The latest all encompassing recruiting thread

[money3189]

Because statistically speaking having a full team of more talented players compensates for the few that inevitably won't match their expectations. Recruiting is a numbers game not an individual players game.

Not sure I understand your point.

 

[Sudano]

Not sure I understand your point.

When posters try to disprove that top HS players don't always pan out they list individual players that meet that point. For every player they correctly point out that didn't meet expectations I can list 10 who did.
Analyzing Recruiting is basically a mathematical statistical endeavor. It has to accommodate margin for error.
The more players who are talented reflected by their offers and less so by their star rating the more likely it can safeguard or cushion the inevitable blow when a few small percentage in the class don't pan out.
Recruit one top player and your failure rate could easily be 100%, recruit almost a whole class of 20 players and your failure rate is reduced greatly when those few don't pan out. People often point to walk on JJ Watt becoming an AA and top NFL draft pick and player and present it as if its a common occurrence what is possible in recruiting as if it happens regularly, but the fact that it isn't a common occurrence and walk on's rarely at extremely low percentages even contribute to top 25 teams escape them and is ignored. They present the rare as common. Alot of rare low rated players ultimately succeed but at such a significantly lower rate that it ultimately negatively affects Wins and Losses in a tough conference like the ACC. We ultimately need to recruit better players in bulk over the entire roster of 85 in comparison to our ACC competitors to accommodate that margin for error.

 

[wfschrec]

Its a long stretch to say Benson and Ruckert are equal. Ruckert is a better blocker than some of the guys we had playing OT last year. But we throw the ball a ton and are usually losing so its possible.

Just compare Benson's numbers as a true frosh to Ruckert's as a soph ... Benson plays the part .. not that hard to see.

 

[wfschrec]

Boy wfschrec you got wayy of topic and alot of posts. Lets try to get back to your original post.
With all due respect I am less interested in what one recruit says who we never really had a shot at, but more interested in those local recruits we might. To use your example Curtis Samuels wasn't a 5 star kid. Neither was Qaidree Ollison the kid from Cannisius who plays for Pitt and ran all over us. I can give you multiple examples of NYS kids playing all over who would be starters for us.

Here is something I think we can all agree on, if your good enough for the NFL you will get drafted in the NFL regardless of where you play college ball. Just look at my example of Ed Oliver. Another just to hammer the point home is Carson Wentz. So that renders your point mute.

Another thing we should all agree on Playing in the P5 is the highest exposure you can have in college football. We are a P5 school you cant get any higher

We should all agree that there are kids who want to play for "state" and some that want to go away to a factory. I am simply saying focus on the local kids. As I originally pointed out they are higher rated than the kids we have been signing

I dont understand why and how you dont see the talent in the "territory" I pointed out (NY NJ PA MA MA). If you truly dont (although I think you do) I will just say Lets go Orange! And leave it alone

We lose local recruits for a reason, I think money has already detailed this for you and once again Florida puts out more players than the 4 states you keep throwing out combined. I'm not going off topic I am stating the obvious here.

 

[money3189]

When posters try to disprove that top HS players don't always pan out they list individual players that meet that point. For every player they correctly point out that didn't meet expectations I can list 10 who did.
Analyzing Recruiting is basically a mathematical statistical endeavor. It has to accommodate margin for error.
The more players who are talented reflected by their offers and less so by their star rating the more likely it can safeguard or cushion the inevitable blow when a few small percentage in the class don't pan out.
Recruit one top player and your failure rate could easily be 100%, recruit almost a whole class of 20 players and your failure rate is reduced greatly when those few don't pan out. People often point to walk on JJ Watt becoming an AA and top NFL draft pick and player and present it as if its a common occurrence what is possible in recruiting as if it happens regularly, but the fact that it isn't a common occurrence and walk on's rarely at extremely low percentages even contribute to top 25 teams escape them and is ignored. They present the rare as common. Alot of rare low rated players ultimately succeed but at such a significantly lower rate that it ultimately negatively affects Wins and Losses in a tough conference like the ACC. We ultimately need to recruit better players in bulk over the entire roster of 85 in comparison to our ACC competitors to accommodate that margin for error.

