Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="billsin01, post: 335703, member: 837"]
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.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?