nice start to class

[orangenauburn]

http://rivals .yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/commitments/2013/syracuse-14;_ylt=AjITrgMLv04nsiogjEMooyNHPZB4

per riv als all four commits rated ***

nice start to the class, and I expect we will be receiving some more good news in the coming weeks ahead!

 

[upperdeck]

interesting so many were down on a qb who is a 3 star guy and so up on another who is a 3 star guy.

 

[All4SU]

NYC, PA, FLA & TX. Nice.

 

[tep624]

Anytime you have your QB class wrapped up with 2 quality prospects by June 1, you have to be happy. Add a highly recruited legacy and a DT who I think ends up a 4 star prospect when all is said and done. Definitely happy with this start. Hope we land some of the bigger NYS fish soon and hopefully the funderburk situation gets resolved too.

 

[All4SU]

A QB from PA and a QB from TX. That always sounds good.

 

[Orangello]

Very encouraging effort by the staff so far.

 

[cusestudent]

Nice to see the negativity around recruiting gone from the board.

 

[Orangepace]

Agreed Student.. I won't get over excited, but Allen to me is the cream of this class so far.. hope that it is'Neezer soon.

 

[Crusty]

Statistically, last year's class was the best in many years - not by much, but a continuation of steady progress. This year's class is off to a great start and since I have been a critic of Hackett as an OC, I should give him credit for the recruiting effort - which I gladly do here. We are apparently moving in a different direction offensively, and if so, I will also give him and DM credit for recognizing the need for a change. I will be patient as they develop the new Orange offense in the ACC (which is NOT going away).

 

[kcsu]

very solid at this point we need a few LB's a deep threat if Funder doesnt make the grade, Two RB's and some big uglies on the OL

 

[orangefan13]

Can anyone can remember the last time we had a above average offensive line in the big east?

 

[bnoro]

It's funny that people use that fact Rivals has all our guys as 3 stars as progress, but when they are ranked two stars people say stars don't matter.

I think we have a nice class right now based on the tape, screw the stars.

 

[orangenauburn]

I have always said 'stars do not matter - coaches ability to evaluate does' ... but stars sure do matter when it comes to perception; and if it is perceived that you are landing talent and solid classes, people start noticing you more and taking another look at what you are doing -- keep it up ... hope to hear some good news in the next couple of weeks

 

[CaliCuse]

http://rivals .yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/commitments/2013/syracuse-14;_ylt=AjITrgMLv04nsiogjEMooyNHPZB4

per riv als all four commits rated ***

nice start to the class, and I expect we will be receiving some more good news in the coming weeks ahead!

I think zDoug's camp at month end will be productive in a few verbals.

 

[gocraz4dasu]

I think this is a nice start to the class due to the fact we have the most important position on the field already addressed, twice. It gets easier to convince other recruits of skill positions and the O-line when they already know who the quarterback is going to be. It's a matter of keeping the guys we already have also.

 

[PhatOrange]

I have always said 'stars do not matter - coaches ability to evaluate does' ... but stars sure do matter when it comes to perception; and if it is perceived that you are landing talent and solid classes, people start noticing you more and taking another look at what you are doing -- keep it up ... hope to hear some good news in the next couple of weeks

I can agree with this. If you have a 2 star guy with 6 offers and a 3 star guy with no offers and someone clicks on your committment list it's perceived that the 3 star guy is a better talent/prospect without doing any research. Then when people are weighing the strength of the recruiting class the only measure is how many stars the kids have.

I'll take the 2 star kid with multiple offers.

Unfortuntely, no matter how bogus and silly the stars are, they do matter when it comes to public perception.

 

[xc84]

I can agree with this. If you have a 2 star guy with 6 offers and a 3 star guy with no offers and someone clicks on your committment list it's perceived that the 3 star guy is a better talent/prospect without doing any research. Then when people are weighing the strength of the recruiting class the only measure is how many stars the kids have.

I'll take the 2 star kid with multiple offers.

Unfortuntely, no matter how bogus and silly the stars are, they do matter when it comes to public perception.

Sure...until we start winning. Winning is a better way of changing perceptions.

 

[billsin01]

Statistically, last year's class was the best in many years - not by much, but a continuation of steady progress. This year's class is off to a great start and since I have been a critic of Hackett as an OC, I should give him credit for the recruiting effort - which I gladly do here. We are apparently moving in a different direction offensively, and if so, I will also give him and DM credit for recognizing the need for a change. I will be patient as they develop the new Orange offense in the ACC (which is NOT going away).

I get what you're saying and this is a perfectly fine post, but it made laugh nonetheless since there is absolutely zero statistic that can even how your recruiting is actually going.

 

[Crusty]

I get what you're saying and this is a perfectly fine post, but it made laugh nonetheless since there is absolutely zero statistic that can even how your recruiting is actually going.

