Class of 2021 DB Darian "Duce" Chestnut (NJ) SIGNED NLI TO SYRACUSE (12/16/20)

[RF2044]

Keep in mind that his team mate Alijah Clark got a 4 star bump and put into their top 250. No explanation for either. He is a Rutgers commit and Rutgers has lots of subscribers on that site that are more interested in winning fake recruiting wars than actual real games.

It's such a naked manipulation, and blatant, it's a crime.

 

[money3189]

247 allows the Rivals rating to also influence its composite scoring and until they grow a pair and decide to rate players separately, they will share in the same embarrassment by association. How can you make a star rating system a significant part of your site, but let a competitor influence the scores with its own ratings? Are they managed by the NCAA?

Facts. It makes it flawed.

 

[PhatOrange]

I'm sort of hoping the new SI site takes off.
Are they hiring?

 

[PhatOrange]

Keep in mind that his team mate Alijah Clark got a 4 star bump and put into their top 250. No explanation for either. He is a Rutgers commit and Rutgers has lots of subscribers on that site that are more interested in winning fake recruiting wars than actual real games.

i think rivals bumped 2 of their guys up. It's really comical and then the morons over there start chest bumping and openly calling for Deuce's rating to be dropped.

the sudden evaluation changes when tape hasn't changed and combines don't exist make even 30 second Bob Lichtenstein's evaluations look good.

 

[money3189]

i think rivals bumped 2 of their guys up. It's really comical and then the morons over there start chest bumping and openly calling for Deuce's rating to be dropped.

the sudden evaluation changes when tape hasn't changed and combines don't exist make even 30 second Bob Lichtenstein's evaluations look good.

Yup Banton. Its truly sad that they are openly campaigning to have a player drop in rankings.

 

[TexanMark]

i think rivals bumped 2 of their guys up. It's really comical and then the morons over there start chest bumping and openly calling for Deuce's rating to be dropped.

the sudden evaluation changes when tape hasn't changed and combines don't exist make even 30 second Bob Lichtenstein's evaluations look good.

Look at their win/loss record

All you need to know

 

[sutomcat]

Yup Banton. Its truly sad that they are openly campaigning to have a player drop in rankings.

This is their Super Bowl...and really their whole season this year.

 

[AngryOtto]

Scouts also downgraded him which is surprising with mcclaster. It just goes back to the point that these ratings are a joke. Many fans base everything on these sites when the rankings are purely subjective. Looks at Josh Hough. Still have him an .81. Please. I’ll continue to back Dino and the staff when it comes to talent evaluations. We may not always get the top player on their board but the players they take will excel in the program.

 

[bnoro]

It's unbelievable that with no evaluation period they can get away with moving kids around in the rankings. Absolute joke.

 

[anomander]

Yup Banton. Its truly sad that they are openly campaigning to have a player drop in rankings.

does the SU site on Rivalz has a writer? Is there still an active board? It’s comical watching our previously highly ranked guys get dropped within a week or 2 of committing.

 

[Trueblue25]

its the same thing every year guys. Was surprised Trill wasn’t dropped to a mid three star, and that man’s every bit the 4 and potentially more

 

[money3189]

does the SU site on Rivalz has a writer? Is there still an active board? It’s comical watching our previously highly ranked guys get dropped within a week or 2 of committing.

SU rivals is a grave yard. The writer Ryan Murray is still there but he hardly has any subscribers. He posts articles but there are no comments. I havent been a member in years. Even when I was there it was little content and he didnt respond to questions often.

 

[rackman18]

I to get frustrated with their drops in rankings of our recruits, but looking forward to rubbing their faces in our "cold winter snow", when these kids prove their higher rankings that should be, on the field. In the end, the joke will be on these ranking sites who think their words are gospel...

 

[Orijinal]

A couple things about Rivals:

I think it's a vicious cycle. Rivals won't invest in Syracuse coverage until they get more Syracuse fans as subscribers, and Syracuse fans won't subscribe because Rivals' coverage is lacking ...and because they pull this kind of nonsense

I also think that if we want to see our recruits valued as they ought to be, Syracuse football has got to start proving that they have enough players in the program to win games. Once that's the case, sites like Rivals won't be able to undervalue our recruits even if they wanted

 

[Sudano]

Scouts also downgraded him which is surprising with mcclaster. It just goes back to the point that these ratings are a joke. Many fans base everything on these sites when the rankings are purely subjective. Looks at Josh Hough. Still have him an .81. Please. I’ll continue to back Dino and the staff when it comes to talent evaluations. We may not always get the top player on their board but the players they take will excel in the program.

Instead of just blindly backing Dino and the staff. How about ignoring the sites for ratings but use the # and quality offers by all teams. Its a solid way to cross reference the professional eyes of all coaches in a region or nationally rather than just one. After all recruiting is a competitive sport with all teams trying to recruit the best players they can.

 

[RF2044]

Instead of just blindly backing Dino and the staff. How about ignoring the sites for ratings but use the # and quality offers by all teams. Its a solid way to cross reference the professional eyes of all coaches in a region or nationally rather than just one. After all recruiting is a competitive sport with all teams trying to recruit the best players they can.

That's a solid data point, but only one of several that should be evaluated.

And the recruiting services do a lousy job of evaluating prospects, outside of a small group of blue chippers -- which is why coaching evaluation matters more than what some services assign as stars.

 

[Sudano]

That's a solid data point, but only one of several that should be evaluated.

And the recruiting services do a lousy job of evaluating prospects, outside of a small group of blue chippers -- which is why coaching evaluation matters more than what some services assign as stars.

