This class is looking great! | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

This class is looking great!

orangenauburn said:
One defense

Rankings weigh quantity as well

The fact we didn't take a full.compliment hindered the rating

Had we taken a full class and kept Palmer we are too 50 for sure
Expand...
not personal but that is one of many typical excuses. our recruiting sucks, and the administration sucks as well. 78 and mark r right on the money. only hope is dino can coach up, if he stays.
 
IthacaBarrel said:
I think grad transfers and Juco guys look fantastic. Outside of devito I see same old same old as far as recruiting. People can soil their drawers and but jergens in 5 gallon buckets all they want but this class is standard operating proecedure at Syracuse, if it is any better than usual we certainly lay ownt know for 2-3 years and hopefully Dino is still around at that point.
Expand...
I like this class, however it is a guessing game. We won't know who can really play until they get onto the field. I also really like the JUCO and Grad Transfers. Mykelti Williams had some nice offers as a high school senior and was a four star recruit.

No offense Ithaca but Jergens and my "but" will not be mentioned in the same sentence.
:rolling:
 
OVR ranking is heavily dependent on how many recruits you take. Bigger classes with lower rankings can jump smaller classes with higher rankings.

This is the problem with these sites, just glancing at OVR rank really doesn't give you a great reflection. It's worth something, but, you should understand how it works and their shortfalls before taking it as gospel.
 
It's a class that keeps us competitive with the mid to lower level ACC schools. I don't blame anybody. It's where we are in the food chain.

I give the staff credit for finding some possible band-aids (no, not more tubas, the other kind of band-aid) to help our defense survive this year. But we know from experience that JUCO's are pretty hit-and-miss.

All in all, this is about what I expected, no more, no less.
 
Not where we want to be yet, but it's improvement. We are heading in the right direction.
 
If they can snag a good grad transfer OT and RB, then the team should be pretty strong this season. Its unfortunate that cuse has the strongest schedule in the country, otherwise it could be a pretty good yr.
 
Symphony Steve said:
It's a class that keeps us competitive with the mid to lower level ACC schools. I don't blame anybody. It's where we are in the food chain.

I give the staff credit for finding some possible band-aids (no, not more tubas, the other kind of band-aid) to help our defense survive this year. But we know from experience that JUCO's are pretty hit-and-miss.

All in all, this is about what I expected, no more, no less.
Expand...

That’s a fair point. I think the class keeps us competitive with everybody on our schedule not named Clemson and Florida State. Louisville will come back down to earth when they lose their Heisman QB. Nobody else on the schedule over the next 4 years should scare anybody.
 
I feel like some people would be well advised to back off Devito's jock. Give the kid a chance to get to campus before we deem him savior. Remember Arob? Feels eerily familiar to that situation right now. Catalina? Legree? Long? Kinder? We have a long list of 3-star flame outs. I'm glad the kid held on and chose us, but the reality is that the best QB we've had in the last decade didn't have one other FBS offer and no late push from Texas A&M or anything like it and certainly wasn't rated as highly as any of the other QBs I've mentioned. I'm talking about Nassib of course, if you want to argue that ED is better, then that's another discussion. To me it's still Nassib and he came in here almost unnoticed.
 
Pyle said:
I feel like some people would be well advised to back off Devito's jock. Give the kid a chance to get to campus before we deem him savior. Remember Arob? Feels eerily familiar to that situation right now. Catalina? Legree? Long? Kinder? We have a long list of 3-star flame outs. I'm glad the kid held on and chose us, but the reality is that the best QB we've had in the last decade didn't have one other FBS offer and no late push from Texas A&M or anything like it and certainly wasn't rated as highly as any of the other QBs I've mentioned. I'm talking about Nassib of course, if you want to argue that ED is better, then that's another discussion. To me it's still Nassib and he came in here almost unnoticed.
Expand...

How many QB's has Dino hand-picked as HC that have actually played in his system?

How many ESPN 300 players have we ever had?

When was the last time a QB was our best recruit?

He's worth getting amped about the day after signing day. We'll see over the summer just where he stands. But until then, it's too damn cold in CNY not to have something to get amped about.

(Side note: Dungey IS already better than Nassib was in his first 3 years. It's really not debatable. 2012 Nassib? Different discussion - one that will be moot by the end of this year, IMHO.)
 
TheCusian said:
How many QB's has Dino hand-picked as HC that have actually played in his system?

How many ESPN 300 players have we ever had?

When was the last time a QB was our best recruit?

He's worth getting amped about the day after signing day. We'll see over the summer just where he stands. But until then, it's too damn cold in CNY not to have something to get amped about.

(Side note: Dungey IS already better than Nassib was in his first 3 years. It's really not debatable. 2012 Nassib? Different discussion - one that will be moot by the end of this year, IMHO.)
Expand...
I get what you're saying. I just frown upon crowing kids before they even have a practice. Some of the folks around here are saying he will start as a true frosh over ED. That's the stuff I have a problem with. This isn't PlayStation or XBOX. Kids need time to adjust, learn, etc. Like I said, I'm very happy he stuck to his word and came. I just don't think we'll see him for a while and personally I have no issue with that.
 
Pyle said:
I just don't think we'll see him for a while and personally I have no issue with that.
Expand...
Probably true, but during his TV interview he made it sound that he would be getting with Sean Lewis a couple of times a week this Spring to go through the "playbook" via Facetime, etc.. He should know the offense when he gets to campus in May.
 
Going back when we were ranked in the top ten, what were our classes ranked? I expect that we will play far above what our classes have been ranked within 2 years.
 
