ESPN grades us out at a C? | Syracusefan.com

ESPN grades us out at a C?

I like our class a lot. Let this be extra motivation for them to kick ass when they finally get on the field in a year or two.
 
Disappointing evaluation...mostly as it compares with our peers. I don't follow recruiting as much as most here, but that ranking just seems off. Seems like a solid class from top to bottom addressing all needs. The only think it "lacks" is somebody tagged with the 5-star label. But these kids here will be the heart and soul of the program, and every last one of them looks like they can play at a high level. No reaches in here.
 
I really like this class for a number of direct (i.e. it fills our current needs and is underrated) and indirect (i.e. it creates GREAT inroads for next year) reasons, but I can see an objective "C." There are 64 BCS teams, plus ND and BYU. We were about 50th overall, making us about 45ish amongst relevant (i.e. BCS + ND + BYU) schools (I'm guessing that there are 4-5 "gang of 5" schools ahead of us). 45/66 is about a C+. Now like I said, I think that our class is underrated and has intangibles, so I wouldn't give it that score. I can just see why an objective outsider might. I would give us a solid B+, which is great give the state of the program. We are respectable, but we have yet to fully return to our former glory.
 
I don't think it should be judged solely on rankings vs our peers. Our team needs and recent recruiting should be a % of the grade.

For example - I'm sure we're behind BC in the rankings (without looking, Addazzio bias). But we beat them on the field last year and our recruiting ranking is right there with them. We filled positions if need really well and improved by almost 25 positions in the rankings over last year. They are slightly behind us.
 
the funny thing is the DTs all hurt SU's overall recruiting ranking - but I like all of these kids and think all three will be big contributors down the road.
 
I don't think it should be judged solely on rankings vs our peers. Our team needs and recent recruiting should be a % of the grade.

For example - I'm sure we're behind BC in the rankings (without looking, Addazzio bias). But we beat them on the field last year and our recruiting ranking is right there with them. We filled positions if need really well and improved by almost 25 positions in the rankings over last year. They are slightly behind us.
Actually we're ahead of BC on Skout:

SU has the 53rd ranked class, 25 recruits, 1 four star, 2.72 average stars
BC has the 58th ranked class, 26 recruits, 0 four star, 2.41 average stars

But on Ryvals the Mike Farrel bias comes into play:

SU has the 52nd ranked class, 24 recruits (they don't count W. Williams), 1 four star, 2.71 average stars
BC has the 42nd ranked class, 26 recruits, 3 four star, 2.78 average stars

BTW, because of the BC shill, Mike Farrel, their recruiting classes have always been over valued. It has nothing to do with Addazzio. IMO, hacks like Farrel and Dohn don't do the coaches of the teams they're spinning for any favors. It only raises the expectations of an already delusional fan base which makes it tough when the losing continues year after year.
 
IMO, hacks like Farrel and Dohn don't do the coaches of the teams they're spinning for any favors. It only raises the expectations of an already delusional fan base which makes it tough when the losing continues year after year.

ding, ding, ding
 
I hope the coaches play the Hell out of this stuff. Freshman orientation for football players should have the facilities full of banners welcoming "The 2014 C Grade Incoming Freshman" and "Welcome to the 13th Ranked Class in the ACC."
 
RMH44 said:
Actually we're ahead of BC on Skout: SU has the 53rd ranked class, 25 recruits, 1 four star, 2.72 average stars BC has the 58th ranked class, 26 recruits, 0 four star, 2.41 average stars But on Ryvals the Mike Farrel bias comes into play: SU has the 52nd ranked class, 24 recruits (they don't count W. Williams), 1 four star, 2.71 average stars BC has the 42nd ranked class, 26 recruits, 3 four star, 2.78 average stars BTW, because of the BC shill, Mike Farrel, their recruiting classes have always been over valued. It has nothing to do with Addazzio. IMO, hacks like Farrel and Dohn don't do the coaches of the teams they're spinning for any favors. It only raises the expectations of an already delusional fan base which makes it tough when the losing continues year after year.

I buy the Farrell comment, not so much Dohn. But even Farrell doesn't have the sole say in any of it.
 
Slayton.

Slayton will make them pay.
 
From an outside perspective a 'C' makes sense. That puts us somewhere near the middle of the pack, nationally. Isn't that essentially where we're rated numerically too? Ultimately, I don't really care. I wouldn't expect our class to blow away any national pundits with mostly 2 and 3 star guys with a fringe 4 star guy sprinkled in. They're too busy gushing over the classes filled with 4 and 5 star guys. Let's get 'em coached up, beat a few teams that are "better" than us, make some noise nationally, and we'll start to nab a few more of the highly rated guys.
 
I guess 50-59 is considered average, or a C. Funny, ESPN gave us the most 4 star recruits with four, and most of the rest were 3 stars. I think the only 2 stars given may have been the 2 last minute DT adds, Harvey and Samuels, which prolly were based on their non-BCS offers. I think if ESPN did a re-eval of these two kids, they'd rank them both low 3 stars. Overall, 247 prolly did th ebest job of rating our recruits, they were only off on a couple of our kids, like Moskel, Hudson, and one or two others. Harvey was absolutely buried by them with a mid-70s, 2 star rating. Below is my personal ratings of each position based on OUR coaching evals and needs:

QB: B+
RB: C+
WR: A-
OL: B-
DT: C
DE: B+
LB: A-
CB: B-
S: C+
 
It's kind of funny that there seems to be an implicit understanding on this board that we count on getting underrated recruits, even a sense that the more drastically underrated a recruit is the better. Go back to any point during the build-up to NSD and you can't read through a board without someone getting hysterical over the possibility that one of our commits gets 'discovered' by a big-name program and they snatch him away. So we successfully assemble a very underrated class and then evals come out that reflect...guess what...a class that by appearances and comparison to our peers is average at best...hmmm...baffling, I know.