I think people like to use examples of guys that over achieve because it gives them hope but yeah its the exception, not the rule.

 

[Sudano]

I think people like to use examples of guys that over achieve because it gives them hope but yeah its the exception, not the rule.

That's exactly what I'm saying. Good Post. The same holds true for signing alot of players without P5 offers and point to all the undervalued players who make it, without recognizing that's just too much emphasis on wishful thinking. Of course some under recruited players make it. Just not at the rate and significance to cover a field with talent enough to win regularly at the ACC level. We have to beat P5 teams for recruits before we can beat them on the field for games.

 

[money3189]

We lose local recruits for a reason, I think money has already detailed this for you and once again Florida puts out more players than the 4 states you keep throwing out combined. I'm not going off topic I am stating the obvious here.

Lol Florida’s 127th ranked player is rated the same as our highest rated kid. Which is 85.18. That is good for 3rd in NYS. Florida’s 200th ranked would be the 10th ranked kid in NYS.

 

[007]

I think people like to use examples of guys that over achieve because it gives them hope but yeah its the exception, not the rule.

People in general seem to struggle to understand that pointing out exceptions to things that are highly correlated (not just in terms of recruiting, but any correlation) does not disprove the correlation.

 

[money3189]

That's exactly what I'm saying. Good Post. The same holds true for signing alot of players without P5 offers and point to all the undervalued players who make it, without recognizing that's just too much emphasis on wishful thinking. Of course some under recruited players make it. Just not at the rate and significance to cover a field with talent enough to win regularly at the ACC level. We have to beat P5 teams for recruits before we can beat them on the field for games.

We beat the P5 teams we are in similar status with and most of those teams have been more successful than us. The issue has always been showing the ability to consistently win. We will get more quality players when we do. They are not coming based on faith. We need to show continued progress. The 5-7 season was a set back. I was hoping for back to back bowl seasons. That would have been enough to keep the optimistim going. We’ve got some 4 stars here and there but the results has been 11 losing seasons in 15 years. As far as the commits we get. You can’t help fans for trying to be excited and hopeful with what we get. That’s what fans do. Constantly complaining and bashing recruiting is not going to get better players in. We all show our moments of frustration on this board. We can’t wait for miracles to happen. I believe in history repeating itself. It’s gonna take the Coach Mac approach to get back to where we were. When it happens its going to something that sustains.

 

[TheCusian]

When posters try to disprove that top HS players don't always pan out they list individual players that meet that point. For every player they correctly point out that didn't meet expectations I can list 10 who did.
Analyzing Recruiting is basically a mathematical statistical endeavor. It has to accommodate margin for error.
The more players who are talented reflected by their offers and less so by their star rating the more likely it can safeguard or cushion the inevitable blow when a few small percentage in the class don't pan out.
Recruit one top player and your failure rate could easily be 100%, recruit almost a whole class of 20 players and your failure rate is reduced greatly when those few don't pan out. People often point to walk on JJ Watt becoming an AA and top NFL draft pick and player and present it as if its a common occurrence what is possible in recruiting as if it happens regularly, but the fact that it isn't a common occurrence and walk on's rarely at extremely low percentages even contribute to top 25 teams escape them and is ignored. They present the rare as common. Alot of rare low rated players ultimately succeed but at such a significantly lower rate that it ultimately negatively affects Wins and Losses in a tough conference like the ACC. We ultimately need to recruit better players in bulk over the entire roster of 85 in comparison to our ACC competitors to accommodate that margin for error.

I think you're underrating this sites understanding of recruiting. Most people here view this exactly as stated.

The argument isn't "more 4* and 5* wouldn't make a difference" - that is self-evident to most everyone. The problem is that it commonly breaks down in the 3* tier. There are too many recruits and the differences among them are not as obvious to the schmucks at recruiting services. Throw in some bias, subs, camp attendance, regional weirdness and there's room to argue.

