Recruiting higher rated kids.

[orange79]

1) Because (this was in basketball), a fella by the name of Clark Francis ( Hoop Scoop) once mentioned that many college recruiters subscribed to his service because it helped narrow the focus of where school's would spend their time looking/following/seeing recruits in action. It's funny when Dino references a highly rated recruit. Highly rated by whom???????? Where would he get such a term??? Don't fool yourself. No matter what coaches say publicly, they look at rankings just like you and everyone else here that seeks a measuring stick of where our recruiting stands.

2) I understand we also attend off campus camps
3) When are most college football games??? The same time as the high school games. How many times could we see a recruit live at their high school game??? Not many...So, that's just foolish to think we could get to see a Rochester team more than once in a season. I will concede game tapes are now readily available these days.
4) I just get tired of all the recruiting service bashing. If we were pulling in the highest "ranked" talent, we both know everyone here would be referencing them.

Looking at rankings and using them as your primary (or even secondary) recruiting guide/tool are two totally different things.

HCDB does not use the services as much as you seem to be claiming.

And the recruiting services and the services they provide are self-fulfilling prophecies. You haven't been posting here long, but you have been following the recruiting services, I assume. A kid commits to Alabama, he gains a start or two. A kid commits to Syracuse, he loses a star. How is that logical or objective? The recruiting services are highly subjective. Do they serve a purpose? Sure - for guideline purposes and for the lazy coaches.

Given what I have seen so far, I trust the staff's decisions in choosing who to offer based on their in-person evaluations and how they fit our system over any of the services. If they overlap, great. If not, I don't care. 10 wins is 10 wins.

 

[bnoro]

1) Because (this was in basketball), a fella by the name of Clark Francis ( Hoop Scoop) once mentioned that many college recruiters subscribed to his service because it helped narrow the focus of where school's would spend their time looking/following/seeing recruits in action. It's funny when Dino references a highly rated recruit. Highly rated by whom???????? Where would he get such a term??? Don't fool yourself. No matter what coaches say publicly, they look at rankings just like you and everyone else here that seeks a measuring stick of where our recruiting stands.

2) I understand we also attend off campus camps
3) When are most college football games??? The same time as the high school games. How many times could we see a recruit live at their high school game??? Not many...So, that's just foolish to think we could get to see a Rochester team more than once in a season. I will concede game tapes are now readily available these days.
4) I just get tired of all the recruiting service bashing. If we were pulling in the highest "ranked" talent, we both know everyone here would be referencing them.

The coaches evaluate the players on their own and formulate their "highly ranked" kids that way. Do you really think they use a system that ranks players based on subscriber counts? They have guys that watch game tapes and if a kid stands out in certain categories they pass that along to the position coaches/lead recruiters to evaluate further.

In fact, I'd argue that the only time our coaches go to a recruiting service, it's to read interviews with the kids. There's literally no other reason, they have everything in front of them.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

I strongly believe that recruiting services (national and state) are used as a resource by the staff in some capacity. Certainly, they don't replace individual evaluation/recruiting. However, coaches all over the country follow recruiting sites/scouts for some reason.

The extent to which they are used is certainly arguable but the blanket statement that coaches don't care/don't use them in any capacity is not a viable argument in my opinion.

Look at the SU staff right now. From the Head Coach down to Recruiting Coordinator, most every one of them follows multiple recruiting sites/scouts/writers on social media. I don't think they do that without the purpose to use them to help the program be successful.

 

[RandomGuy]

I strongly believe that recruiting services (national and state) are used as a resource by the staff in some capacity. Certainly, they don't replace individual evaluation/recruiting. However, coaches all over the country follow recruiting sites/scouts for some reason.

The extent to which they are used is certainly arguable but the blanket statement that coaches don't care/don't use them in any capacity is not a viable argument in my opinion.

Look at the SU staff right now. From the Head Coach down to Recruiting Coordinator, most every one of them follows multiple recruiting sites/scouts/writers on social media. I don't think they do that without the purpose to use them to help the program be successful.

The 3 ranking services? HCDB has said in press conferences they don't pay attention to them. (Ok maybe for a recruits story, etc.) He's said our recruiting is improving, and laughed at the idea of using them, for that measure.

There ARE scouting services that many schools PAY to find recruits, and initial analysis. You've probably never heard their names. Those scouts have earned trust, where's the ones we look at, are based on the fan experience.