I'm not trying to downplay the importance of perception in recruiting. Yes, I absolutely want perception of our program to change for the better. I'm just trying to point out...you can't have it both ways. We should all be happy with the class we came out with, most of us can see that there are more diamonds in this group than we have seen quite some time...along with that though comes accepting that everyone else isn't going to know it for some time.
 
Compared to maybe Alabama.

The only thing I think the staff could have realistically done better was land Holley and Hayes out of NYC. I give them a rock solid B on this class relative to what our program stature is right now and where we want to go. We land Holley and Hayes I think it's up in the B+/A- range, again relative to what's realistic for a program of our stature right now.
 
Trueblue25 said:
Slayton. Slayton will make them pay.
think slayton gonna have that Marshawn lynch type silent assassin look at me wrong and I will end you feel.
 
honestly What cares -i guarantee no one at espn or rivals ect ect can see the future-

the last few years we have found and developed some real good players who espn ect ect didnt have a f@#$n clue about -

i think we are developing a team mindset attitude of screw the world my TEAM can whoop yours
 
Did some research on past recruiting years as I think overall this class ranks with 1994 when Konrad, Johnson and McNabb came. Incidently I feel the 94 class was an awesome class. Anyways in the article it listed the top 10 classes and also made mention of how Syracuse had, you gueesed it "the most disappointing" class in the country. Funny how those three first round draft picks probably don't think they were a disappointment. Point being rankings are to be based on teh field and by coaches, not rating systems or newspaper men.

http://articles.philly.com/1994-02-04/sports/25857251_1_allen-wallace-phil-grosz-football-recruits
 
It's kind of funny that there seems to be an implicit understanding on this board that we count on getting underrated recruits, even a sense that the more drastically underrated a recruit is the better. Go back to any point during the build-up to NSD and you can't read through a board without someone getting hysterical over the possibility that one of our commits gets 'discovered' by a big-name program and they snatch him away. So we successfully assemble a very underrated class and then evals come out that reflect...guess what...a class that by appearances and comparison to our peers is average at best...hmmm...baffling, I know.

I'm not trying to downplay the importance of perception in recruiting. Yes, I absolutely want perception of our program to change for the better. I'm just trying to point out...you can't have it both ways. We should all be happy with the class we came out with, most of us can see that there are more diamonds in this group than we have seen quite some time...along with that though comes accepting that everyone else isn't going to know it for some time.
Great post.
 
Did some research on past recruiting years as I think overall this class ranks with 1994 when Konrad, Johnson and McNabb came. Incidently I feel the 94 class was an awesome class. Anyways in the article it listed the top 10 classes and also made mention of how Syracuse had, you gueesed it "the most disappointing" class in the country. Funny how those three first round draft picks probably don't think they were a disappointment. Point being rankings are to be based on teh field and by coaches, not rating systems or newspaper men.

http://articles.philly.com/1994-02-04/sports/25857251_1_allen-wallace-phil-grosz-football-recruits
Do we have anyone in this class that's rated as highly as either McNabb or Konrad were? Incidentally, McNabb was the only first round draft pick. The other two guys went in the second round.

It's interesting how they said Tennessee had the highest rated class, and, four years later, they win the national championship.
 
I don't understand why Samuels, Harvey, and Cordy don't get rated? Plus you have Wayne Williams not rated, although he was a 73 last year? Rutgers qb commit they got last week got evaluated last week and went from NR to 4 star. They really not going to grade our guys a week later?

Even so ESPN is good for some things, but they don't go back and adjust grades after JR years, unless you are a top 300 kid. It says a lot when Juwan Dowels is our lowest rated kid, and Steve Ishmael is a 74. I take it for what it's worth. While I would like to have higher rated recruiting classes since it effects perception, and good players want to play with other perceived good players, I am still thrilled with our class. I don't need ESPN, skout, or rivalz to tell me this is an extremely strong class with some high ceiling prospects in their. We addressed positions of need as good as anyone out there.
 
Do we have anyone in this class that's rated as highly as either McNabb or Konrad were? Incidentally, McNabb was the only first round draft pick. The other two guys went in the second round.

It's interesting how they said Tennessee had the highest rated class, and, four years later, they win the national championship.

Thanks for correction on Konrad and Johnson. Also interesting that Tennessee toughest game was the very first game of the season against us. Still think it was a bad call giving them a chance at the field goal.
 
Thanks for correction on Konrad and Johnson. Also interesting that Tennessee toughest game was the very first game of the season against us. Still think it was a bad call giving them a chance at the field goal.
I've watched the replay a few times. The pass interference call was a good one. I have a bigger problem with the bogus equipment violation calls (there were two of them). One almost certainly kept us from getting a TD. I think they one other game where they had to either score or prevent a last second TD to win. Living in Knoxville, I've had a lot of discussion with UT fans about that season.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,902
Messages
4,736,013
Members
5,932
Latest member
CuseEagle8

Online statistics

Members online
249
Guests online
1,569
Total visitors
1,818


Top Bottom