So, when a poster drops in and says "he's no 4*" and "we must do better in recruiting" it's a mailed-in, super-obvious take. What we absolutely do know is that 4* kids don't come here unless something very persuasive happens (wins mostly, sometimes a new system, or exceptional recruiters).

Where we've lived for a long time is hire a good coach who can win, get the best 3* kids we can get, try to snag the rare 4* and then win. Dino has done as good as any since Marrone, then P, then Mac. I say all this to tell folks to temper their expectations. If it happens it will be a slow build. The new OC/DC along Dino is the latest chance.

But please, please let's stop banging the "we need 4*!" and "we have to recruit better" drum. Got a headache.

 

[money3189]

People in general seem to struggle to understand that pointing out exceptions to things that are highly correlated (not just in terms of recruiting, but any correlation) does not disprove the correlation.

Right. I agree. It happens a lot.

 

[Oakland]

But we do need 4*s if we want to get to where we want to be. A 5* every few years would also help. As you indirectly stated, 4*s and 5*s would make a difference.

I think you're underrating this sites understanding of recruiting. Most people here view this exactly as stated.

The argument isn't "more 4* and 5* wouldn't make a difference" - that is self-evident to most everyone. The problem is that it commonly breaks down in the 3* tier. There are too many recruits and the differences among them are not as obvious to the schmucks at recruiting services. Throw in some bias, subs, camp attendance, regional weirdness and there's room to argue.

So, when a poster drops in and says "he's no 4*" and "we must do better in recruiting" it's a mailed-in, super-obvious take. What we absolutely do know is that 4* kids don't come here unless something very persuasive happens (wins mostly, sometimes a new system, or exceptional recruiters).

Where we've lived for a long time is hire a good coach who can win, get the best 3* kids we can get, try to snag the rare 4* and then win. Dino has done as good as any since Marrone, then P, then Mac. I say all this to tell folks to temper their expectations. If it happens it will be a slow build. The new OC/DC along Dino is the latest chance.

But please, please let's stop banging the "we need 4*!" and "we have to recruit better" drum. Got a headache.

 

[money3189]

I think you're underrating this sites understanding of recruiting. Most people here view this exactly as stated.

The argument isn't "more 4* and 5* wouldn't make a difference" - that is self-evident to most everyone. The problem is that it commonly breaks down in the 3* tier. There are too many recruits and the differences among them are not as obvious to the schmucks at recruiting services. Throw in some bias, subs, camp attendance, regional weirdness and there's room to argue.

So, when a poster drops in and says "he's no 4*" and "we must do better in recruiting" it's a mailed-in, super-obvious take. What we absolutely do know is that 4* kids don't come here unless something very persuasive happens (wins mostly, sometimes a new system, or exceptional recruiters).

Where we've lived for a long time is hire a good coach who can win, get the best 3* kids we can get, try to snag the rare 4* and then win. Dino has done as good as any since Marrone, then P, then Mac. I say all this to tell folks to temper their expectations. If it happens it will be a slow build. The new OC/DC along Dino is the latest chance.

But please, please let's stop banging the "we need 4*!" and "we have to recruit better" drum. Got a headache.

Great post. Spot on.

 

[money3189]

But we do need 4*s if we want to get to where we want to be. A 5* every few years would also help. As you indirectly stated, 4*s and 5*s would make a difference.

We need many 4/5 stars but it ain't happening until we show consistent winning.

 

[Sudano]

We beat the P5 teams we are in similar status with and most of those teams have been more successful than us. The issue has always been showing the ability to consistently win. We will get more quality players when we do. They are not coming based on faith. We need to show continued progress. The 5-7 season was a set back. I was hoping for back to back bowl seasons. That would have been enough to keep the optimistim going. We’ve got some 4 stars here and there but the results has been 11 losing seasons in 15 years. As far as the commits we get. You can’t help fans for trying to be excited and hopeful with what we get. That’s what fans do. Constantly complaining and bashing recruiting is not going to get better players in. We all show our moments of frustration on this board. We can’t wait for miracles to happen. I believe in history repeating itself. It’s gonna take the Coach Mac approach to get back to where we were. When it happens its going to something that sustains.

