P5 programs. Is it too much to beat out ECU, USF and UCF more often than we beat our Army, Columbia, Fordham and Houston Baptist?

I don't think so. I have higher standards for the program. Not SEC standards, but AAC standards. I gave up the FCS, Patriot League, and Ohio Valley standards about 18 years ago.

Your groupings are interesting. You note ECU, USF and UCF in one group, and I'll expand your other group by just using the Academies and the Ivy and Colonial Leagues. I don't believe that the interest in our recruits on the part of academically rigorous institutions is capitulation to some feeling that we only pursue talent perceived as being on a lower tier. It's probably a natural outcome of our recruiters being somewhat handicapped by UConn's admissions policies.

A question, Does anyone know the difference between the NCAA Clearing House requirements and UConn's admission requirements for athletes? I'll bet a fair amount that the staffs at ECU, USF and UCF have only to sweat the Clearing House where our staff has to target kids who are not only good football players but qualify for more vigorous academic vetting, as well. Probably a significant advantage.

It doesn't mean our kids aren't good players. It just means they qualify for another tier of academic institution and is probably one of the reasons for our recent interest in kids from places like St. Paul's, Lawrenceville, The Hun School, Deerfield and the Gunnery.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

No one is blasting any individual kid.

You're doing it en masse so perhaps you are technically correct on not blasting any individual.

No one has written off anyone.

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting your posts but it appears that your view is that Edsall and only Edsall was capable of finding kids who could in time outperform their recruiting rankings.

If the idea is you can't judge how your recruiting is going based on the information you have - you are probably on the wrong internet.

I just believe that it is a more intelligent approach if you were to wait until the kids actually get on the field before declaring how good of a recruit he is. It may be a frivolous way of doing things but having seen informed pundits claim the Cubs got fleeced when they traded Ivan Dejesus to the Phillies for an aging Larry Bowa (and a minor leaguer named Ryne Sandberg) or that the Tigers got a steal when they acquired Doyle Alexander for two minor leaguers (one of whom was John Smoltz) I've realized waiting for results before declaring victory works better.