What do you think should be the several that should be considered. I think the sites are the worst, Just trusting Dino is too partisan without any evaluation, eye test is ok but we're all really amateur evaluators and are just looking at highlights. Alot of posters I think just like anyone considering SU without seeing who we missed out on. Interested your thoughts.

 

[RF2044]

What do you think should be the several that should be considered. I think the sites are the worst, Just trusting Dino is too partisan without any evaluation, eye test is ok but we're all really amateur evaluators and are just looking at highlights. Alot of posters I think just like anyone considering SU without seeing who we missed out on. Interested your thoughts.

• Offer list
• Composite ranking
• Stars
• Whether or not the kid is a camp offer [meaning that the coaches first hand see something they like]
• Measurables [size for position, speed if important for position, etc.]
• The eye test / film [especially when a small, select group of posters weigh in]

If we were Alabama, OSU, Clemson, etc. than the stars alone would tell 95% of what we'd need to know. The recruiting sites do a good job evaluating players who are considered the "blue chip" creme de la creme recruits.

Where the recruiting services don't do nearly as good of a job is with the next two tiers of recruits below that elite group. Not only are they lazy [i.e., formerly just assigning two stars, now three stars if a player has a P5 offer], they assign stars and numerical ratings based upon a bunch of bias. Witness Duce Chestnut being downgraded from a 4-star after committing to us, based upon intentional malfeasance from the Rutgers contingent who rate players.

So in light of that, we need to consider other factors that peel back the onion and provide a fuller picture. Because we can't just get it from the recruiting services alone.

And I agree that there are SOME who think that every recruit is a dark horse. But I think that there is a much larger group of posters who pay close attention to recruiting, who have a far better handle on what's transpiring and don't just blindly trust that every recruit will be a stud.

 

[Libero2]

• Offer list
• Composite ranking
• Stars
• Whether or not the kid is a camp offer [meaning that the coaches first hand see something they like]
• Measurables [size for position, speed if important for position, etc.]
• The eye test / film [especially when a small, select group of posters weigh in]

If we were Alabama, OSU, Clemson, etc. than the stars alone would tell 95% of what we'd need to know. The recruiting sites do a good job evaluating players who are considered the "blue chip" creme de la creme recruits.

Where the recruiting services don't do nearly as good of a job is with the next two tiers of recruits below that elite group. Not only are they lazy [i.e., formerly just assigning two stars, now three stars if a player has a P5 offer], they assign stars and numerical ratings based upon a bunch of bias. Witness Duce Chestnut being downgraded from a 4-star after committing to us, based upon intentional malfeasance from the Rutgers contingent who rate players.

So in light of that, we need to consider other factors that peel back the onion and provide a fuller picture. Because we can't just get it from the recruiting services alone.

And I agree that there are SOME who think that every recruit is a dark horse. But I think that there is a much larger group of posters who pay close attention to recruiting, who have a far better handle on what's transpiring and don't just blindly trust that every recruit will be a stud.

I really like this list, and this post as a whole.

Lots goes into recruiting, and while it's quite clear we aren't snagging the elite 5 star prospects we all want, we are getting some guys that have lots of potential, but they are needing something, whether it's a college S&C program, improved diet/nutrition, more technique work, or a million other things a guy needs to grow. If they can grow and build up their deficiencies (things preventing them from being an elite recruit) then they can become studs for us.

Guys like Duce will help change the perception of our recruiting once they hit the field. We need 1-5 guys like him in each class and we will start climbing rankings and turning corners on the field. Can't wait to see him get to campus.

 

[PhatOrange]

What do you think should be the several that should be considered. I think the sites are the worst, Just trusting Dino is too partisan without any evaluation, eye test is ok but we're all really amateur evaluators and are just looking at highlights. Alot of posters I think just like anyone considering SU without seeing who we missed out on. Interested your thoughts.

I can agree.

1) I consider offers. (w/a grain of salt since they are mostly player reported) unless a kid posts official offers
2) verified speed - track times/combine times (agility/vj/shuttle etc)
3) verified height/weight
4) summer camps - what coaches have personal eyes on the kid
5) region played ie competition
6) accolades - all state/combine awards/combine invites
7) HS championships
8) what the locals say about a kid /local media/local fans

one thing i dont care about are hs stats.
i also don't consider stars or composite rankings.

 

[TheCusian]

I remember when the *other* good NJ QB got bumped in Tommy's year and Rutgers fans were all amped.
Guy flamed out.

 

[baggerbob]

What do you think should be the several that should be considered. I think the sites are the worst, Just trusting Dino is too partisan without any evaluation, eye test is ok but we're all really amateur evaluators and are just looking at highlights. Alot of posters I think just like anyone considering SU without seeing who we missed out on. Interested your thoughts.

Iffy had no offers, and was rated low, but as we have seen everyone was wrong.

 

[RMH44]

Iffy had no offers, and was rated low, but as we have seen everyone was wrong.

IIRC, Iffy had a late offer from Don Brown and Michigan.

 

[tep624]

IIRC, Iffy had a late offer from Don Brown and Michigan.

He was offered by BC, UCONN, UMASS, so all the main NE Regional schools, late offer from Michigan that recruits MA heavily. And he also had a brother that was a projected NFL draft pick at the time too.

 

[Sudano]

Iffy had no offers, and was rated low, but as we have seen everyone was wrong.

He had a Michigan offer. He started 8 games on a 5-7 team with a poor defense finishing 11th in the ACC giving up over 30 pts a game. Why is he used as the gold standard an example of someone to recruit to have winning records and go to bowl games. If you ask me he's kinda iffy.