Fans come in many shades. Not just one. It's not complaining or bashing it's pointing out and lamenting about recruiting. And constantly quoting wow great pickup, or blindly trust the coaches when its obvious we are struggling isn't going to get better players either. I'm going to say the king has no pants if its true not just ignore it in hopes things will change. I'm frustrated and then get bashed for pointing out the obvious.
We all can be fans and debate and disagree the best approach our return to greatness. Different paths to the same goal. Last season was a HUGE missed opportunity and the coaches have to take some of the blame.
I really hope we go bowling this year because with bowls come changes in recruiting and so on and so on...

 

[Sudano]

We need many 4/5 stars but it ain't happening until we show consistent winning.

Chicken or the egg? Which comes first getting good players who win, or winning to get good players?

 

[General Joe]

We lose local recruits for a reason, I think money has already detailed this for you and once again Florida puts out more players than the 4 states you keep throwing out combined. I'm not going off topic I am stating the obvious here.

And we lose more Florida recruits than we win for a reason also. We have perennially been a bottom ACC recruiting team under HCDB. If you think the recruiting with our Florida strategy is good why have we been so bad on the field?

 

[money3189]

Chicken or the egg? Which comes first getting good players who win, or winning to get good players?

We all know great players are needed to win. Thats a given but we are not going to get high ranked players to come here consistently when you consistently lose. For example schiano with Ray Rice and the McCourty brothers. He develop them and they became 4 star college players and on to the NFL. During that time they were getting to bowl games. Then the elite commits came. You have to develop players and use that to sell to kids.

 

[money3189]

Fans come in many shades. Not just one. It's not complaining or bashing it's pointing out and lamenting about recruiting. And constantly quoting wow great pickup, or blindly trust the coaches when its obvious we are struggling isn't going to get better players either. I'm going to say the king has no pants if its true not just ignore it in hopes things will change. I'm frustrated and then get bashed for pointing out the obvious.
We all can be fans and debate and disagree the best approach our return to greatness. Different paths to the same goal. Last season was a HUGE missed opportunity and the coaches have to take some of the blame.
I really hope we go bowling this year because with bowls come changes in recruiting and so on and so on...

We are all frustrated. I am both optimistic and critical. I dont tell anyone how to be a fan. I definitely have my moments on this forum. I love the different attitudes and perspective on here as far a games, players etc... Recruiting is pretty clear to me. I have a good grasp on what our strengths and challenges are. It doesn't mean I'm not holding the staff accountable. We are not getting any 5 star saviors .That's not a debate and its not a preference by the staff. Its what they have to do. We have to get out of this whole with a lunch pail mentality. We can do that by developing 3 star players and making the most with the few 4 stars we get. We have to string together some 6, 7,8 win seasons while doing that.

 

[wfschrec]

General Joe
Seriously? You are going to lose more than you win in general no matter where you recruit ... however to money's point and I will explain this for the last time it is easier to land a prospect ranked 200th in the state because he is lower on the pecking order than it is to land a top 10 guy in a talent poor state with the same ranking because there is less ground to cover in talent poor states. Which is why ND or Clemson can put minimal effort in NY and take the top players, that is who we are competing with. When it comes to the 200th ranked recruit in FL who is just as skilled we are more than likely competing against peers like Lville. Our odds of victory improve ... I'm not sure why you can't get this.

 

[TheCusian]

But we do need 4*s if we want to get to where we want to be. A 5* every few years would also help. As you indirectly stated, 4*s and 5*s would make a difference.

*Everyone agrees on this*

 

[Oakland]

I would hope so, but after reading many posts on the subject, I'm not so sure.

*Everyone agrees on this*

 

[money3189]

I would hope so, but after reading many posts on the subject, I'm not so sure.

Of the 10 years on this board discussing recruiting. I've haven't heard one person say we don't need 4/5 stars on the roster.