While I am not a big fan of the star system, and have criticized it in the past for its obvious faults, it is, with all its shortcomings, a reasonable relative measure. Our classes have gotten better on this basis, and I think it accurately depicts the slow progress of our recruiting under DM. Others may certainly disagree and I understand their thinking. I am only saying that by that one quantitative measure we are trending up.

Stars - Significant improvement as the number of three stars has almost doubled as a pct of total. 2012 is the first class where the number of 3 stars has been greater than the number of two stars.

2009
Zero Stars (1) =6%
2 Stars (10) = 63%
3 Stars (5) = 31%

2010
Zero Stars (1) =3%
2 Stars (16) = 53%
3 Stars (12) = 40%
4 Stars (1) = 3%

2011
2 Stars (14) = 54%
3 Stars (12) = 46%

2012
2 Stars (8) = 38%
3 Stars (13) = 62%

 

[CaliCuse]

I can agree with this. If you have a 2 star guy with 6 offers and a 3 star guy with no offers and someone clicks on your committment list it's perceived that the 3 star guy is a better talent/prospect without doing any research. Then when people are weighing the strength of the recruiting class the only measure is how many stars the kids have.

I'll take the 2 star kid with multiple offers.

Unfortuntely, no matter how bogus and silly the stars are, they do matter when it comes to public perception.

When you say "public perception you are referring to the average fan. No one here can be included in that grouping.This and we are a segment that goes way bove average in interest and reality rather than perception.

 

[wfschrec]

While I am not a big fan of the star system, and have criticized it in the past for its obvious faults, it is, with all its shortcomings, a reasonable relative measure. Our classes have gotten better on this basis, and I think it accurately depicts the slow progress of our recruiting under DM. Others may certainly disagree and I understand their thinking. I am only saying that by that one quantitative measure we are trending up.

Stars - Significant improvement as the number of three stars has almost doubled as a pct of total. 2012 is the first class where the number of 3 stars has been greater than the number of two stars.

2009
Zero Stars (1) =6%
2 Stars (10) = 63%
3 Stars (5) = 31%

2010
Zero Stars (1) =3%
2 Stars (16) = 53%
3 Stars (12) = 40%
4 Stars (1) = 3%

2011
2 Stars (14) = 54%
3 Stars (12) = 46%

2012
2 Stars (8) = 38%
3 Stars (13) = 62%

Agreed plus look at where we are now getting these kids from ... strong programs in GA, TX and FL ... also making more inroads in PA and OH ... we are grabbing kids that play at a higher level than a 3 star from NY ... that is just how it is ...

 

[billsin01]

While I am not a big fan of the star system, and have criticized it in the past for its obvious faults, it is, with all its shortcomings, a reasonable relative measure. Our classes have gotten better on this basis, and I think it accurately depicts the slow progress of our recruiting under DM. Others may certainly disagree and I understand their thinking. I am only saying that by that one quantitative measure we are trending up.

Stars - Significant improvement as the number of three stars has almost doubled as a pct of total. 2012 is the first class where the number of 3 stars has been greater than the number of two stars.

2009
Zero Stars (1) =6%
2 Stars (10) = 63%
3 Stars (5) = 31%

2010
Zero Stars (1) =3%
2 Stars (16) = 53%
3 Stars (12) = 40%
4 Stars (1) = 3%

2011
2 Stars (14) = 54%
3 Stars (12) = 46%

2012
2 Stars (8) = 38%
3 Stars (13) = 62%

It certainly wasn't my intention to call you out and it is interesting to note the drastic increase in percentage of 3 star recruits last season. I think my point is more about the validity of stars relative to production. I don't feel like going through each player, but from a glance I'd argue that they have found at least as many productive, solid prospects from their two stars as they have their three. Lyn, for example was a 2 star, while Rishard Anderson and Jeremi Wilkes were 3s. IMO, there is absolutely no question who the best player of that trio is and it's the guy that had just two stars next to his name. Chibane and Pugh are, by most accounts, our best OL. They were two-star kids. Certainly our most consistent, productive receiver is Lemon -- 2 star. Most feel Terrell Hunt -- a three star -- is our future at QB but most also feel Kinder -- a three star -- is never going to play a down (note: this may be the exact reverse of what happens, but it seems to be the consensus). Then you take all the three stars and somehow Diabate (an undersized LB from JUCO) rated the same number of stars as Richie Desir, Durrell Eskridge, Brandon Reddish and Cam Lynch -- guys that by most accounts are considered the future of the defense.

Regardless, my point is more that I think the recruiting has likely improved due to the staff developing better relationships with schools, getting to know kids earlier, honing their evaluation/recruiting tactics ... But I just think stars are about as inexact as science or statistics get.

So I'd tend to agree that we appear to have improved our recruiting, I just think most statisticians would throw up in their mouths if we used stars as substantiation for that claim.