 

[CbusCuse]

I'm sure our coaches use the recruiting services for identifying targets. Sure they have plenty of relationships and contacts where they get targets elsewhere and ones that may not even be on recruiting services yet but they must use them to identify other potential targets to pursue. I would guess they use what they can from recruiting services regarding interviews, films, and probably specific situations with competitor offers and who the other suitors are. Why would they not. Some information needs to be taken into the right context and filtered accordingly though. I'm sure all of their talent evaluation is done by themselves though via watching games, camps and film review so the star rankings don't mean much to them.

 

[tep624]

The 3 ranking services? HCDB has said in press conferences they don't pay attention to them. (Ok maybe for a recruits story, etc.) He's said our recruiting is improving, and laughed at the idea of using them, for that measure.

There ARE scouting services that many schools PAY to find recruits, and initial analysis. You've probably never heard their names. Those scouts have earned trust, where's the ones we look at, are based on the fan experience.

Makes sense and I’m sure there is overlap, but you’d have to be foolish not to use tools that can help you.

The fansite recruiting sites are just that. I’d be unimpressed if our staff was using Rivals to find recruits, however I think you can use the fan sites to gain some intelligence on recruits.

 

[Sudano]

I strongly believe that recruiting services (national and state) are used as a resource by the staff in some capacity. Certainly, they don't replace individual evaluation/recruiting. However, coaches all over the country follow recruiting sites/scouts for some reason.

The extent to which they are used is certainly arguable but the blanket statement that coaches don't care/don't use them in any capacity is not a viable argument in my opinion.

Look at the SU staff right now. From the Head Coach down to Recruiting Coordinator, most every one of them follows multiple recruiting sites/scouts/writers on social media. I don't think they do that without the purpose to use them to help the program be successful.

The internet and all its recruiting sites including recruiting websites, twitter, hudl, 247 are all sources of information. They are not the only sole source of information.
If they are not looking at sites for names/ players/ player videos basic info on possible players then they are missing out on a valuable source of immediate information that they may want to follow up on. Basic Group Sourcing helps the overall process. What if a site or twitter reports a recruit will visit someone when there was no mention of it during a phone call a few hours ago. Guess what, they use the information to decide what to do next. What if they come across a name on a site that looks intriguing that they've never heard of yet. Guess what, they use the information to decide if they want to connect with that recruit. If programs are not using the Internet and its vast amount of recruiting information and its immediacy in some significant way then they are not doing their job.

 

[RandomGuy]

I'm sure our coaches use the recruiting services for identifying targets. Sure they have plenty of relationships and contacts where they get targets elsewhere and ones that may not even be on recruiting services yet but they must use them to identify other potential targets to pursue. I would guess they use what they can from recruiting services regarding interviews, films, and probably specific situations with competitor offers and who the other suitors are. Why would they not. Some information needs to be taken into the right context and filtered accordingly though. I'm sure all of their talent evaluation is done by themselves though via watching games, camps and film review so the star rankings don't mean much to them.

I'll guess Dino wasn't lying. I'd also have to guess, it's mostly the other way around. The 3 ranking services mostly get their info from the college's/college scouting services. Or a kids Twitter page. They don't mind grading "recruits" that don't even exist.

 

[Sudano]

The coach perspective: How do college coaches recruit players?
Article about the 'board' and how one goes up and down on the 'board'. But no mention on how a name goes or doesn't go on the 'board'

 

[sufandu]

The discussion of using recruiting sites has gotten off topic. The question was do coaches use these sites to evaluate kids? The answer is no they don't. If 2 4 7 has a kid as a 3 star and Dino sees something more, he does not care what they say. Therefore, rankings from these sites are meaningless to them. Will there be overlap with the site evaluations and coaches? Sure, especially with the elite can't miss guys. Beyond that, probably not, and the coaches don't care.

Nobody is disputing the coaches don't use the services as a source of intel on a recruit they already have interest in. That just makes sense. But they absolutely don't care if a site hase a kid as a 3 star or a 4 star. They have already determined that for themselves.

 

[Sudano]

The discussion of using recruiting sites has gotten off topic. The question was do coaches use these sites to evaluate kids? The answer is no they don't. If 2 4 7 has a kid as a 3 star and Dino sees something more, he does not care what they say. Therefore, rankings from these sites are meaningless to them. Will there be overlap with the site evaluations and coaches? Sure, especially with the elite can't miss guys. Beyond that, probably not, and the coaches don't care.

Nobody is disputing the coaches don't use the services as a source of intel on a recruit they already have interest in. That just makes sense. But they absolutely don't care if a site hase a kid as a 3 star or a 4 star. They have already determined that for themselves.