 

[721Comstock]

Of the 10 years on this board discussing recruiting. I've haven't heard one person say we don't need 4/5 stars on the roster.

We don't need 4/5 stars on the roster.

Checked THAT box for ya!

Well - we don't "need" them, we'd very much like them, and they would probably be incredibly beneficial, but the team that went 10-3 didn't really have any 4/5 stars (I guess other than Tommy) on it.

Given how few 5* guys there are, and that they ALL typically go to a handful of factory programs, it's silly for Cuse fans to pine for them.
Ain't happening.

... at least, not at the moment.

Our only realistic change to land somebody like that, would be a Tim Green type local player, who decides to stay home. Alas, the small handful of really talented NY kids usually seem to have zero interest in playing for Syracuse.

And we haven't been able to land a 4/5* legacy either - let's hope Rooks chances that trend.
(of course, all the crystal meth balls have him going to Michigan. Damn bricks!!! )

 

[General Joe]

Seriously? You are going to lose more than you win in general no matter where you recruit ... however to money's point and I will explain this for the last time it is easier to land a prospect ranked 200th in the state because he is lower on the pecking order than it is to land a top 10 guy in a talent poor state with the same ranking because there is less ground to cover in talent poor states. Which is why ND or Clemson can put minimal effort in NY and take the top players, that is who we are competing with. When it comes to the 200th ranked recruit in FL who is just as skilled we are more than likely competing against peers like Lville. Our odds of victory improve...I'm not sure why you cant get this.

You say "it is easier to land a prospect ranked 200th in the state because he is lower on the pecking order than it is to land a top 10 guy in a talent poor state with the same ranking because there is less ground to cover in talent poor states". You go on to say "we are more than likely competing against peers like Lville". But you totally don't address the elephant in the room which is we play FLST, MIA, NC and yes Louisville. So to correct your statement it would be like saying we are going to get players 200+rated to play against MIA, FLST,NC Louisville top 100 players. This is a horribly flawed strategy because those teams get the more talented players EVERY SINGLE year then get to play our lower rated players. Its like those teams get the 1st team all county players while the guys we get to play vs them are hopefully honorable mentions in the same county. Think about it. If I am correct, the direct correlation will be expressed in our record vs those P5 teams. Look at our record. I think generally you agree that it is easier to recruit to your home territory. To hammer this home lets look at the Florida and NE territory in 2018. I picked 2018 because we obviously got our best player from Florida (Cisco) so this should help your argument.

2018 top Florida recruits signed to ACC teams
Clemson- #1 DE Xavier Thomas #1 nationally #36 LB mike jones #210,

Miami- #6 RB Lorenzo Lingard #25 nationally, #13 WR Mark Pope #67, #21 CB Al Blades #97, #25 G DJ Scaife #149, #26 Brian Hightower #154, #29 RB Camron Harris #173, #32 S Gurvan Hall #184, #33 Gilbert Frieson #200, #37 TE Will Mallory #211, #Cleveland Reed #259, #63 DJ Ivey #353, #77 WR D Wiggins464, #79 OT John Campbell 481, #80 WDE Greg Rousseau 485,

NC#10 OT William Barnes #53 nationally, #61 WR Antoine Green #350, #89 OG Ed Montilus 567,

Fl ST #12 CB Assante Samuel jr #60 nationally, #27 Warren Thompson #157,#42 Malcolm Lamar #222, #43 cb Isaiah Bolden #231, #44 OLB Amari Gainer #239, #57DT Dennis Briggs #324, #74 WR Dmarcus Adams #420

Louisville- ILB Robert Hicks #240, #50 S Trenell Troutman #278, #68 Marcus Riley #383, #69 CB Chandler Jones #385,

