Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="cuseinchina, post: 869796, member: 3079"] Question for people who have enough history and expertise to know what they are talking about on this...is talent significantly more concentrated in the top programs than it was during our last period of great success in the mid to late 90's? The SEC is obviously the strongest conference today, though last night and hopefully the NC game will take them down a notch - but much of that seems to be cyclical. So ignoring conference affiliation is their a higher degree of talent concentration today - meaning are the best teams substantially more talent rich than they were 15 years ago? Just thinking anecdotally about our late 90's teams and looking at highlights of some of the games, they were seemingly bigger/faster/more athletic than what we have now - but not by a large margin. The big difference is we tended to have 3 or4 big time players. I don't know how good the recruiting rankings were then and I know people find them to be suspect, but I recall looking back those classes were filled with 2 and 3 star recruits with a few four stars scattered in. Maybe there is 'grade inflation' and those 2's would be 3's and 3's would be 4's today, I don't know. But just overall it seems like the level we are recruiting at this year, carried forward two or three years repeatedly, would get us back to comparable talent level to what we saw in the 90's. I guess my question is - what will that translate into in today's game? Is that good enough to get us back to being a team that is regularly in the bottom end of the top 25 that can compete with all but the very top programs year in and year out? Or is talent so concentrated that getting back to where we were isn't good enough? I love the direction we are going in with the current staff and the uptick in recruiting - I am just wondering if getting back to where we were will be good enough or if we'll have to take it a step further. Thoughts? [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?