New Commit

[rrlbees]

30 second Bob agrees.

Well there's a reason why we go 6-6 with 2 and 3 star kids and another team will go 11-1 with 3, 4 and 5 stars.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[supp]

Sounds like a great, well-rounded kid. It's funny, though, that I worry about these kinds of recruits and their future in the program as much as I do the academically marginal kids. With the weaker students, you don't doubt their commitment to football. And sometimes that's because they think it's the only thing they've got going for them. But if you manage to get them in school, you always worry about them staying in school. With the smart kids, you worry about whether they're going to finally wise up and give up on the game because they believe that they've got a brighter, less physically demanding future elsewhere. We've seen that recently with Mungwa and Ford. I never know how to feel about kids like that. At one level you're disappointed to lose them but on the other hand you want to applaud their long-term thinking.

 

[Rocco]

Well there's a reason why we go 6-6 with 2 and 3 star kids and another team will go 11-1 with 3, 4 and 5 stars.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

Boise St is one that comes to mind who has beaten really good teams with NR, 2 & 3 stars.

 

[Chip]

Some of you always want to point at offers, that's a bigger fraud than the ratings cause it comes from the kid mat times.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

In that case, then I'm glad to see we're recruiting better liars.

 

[rrlbees]

Boise St is one that comes to mind who has beaten really good teams with NR, 2 & 3 stars.

Yeo, they do a great job of identifying potential and developing it.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[Rocco]

Yeo, they do a great job of identifying potential and developing it.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

I'd say we've done pretty well with some of these kids.

Long and short, the recruiting rankings at these sites are biased. No other way to say it.

 

[rrlbees]

I'd say we've done pretty well with some of these kids. Long and short, the recruiting rankings at these sites are biased. No other way to say it.

Since I was engaged with it for several years, I can say no it wasn't for the most part. Someone like Farrell, sure. Most no.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[SUFaninNJ]

Well there's a reason why we go 6-6 with 2 and 3 star kids and another team will go 11-1 with 3, 4 and 5 stars.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

Or in Rutgers case, 6-6 with 3, 4 and 5 stars.

 

[Rocco]

Since I was engaged with it for several years, I can say no it wasn't for the most part. Someone like Farrell, sure. Most no.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

Then explain how a kid who is a low 3 star, gets an offer from a big school and becomes a mid 4 star... it happens quite a bit.

 

[rrlbees]

Or in Rutgers case, 6-6 with 3, 4 and 5 stars.

They are one of those one offs. Their coaching has sucked for years and they never build up any hot steel with their cream puff schedules.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[orangepassion]

Sounds like a great, well-rounded kid. It's funny, though, that I worry about these kinds of recruits and their future in the program as much as I do the academically marginal kids. With the weaker students, you don't doubt their commitment to football. And sometimes that's because they think it's the only thing they've got going for them. But if you manage to get them in school, you always worry about them staying in school. With the smart kids, you worry about whether they're going to finally wise up and give up on the game because they believe that they've got a brighter, less physically demanding future elsewhere. We've seen that recently with Mungwa and Ford. I never know how to feel about kids like that. At one level you're disappointed to lose them but on the other hand you want to applaud their long-term thinking.

I believe Ford transferred to Pitt, so he's still playing