Off topic? People are taking an interesting discussion to its natural iterations, adding related ideas and thoughts through a normal process. I find it a good give and take on all related topics. To add onto your point they do not care what star they are and don't determine any star for that matter but they do have some method of either giving them a talent grade or a ranking system to put one athlete over another.

 

[sufandu]

Off topic? People are taking an interesting discussion to its natural iterations, adding related ideas and thoughts through a normal process. I find it a good give and take on all related topics. To add onto your point they do not care what star they are and don't determine any star for that matter but they do have some method of either giving them a talent grade or a ranking system to put one athlete over another.

Yes. The debate was whether coaches use sites to evaluate players/care about stars, not whether they used them to gain intel. It slowly shifted to the latter, which nobody ever disputed.

 

[Cusedad2X]

Looking at rankings and using them as your primary (or even secondary) recruiting guide/tool are two totally different things.

HCDB does not use the services as much as you seem to be claiming.

And the recruiting services and the services they provide are self-fulfilling prophecies. You haven't been posting here long, but you have been following the recruiting services, I assume. A kid commits to Alabama, he gains a start or two. A kid commits to Syracuse, he loses a star. How is that logical or objective? The recruiting services are highly subjective. Do they serve a purpose? Sure - for guideline purposes and for the lazy coaches.

Given what I have seen so far, I trust the staff's decisions in choosing who to offer based on their in-person evaluations and how they fit our system over any of the services. If they overlap, great. If not, I don't care. 10 wins is 10 wins. View attachment 163001

I NEVER CLAIMED WE USED THESE Recruiting services to the extent you are stating (primary). I SAID the stars have value and the services have value AS OPPOSED TO YOU AND ANOTHER POSTER THAT SAID THEY MEAN NOTHING. I pointed out that many coaches DO use these services (subscribe to them) and reference them. YOU and another poster CONSISTENTLY bash the services and their value. IT flat out is just incorrect in my opinion. If we were reeling in a bunch of 5 stars like bama, Clemson, etc. everyone would love the recruiting services.

FYI...I have posted on this site and a predecessor for along time. A new computer and forgotten password forced my newer identity.

 

[Cusedad2X]

The coach perspective: How do college coaches recruit players?
Article about the 'board' and how one goes up and down on the 'board'. But no mention on how a name goes or doesn't go on the 'board'

Article shows a player's offer list may not be as reliable of a measuring stick for evaluating a recruit as previously referenced on this thread.

 

[orange79]

I NEVER CLAIMED WE USED THESE Recruiting services to the extent you are stating (primary). I SAID the stars have value and the services have value AS OPPOSED TO YOU AND ANOTHER POSTER THAT SAID THEY MEAN NOTHING. I pointed out that many coaches DO use these services (subscribe to them) and reference them. YOU and another poster CONSISTENTLY bash the services and their value. IT flat out is just incorrect in my opinion. If we were reeling in a bunch of 5 stars like bama, Clemson, etc. everyone would love the recruiting services.

FYI...I have posted on this site and a predecessor for along time. A new computer and forgotten password forced my newer identity.

Calm down.

Where did I say they mean nothing? Oh, that's right. I didn't

And I think you must have me confused with another poster. I truly can't remember the last time (if ever) I commented on the services. Seriously. It must be someone else.

 

[Cusedad2X]

Calm down.

Where did I say they mean nothing? Oh, that's right. I didn't

And I think you must have me confused with another poster. I truly can't remember the last time (if ever) I commented on the services. Seriously. It must be someone else.

And it was a couple others just a page or two previously. sorry.

 

[blizz]

Funny how Dino ignores recruiting rankings for his own players but then will refer to star rankings and count stars on opposing teams. They mean nothing and something at the same time, it just depends on who is at the business end of the stick.

 

[Horn88]

Looking at rankings and using them as your primary (or even secondary) recruiting guide/tool are two totally different things.

HCDB does not use the services as much as you seem to be claiming.

And the recruiting services and the services they provide are self-fulfilling prophecies. You haven't been posting here long, but you have been following the recruiting services, I assume. A kid commits to Alabama, he gains a start or two. A kid commits to Syracuse, he loses a star. How is that logical or objective? The recruiting services are highly subjective. Do they serve a purpose? Sure - for guideline purposes and for the lazy coaches.

Given what I have seen so far, I trust the staff's decisions in choosing who to offer based on their in-person evaluations and how they fit our system over any of the services. If they overlap, great. If not, I don't care. 10 wins is 10 wins. View attachment 163001

Just as an FYI to explain that, it's basically because the recruiting services guys will trust the Saban's, Dabo's, Urban's eval and think if these guys think they're good and will take their commitment over a higher rated kid then they must be good because they don't miss that often. You see the same thing with basketball where the scouting services just see who the proven coaches are watching in the EYBL and then write about how they the site have uncovered this hidden gem.

