orangeinohio
2023 Cali Award Participant
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 7,306
- Like
- 9,700
LOL..it's been a busy week.
He undoubtedly gets a pass in my book.
LOL..it's been a busy week.
I was one of those who was worried because they hadn't had a face to face. Now I'm not worried anymore.Kind of wonder if the worries about the staff not wanting him were overblown.
Just a little bit...Kind of wonder if the worries about the staff not wanting him were overblown.
Yeah, some people took until now to change their signature quoteLOL..it's been a busy week.
Mea culpa...and very happy to be wrong! LGOWriting's on the wall...
Just a little bit...
Well thanks for noticing.Yeah, some people took until now to change their signature quote
I think you've nailed it, and this should be obvious. Why should any of us expect a new staff to be enamored with the prior staff's recruits (who was run due to lack of success, particularly in recruiting). Dino's history of success on the offensive side of the ball gives me some faith that he might know what attributes he's looking for in a qb. If he has a better prospect (at least a better fit for his system) in mind then why not defer to his judgement on this one?I am not even sure that is it. This staff wants their own players. Period. With a few exceptions they haven't kept any of Shafers' recruits for 2016.
Yes it does, there is limited time and resources available to devote to successful recruiting. Trying to open up the state of LA where we have had historically zero success, the distance to campus, lack of visibility to SU in the state- our resources are better spent in areas where the probability of success is far greater.I agree with that but it doesn't hurt to develop a relationship with kids in a very talented area.
I think you've nailed it, and this should be obvious. Why should any of us expect a new staff to be enamored with the prior staff's recruits (who was run due to lack of success, particularly in recruiting). Dino's history of success on the offensive side of the ball gives me some faith that he might know what attributes he's looking for in a qb. If he has a better prospect (at least a better fit for his system) in mind then why not defer to his judgement on this one?
I see your point, but perhaps I'm not being articulate in my assessment of the prior regime: to be sure they were canned due to lack of success on the field, which was only matched by perennial bottom of the ACC results in recruiting. They were dismal in both areas. I was never overly impressed even by our recent classes. We had a handful of "bright spots" in the middle of our classes, but no real high-end talent at the top and the bottom was filled with mediocrity and a lot of reaches for a P5 school. If Babers isn't enamored with the prior regimes recruits that's hardly a slight to Babers-I have to disagree with this. They were let go due to a lack of success on the field. It's pretty much cut and dry. If anything the few bright spots on the team were younger Shafer recruits. I'm not saying that our recruiting was top notch, but to say that they were fired for this reason in particular I find to be incorrect. If the team won more, they'd still be here.
Well, dammit anyway.Well, the writing has been on the wall for this...