Skill position recruitng

[GoSU96]

Oh but people can make claims about how great our current RBs are and they have shown LESS than he did? Got it makes sense.

Who is touting these guys as great?

Gulley has 2 more carries and 80 more yards if you want to be exact.

Guess what, it's all potential, we get it.

 

[OrangePA]

Collier was better than any RB currently on the roster. Really, other than the fact that he couldn't stay in the program because he couldn't stop hitting the pipe, his entire career consisted of appearing in 4 games, 12 carries, and netting 86 yards, 60 of which was on one run.

How the can you make that claim based on that body of work?

Silly

I liked Collier but didn't see him as the answer.

I didn't get the sense that he had great speed or was a true home run threat - despite the one 60 yard run.

Still, was disappointed over how his career on the Hill ended.

 

[OrangePA]

There's no point debating about 4/5 stars versus under the radar kids, because we get the best kids we can and then we balance them with kids we think have potential. The stars arn't always right, but 4 and 5 star kids are more likely to be impact players -- the past is a good predictor of the future, but not the only predictor. For the remainder of the recruits, our staff has done a great job of mining under-the-radar kids whose talents were mis/underrepresented in the star system. And I hope that continues.

All that said, I think most people would agree that we need some impact guys at the skill positions sprinkled over the top of the recruits with potential ... and that's King's point. The RB position this year (although we havn't started the season) appears to be illustrative -- the higher rated/impact guys are younger ... but already flashing their skills. Same at TE ... Thompson .. highly rated .. and proving why. In most cases, the stars are shining in our system (although not in every case, as with Lobdell, et al.).

Rutgers sucks because ... that's what Rutgers does. The only thing we can learn from them is not to do what they do.

We need to do more of what Rutgers seems to have been doing for the past few years - recruit better athletes.

 

[reedny]

We need to do more of what Rutgers seems to have been doing for the past few years - recruit better athletes.

Or wasting talent, which was the point.

 

[billsin01]

I honestly don't know how anyone here can evaulate any of the running backs from a productivity perspective, we haven't seen enough of any of them really. Smith looked pretty good to me versus Pitt, Gulley has shown some progress and we know he is a bonehead off the field and probably a bit fumble prone, Morris is a frosh, and AAM was 30 pounds overweight last year, some due to injury some due to his own doing as well, I am sure but seriously we aren't dealing with a legit body of work with any of these guys.

I don't know if any of these kids can replace Bailey but certainly not going to say they can't, and certainly won't judge by rivals recruiting numbers.

Call me crazy

Yeah, this thread has two very distinct points -- one of which I agree with and one of which I believe is way off.

The one I agree with is that you need to have talented athletes at skill positions to truly have a consistently productive offense and we haven't quite had the success bringing those kids in. Although an important point to make here is that the first full recruiting class -- and I looked at the numbers a while back and am way too lazy to look now -- was largely focused on the lines and on defense. Was that an error in judgment? I don't think so -- we were woefully thin at LB and needed a lot of help at DB and DL as well. I think we're better in those areas now. Regardless, we need more help on offense and, it appears, we're starting to get it.

The second point is comparing rating systems -- the point I make all the time is UConn never -- NEVER -- has brought in highly rated kids and they have had a bunch of first-day picks and super productive RBs. The star system is horribly flawed once you get past the truly top tier (maybe the national top 250 overall). We need to stop pretending that getting the 31st ranked LB is going to make us better than getting the 54th ranked LB.

 

[billsin01]

Those two RBs are two of my all time favorites in SU history. Love both of those players.

I always thought Brown was underrated and, had he played in this era, would have made for a dangerous weapon at QB from time to time.

 

[RF2044]

I always thought Brown was underrated and, had he played in this era, would have made for a dangerous weapon at QB from time to time.

Huge, huge Dee Brown fan. He was a tremendous college player.

On a related note, when I lived in Cleveland during grad school, I attended a Browns / Panthers game that Dee ended up starting since Carolina's backfield was ransacked with injuries--he was their 3rd or 4th string RB. He ended up carrying the ball something like 30 times for 125 yards [not exact, but in that ball park], and totally helped Carolina dominate TOP in a win.

I was the only one in the otherwise glum stadium rooting for Dee Brown.

 

[Shrmdougluvr]

Anyone that didnt think Broyld was a four star recruit out of HS is a ing !

Yeah I said it.

Not sure what this ha to do with Otto's post, but ive been dying to post that somewhere.

 

[FranCuse]

Huge, huge Dee Brown fan. He was a tremendous college player.

