Whitmer 3 stars
- Thread starter B1GEast
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 7,401
- Reaction Score
- 18,886
I'm thinking NC game.
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,180
i'm thinking bcs bowl. nd and fsu will both prob go 12-0 from what espn is telling me.
He couldn't win the job, transferred out, and was maybe given a second look. Guys move up and down during their high school career, no reason he couldn't move up or down two years later.
I've seen nothing but 9 minutes of highlights, so I don't know (or care) how accurate the rating is.
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 5,829
- Reaction Score
- 10,356
Who cares about stars. Really. Lets see him on the field.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 10,856
- Reaction Score
- 13,078
I hear ya, those 5 star guys at LSU and Alabama are overrated
The 5 star kids are easier to distinguish based on how much they stand out from the pack.
When you get to 3/4 stars, they become much less accurate. Whether Whitmer was rated a 3 in HS and a 4 now, or vice versa doesn't have any affect on what he does on the field next season.
When evaluating UConn's 2 star recruits and whether they ultimately outperform that 2 star ranking, you might as well flip a coin. I'm not saying 2 stars will play like 5 stars. But the difference between 2 and 3 stars and how those players develop over 4/5 years can be negligible.
I'm sure you've followed our recruiting for years, so I'm sure you realize that we can actually say when it comes to UConn and how our recruits are evaluated a 2 star recruit is at least as likely to perform like a 3/4 star recruit as a 3/4 star recruit is to perform like a 2 star.
Nevermind the fact that players that commit to certain schools are automatically bumped up based on the school recruiting them, rather than the evaluation of the player.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,772
- Reaction Score
- 3,443
Yeah we don't even care if he's worthy of a scholarship . . . he could be a "walk-on" for all we care. Oh wait. . . UConn's tried that already.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 10,856
- Reaction Score
- 13,078
We are talking about two differnt things, CAPS wrote stars don't matter, and I made the absurd point about LSU and Alabama 5 star recruits. You are talking about evaluating talent, that was not my point, we can debate all day the difference between a 2 star Boise St recruit and a 4 star Oklahoma recruit. In the long run I'd rather have 10 4 star recruits then 10 2 star recruits.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,772
- Reaction Score
- 3,443
Me too, but that kind of talk only gets you in trouble on this board where folks favor the "under-the-radar" types made popular by RE, perhaps as a cover to mask his inability to recruit higher ranked kids.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,362
- Reaction Score
- 33,634
Nonsense. Strawman.
Is the weather nice in your fantasy world? I only ask because most of what you post is purely negative, so I think the world you have constructed for yourself has weather more comparable to Seattle or Britain than Miami or San Diego.
Dann
#4hunnid
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,901
- Reaction Score
- 7,180
i don't mind a couple under the radar type guys especially if they are filling out classes or local kids. but rangoon would get 18 kids and 9 of them would be solid 2* across the board. This year P no matter what site has 2* kids as about half the class, differance is most of those kids have other rankings on different sites. like battles santos or obi. they are 2* on one site and 3* on another. rangoons guys would all get 2* late in the year after being not ranked for ever. I like where P is going with recruiting. He is after NJ/NY/PA VA/DC FL and NE. He has had a couple 4* guys verbal but dobbs and armstrong are both ?'s about ever getting to storrs, he also had a juco TE taken by OK. we are now going after the big boys that rangoon never bothered with. give it some time, we will eventually start landing some of them. the guy is working his tail off right now.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2011
- Messages
- 3,772
- Reaction Score
- 3,443
Naahhh. I'm real positive. Positive that I liked beating Fordham, Buffalo, South Florida, Rutgers & Syracuse. Positive that I don't like losing to the likes of Vandy and Iowa State. Positive that I (like many others) expect a lot out of the UConn football initiative. Right now I'm positive that I'd settle for a run comparable to mens' hoops (circa 1990-1998). Purposely leaving out the NC era.
It's simply not true to say Edsall never went after higher rated kids, and it's also disingenuous to say that recent success (2 conference championships and a Fiesta Bowl trip) haven't helped. He rarely succeeded, but we did go after them. Edsall is not a good recruiter, but Pasqualoni's job has been made easier thanks to recent success on the field. (It's also going to be made harder thanks to recent events off the field)
I guess two conference championships, 5 bowl bids, including a Fiesta Bowl don't compare to what happened from 1990-1998 with Calhoun.
If anything, the two decades are strikingly similar.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,362
- Reaction Score
- 33,634
That's the question. What outweighs the other......recent success on the field or the instability of the Big East? We'll never know for sure, but I think it may be harder to recruit today. I think the uncertainty of the Big East's existence is going to weigh heavily on some kids. The Issacs kid from Manchester that committed to BCU explicitly stated as much.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 13,362
- Reaction Score
- 33,634
I guess two conference championships, 5 bowl bids, including a Fiesta Bowl don't compare to what happened from 1990-1998 with Calhoun.
If anything, the two decades are strikingly similar.
The biggest difference is that we were a perennial top 25 team in hoops year in and year out (for the most part).
But comparing the 2 sports in any way is idiotic to begin with.
True, however, the guy i'm responding to goes out of his way to undercut or outright ignore every accomplishment this program has made. Just because it wasn't accomplished in a manner that was pleasing to his eyes.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 3,084
- Reaction Score
- 6,329
Recent success on the field:
2010 5-2 in league; tied with 2 other teams for 1st; no BE teams in top 25
2009 3-4 in league; tied with 2 other teams for 4th; Cin #8 and WV #25
2008 3-4 in league; alone at 5th; Cin #17 and WV # 23
BE had one team in top 15 over last 3 years; 11-10 in league over last 3 years. Someone has to win the BE, it only has 8 teams, had Kragthorpe and Syracuse coachs which almost guaranteed 2 league wins a year in 2008 & 09, 37.5% of the league tied for 1st in 2010. Of Uconns 6 league wins in 2008&09 there were 4 against Louiville and Syracuse.
Not calling this failure, just can't get my arms around "recent success".
You're right, because the Big East has been mediocre, we shouldn't be proud of a 50-37 record since we joined the Big East, we should apologize for winning a share of the the conference title twice, and going to 5 bowls in 7 years.
Because you know, that stuff is easy. Just ask Rutgers who has 0 conference championships, and two more bowl appearances despite a 30 year head start.
No, it makes more sense to judge our success based on how many teams Big East are in the top 25. That's why Kentucky football is so succesful, because the SEC always has teams in the top 25.
Now that Edsall is gone the apologist tag should be handed out to those who refuse to acknowledge that we have by any reasonable, rational, impartial measure, been succesful. It sounds like you're calling it failure to me. If it's not success and it's not failure, what is it? Happenstance?
- Status