I know for a fact Saban has no idea where any of the sites have guys ranked and on numerous occassions has turned down 5 stars who wanted to commit and took a 3 star who he thought was better and he's usually right.

 

[General Joe]

Let's not kid ourselves here. Stars do matter. Yes, there are some misses. But guys with the pedigrees generally earned them. We can bang our chests when be take 3-4 NORTHERN recruits from PSU. Ohio St. ND, etc. Again, I said NORTHERN recruits. I haven't seen that yet. We are taking second tier southern recruits. I'm not saying they can't be great players, BUT when we control our own backyard first, then I will say we are recruiting at a real good level.

I have always thought the "stars dont matter" defense was loser talk. Loser talk because the top teams year in and year out have more players with 4 or 5 stars than they do players with 2 or 3 stars. Losing teams have more low or even "no star" recruits. Just look at Clemson, Ala, OKl etc etc etc. You still have to take the field with recruited players, gameplan and win so having top recruits isnt the end all be all. But can you imagine if Syracuse could get a few top notch recruits?????? I hope we move in that direction instead of being the "top school offer" for our recruits. Just look at the three guys we have signed for 2020 so far.

 

[RF2044]

I have always thought the "stars dont matter" defense was loser talk. Loser talk because the top teams year in and year out have more players with 4 or 5 stars than they do players with 2 or 3 stars. Losing teams have more low or even "no star" recruits. Just look at Clemson, Ala, OKl etc etc etc. You still have to take the field with recruited players, gameplan and win so having top recruits isnt the end all be all. But can you imagine if Syracuse could get a few top notch recruits?????? I hope we move in that direction instead of being the "top school offer" for our recruits. Just look at the three guys we have signed for 2020 so far.

I have always thought the "stars don't matter" talk is a made up straw man.

 

[HOFCeluck]

I guess if you're going to get really passionate and die on an internet hill, high school football recruiting rankings is a good one.

 

[General Joe]

Cooper Dawson chose us over Clemson (yes, more to it).

Grabbing prospects from Clemson will be tougher. Now, have ANOTHER year (back to back) where we finish higher ranked than Ped State? Those that are recruited by both schools may take a much more serious look at Cuse. That's what I want. Stick it to Creepy Valley.

This might be the single best post i have read in this thread. If we can just beat Penn ST on some of the high 4 star talent in NY NJ and Midatlantic area year in it can take us from the "feel good story year" to consistently performing at the top of ACC

 

[Cusester]

One thing to remember when you talk about beating creepy valley for a recruit is that this is a fan base that looked the other way while children were being sodomized on campus. They wouldn't be concerned at all about what was done to entice a recruit to commit.

 

[Sudano]

I have always thought the "stars don't matter" talk is a made up straw man.

While I agree that 'stars' literally don't matter because its a construct for fans and not college football coaches to evaluate talent, they DO matter in how they reflect and are a correlation to their offers which in turn correlate with their talent...
So to further confuse everyone...Stars really don't matter in the literal sense but matter in how they reflect overall talent. Statistics prove how higher HS talent grades reflect in higher talent levels. Its not absolute when comparing hundreds of 4-5 star athletes with thousands of 3 star athletes and that's what people want to argue about. They list a few players who had no stars who are now NFL All Pros while ignoring the overall statistics of hundreds of thousands of players over decades proving the correlative statistics of talent (stars).

 

[CuseLegacy]

While I agree that 'stars' literally don't matter because its a construct for fans and not college football coaches to evaluate talent, they DO matter in how they reflect and are a correlation to their offers which in turn correlate with their talent...
So to further confuse everyone...Stars really don't matter in the literal sense but matter in how they reflect overall talent. Statistics prove how higher HS talent grades reflect in higher talent levels. Its not absolute when comparing hundreds of 4-5 star athletes with thousands of 3 star athletes and that's what people want to argue about. They list a few players who had no stars who are now NFL All Pros while ignoring the overall statistics of hundreds of thousands of players over decades proving the correlative statistics.

The star system is skewed. If kids don't go to the recruiting service camps, aren't promoted to programs by their coaches or don't get P5 offers they can be the most talented/gifted player but they won't have the stars. There are a lot of players that until they start receiving offers aren't going to show up in a recruiting services database if they don't go to their camps. Sometimes when the coaches offer prospects the only place I can find info on them is Hudl and their twitter account.