On a related note, when I lived in Cleveland during grad school, I attended a Browns / Panthers game that Dee ended up starting since Carolina's backfield was ransacked with injuries--he was their 3rd or 4th string RB. He ended up carrying the ball something like 30 times for 125 yards [not exact, but in that ball park], and totally helped Carolina dominate TOP in a win.

I was the only one in the otherwise glum stadium rooting for Dee Brown.

I'm also a huge Dee Brown fan. He had the fumble against NC St his freshman(?) year in multiple OT game that led to a loss. A big write up in the paper a few days later explained how he called his Dad and they talked for hours about the fumble and how he was a man on a mission to never fumble again. It was a great story and he was from that point forward one of my favs at SU. He was very versatile almost to a fault. SU used him as their BU or 3rd string QB and he had to also did whatever the coaches asked. I would love to know what he is doing now. One of my favorite SU players.

 

[OburgCuse]

Huge, huge Dee Brown fan. He was a tremendous college player.

On a related note, when I lived in Cleveland during grad school, I attended a Browns / Panthers game that Dee ended up starting since Carolina's backfield was ransacked with injuries--he was their 3rd or 4th string RB. He ended up carrying the ball something like 30 times for 125 yards [not exact, but in that ball park], and totally helped Carolina dominate TOP in a win.

I was the only one in the otherwise glum stadium rooting for Dee Brown.

Dee still lives in the Charlotte area and is doing well. He does a lot of work training athletes. I have a friend who is very good friends with him and have met him a couple times.

 

[SmilinBob]

Dee always seemed to be a guy that got 3 yards instead of 2...4 yards instead of 3 and 5 yards instead of 4. It adds up and he was a sifferin fool.

I love natural talent/speed and size at the rb position but I also enjoy having a back that can read holes and let his linemen develop their blocks.

 

[TheOrangeBuddha]

I am talking about our current struggles on O. That removes Funderburk and Edwards since they cannot help. In addition Funderburk is a transfer. Lemon was a GRob recruit. You want to add TEs fine I will give you Thompson as he is a Top 50 guy.

The whole point is we need more impact guys at RB and WR. You cannot expect to have a decent O with ALL under the radar kids. They are veyr important to a team and Marrone has done a fine job adding depth. But until we get some impact guys the O will struggle. In addition I realize that the Top recruits don't always pan out. But if you are essentially getting NONE of them, then it is hard to have a good O.

Rutgers stinks because they have no QB, a bad OL, and bad coaching. If we had one of those RBs or WRs that they have brought in the last three years then we would be a much better team. Thats the point. We will be limited until we can upgrade talent. And in reality from a playmaker perspective we have gone DOWN vs GRob.

There are college teams each year that don't have top end recruits that are able to formulate and be much more successful on offense than Syracuse has shown in a decade. Obviously, the more talent you have the easier it should be - but others seem to find a way to overcome. Our first opponent is a perfect example of this ...

 

[SoBristol]

There are college teams each year that don't have top end recruits that are able to formulate and be much more successful on offense than Syracuse has shown in a decade. Obviously, the more talent you have the easier it should be - but others seem to find a way to overcome. Our first opponent is a perfect example of this ...

It is a myth that Northwestern gets by without recruiting ranked offensive talent. Of course, they aren't getting Michigan-level talent, but if you look at NW's recruits in 2010 and 2011, you see:
RB 35, 62, 84, 87, 109
WR 85, 92
QB 33, 49
C 17
OG 38, 68
OT 74, 75, 84

It is a step or two better than what we landed in the same years, especially in the OL.

 

[TheOrangeBuddha]

It is a myth that Northwestern gets by without recruiting ranked offensive talent. Of course, they aren't getting Michigan-level talent, but if you look at NW's recruits in 2010 and 2011, you see:
RB 35, 62, 84, 87, 109
WR 85, 92
QB 33, 49
C 17
OG 38, 68
OT 74, 75, 84

It is a step or two better than what we landed in the same years, especially in the OL.

And the myth is that NW has recruited this way for the past ten years. Yet in just about each year they have produced an offense that is capable of putting points on the board and one that for the most part keeps them in games.

 

[OrangeMaNPD]

There are college teams each year that don't have top end recruits that are able to formulate and be much more successful on offense than Syracuse has shown in a decade. Obviously, the more talent you have the easier it should be - but others seem to find a way to overcome. Our first opponent is a perfect example of this ...

East Carolina, Southern Miss, Houston, Tulsa and probably a slew of other Conf USA and/or MAC teams also come to mind.