VT- S Chamarri Conner #317

Pitt- #83 WR Shocky Jacques Loius 531

GT- #87 DT TK Chimedza #558

Syracuse- #101 Cameron Jonas 653, #137 Andre Cisco 929

Florida is obviously the "TERRITORY" of FLST and Miami. So as you would expect they both do well with 14 and 7 top 100 in state prospects respectively. But Florida is also SEC territory with 30 of the top 100 signing to SEC. These two facts coupled with the status of Florida being a hotbed makes it highly competitive and puts us in a poor position to win top talent from Florida. This is expressed in our best year of 2018. Interestingly a MAC school Toledo had two top 100 recruits 92,95 higher than our guys (MAC Strategy) and PN ST (NE focuse)had 1(more on them in a minute) #60. We hit a home run with Cisco and with all due respect the other guys from Florida from the 17, and 18 class haven't done anything. So they were backups at best NOT high end talent better than our local recruits. Those local recruits from "OUR TERRITORY" (NY, PA, NJ,MD,MA,CT,CAN) included 11 of the top 100 overall and 3 of top 10 overall players in the country. This was HCDB best class BECAUSE of the prospects from "OUR Territory" Trill, Q White Taj etc. In fact the NY NJ players we have are higher on the depth chart than the players from Florida atleast in the 1st two classes when you add Devito (NJ) Iffy (MA) Coley (NY) Richards (CAN) So after the 2018 season and recruiting class I thought we would really focus on competing in the NE vs Penn ST for those top 100 prospect. Its our territory, we have more selling points and by in large less competition. You dont have to be a genius to see its easier to position yourself as the other guy besides PNST in the NE than the 30th best team/option recruiting in the SEC territory of South Florida. How does that pitch go "hey your top 29 choices passed you up but we are here for you. Its cold, you will be far from home with no beaches but come on up". We see how that has worked we have a bunch of backups and 1 stud from Florida. I thought HCDB was going to embrace this NE strategy after 2018. Imagine if we focused more heavily on NYC like Penn ST does.

And about Penn ST. Imagine if we had folks doing 12 face to faces with a player like Adessa Issac. We cant, we dont have the State college bankroll as a small private school but that is even more reason to focus and consolidate all of our time, money and other resources on the NE. Penn ST has 3 recruiters focusing on the NE and we have a "Florida strategy". Even though Penn St has much more going for it from a sales perspective they focus on the NE NOT FLA just like we should do. Lets look at them in 2018

5 Star Micah Parsons PA
5 Star Justin Shorter NJ
5 Star Ricky Slade
12 other 4 stars FROM THE EXACT SAME territory (add VA) that I am saying we should focus on. And BTW they did answer the phone on that kid from Florida Jordan Miner #60 Florida #356 overall. He actually is ranked higher than any player HCDB has ever recruited in his entire head coaching career not named Tommy Devito. He was the 15th best player in that class. So much high end talent in the NE that he is a throw in player. He would have been our 2nd highest recruit under HCDB ever. The other throw in kid from Florida was Judge Culpepper. You guys know the story there smh. How can it be true that a school like Penn ST can focus on the NE and pull in so much talent, but the NE can have so little talent that Syracuse has to look for scraps 1300 miles away???????" So much talent in the NE that the Florida players are "filler recruits" (17-25 in class) for Penn ST. And thats before I even adress the 5 stars that ND Clemson and Ala cherry pick from the Northeast. Look those up.

Can you imagine if we focused all our efforts and just took 3 of Penn St's recruits from the NE Not even the top 5 stars but NE prospects number 14,15,16 that the sign. Those NE prospects would be amongst the best players we sign under HCDB. And what would we be missing, again all Florida players not named Cisco are on the bench anyways. Now we can still take the flyer on a Florida kid just like Penn St or anybody else does and lets pray he turns out to be Cisco. But why not focus on the 60 or so higher end guys in "territory" that can see the field immediately for us in our local territory.

As a salesperson if I am going after two prospects with the same payoff. I would rather be in a 1 on 1 in my home turf that allows me to maximize my pros thus limiting my cons with a lower acquisition cost (amount of resources used to get deal)than being out of area vs 30 other competitors that are better positioned with a higher acquisition cost. The NE strategy allows us to do that.