Whats important here is the system fit of the players (which I feel this was very nice class for). While many have noted, rankings wise, this class is in line with most classes over the last 5-10 years. That said we finally have a clear system on both offense and defense for which we can recruit. Looking back to the Marrone/Schafer era our classes were at this same general level (probably a little worse) but our Defense had excelled a hand full of those years, mostly due to the system and players we had recruited specifically for the system. The offense struggled because the system kept changing. JMHO but getting the type of players you want for the type of system you are running can make a class in the 50-60 range a 40-50 type quality class.
 
Janner said:
JMHO but getting the type of players you want for the type of system you are running can make a class in the 50-60 range a 40-50 type quality class.
Expand...

I'd go in the opposite direction. Most schools are recruiting for their system as it is, therefore their ranking are on point. However, plugging a class ranked in the 50's into a system they weren't recruited for has the effect of dropping that class a good 20 spots or so.

I'd also like to add that the people saying it's crapshoot between 60 and 40 are talking coachspeak and sorry but acting as apologists. The schools recruiting around the 40's are schools like Pitt who has beaten us consistently over the past decade while we hang out in the 60's range. Are you telling me there's no difference between a 55th ranked class and a 75th one? What I've come to learn over the years is that yes, star ratings are a crapshoot...per individual player. But overall recruiting rankings aren't completely made up of smoke and mirrors. A bad class is a bad class, kinda like our 2012 one was.
 
I know it's a different situation, but a lot of FSU fans have been freaking out because FSU took an unusual number of three stars this year...half the class. We got four five stars, so we were top and bottom heavy, thin at the 4 star level. It's the opposite of last year where we had 0 or 1 five-star, but only a few three stars.

The question that we look at...is this player a three star because they are a high ceiling project, but with a high-ish bust potential, or are they low ceiling but high floor guys. For FSU, they want a three star that has the measurables, but maybe only has two years of high school football, or played suspect competition (like the 6'7" tight end from Maine they got). That player at least has a chance to start if they reach their ceiling. What they aren't looking for in a three star is a high-floor, low ceiling kid. Like a 5'9 230 lb DT that is really smart and a coaches son, and dominated his league with a high motor. That kid probably isn't contributing at FSU on the field, short of an unforeseen growth spurt, no matter what he or the coaching staff does.

I don't know what you guys need more...guys that are most dependable to provide a steady baseline, or guys that could bust but also could end up being 4-star caliber performers. I don't know your recruits, you would have to give an honest assessment of which kind of three star they are. I have read a few times that you're getting taller an bigger with this class, which implies to me Dino might be looking at kids based more on potential than high school production and field readiness, and is putting on his staff to coach them up. That has the most upside, but the most potential for growing pains and total busts as well.
 
Lou_C said:
I know it's a different situation, but a lot of FSU fans have been freaking out because FSU took an unusual number of three stars this year...half the class. We got four five stars, so we were top and bottom heavy, thin at the 4 star level. It's the opposite of last year where we had 0 or 1 five-star, but only a few three stars.

The question that we look at...is this player a three star because they are a high ceiling project, but with a high-ish bust potential, or are they low ceiling but high floor guys. For FSU, they want a three star that has the measurables, but maybe only has two years of high school football, or played suspect competition (like the 6'7" tight end from Maine they got). That player at least has a chance to start if they reach their ceiling. What they aren't looking for in a three star is a high-floor, low ceiling kid. Like a 5'9 230 lb DT that is really smart and a coaches son, and dominated his league with a high motor. That kid probably isn't contributing at FSU on the field, short of an unforeseen growth spurt, no matter what he or the coaching staff does.

I don't know what you guys need more...guys that are most dependable to provide a steady baseline, or guys that could bust but also could end up being 4-star caliber performers. I don't know your recruits, you would have to give an honest assessment of which kind of three star they are. I have read a few times that you're getting taller an bigger with this class, which implies to me Dino might be looking at kids based more on potential than high school production and field readiness, and is putting on his staff to coach them up. That has the most upside, but the most potential for growing pains and total busts as well.
Expand...

Since being in the ACC, which is when your recruiting needs change based on level of competition, a guy like Shafer went mainly for the high floor guys. You can even see it in his choice of defensive players. He would gladly take the 6 foot linebacker who can play (cam lynch) or a short DB with a lot of heart. I think Dino and his staff are better recruiters, have better resources (but not enough to compete with the big boys), and are selling a dynamic system. They are placing a premium on measurables and banking on their ability to scout and the S&C coaches they brought with them. He even said hes hoping he can take the 3 stars and turn them into 4 stars. Its a shift in philosophy because honestly this is a better coaching staff than we've had in the past.
 
AAM62 said:
Since being in the ACC, which is when your recruiting needs change based on level of competition, a guy like Shafer went mainly for the high floor guys. You can even see it in his choice of defensive players. He would gladly take the 6 foot linebacker who can play (cam lynch) or a short DB with a lot of heart. I think Dino and his staff are better recruiters, have better resources (but not enough to compete with the big boys), and are selling a dynamic system. They are placing a premium on measurables and banking on their ability to scout and the S&C coaches they brought with them. He even said hes hoping he can take the 3 stars and turn them into 4 stars. Its a shift in philosophy because honestly this is a better coaching staff than we've had in the past.
Expand...

Yeah, to me that makes all the sense in the world. That's what I'd expect from an aggressive, ambitious guy like Babers. You have to live with the potential flame outs, which I'm sure will be frustrating. If he can't coach em up, then it will be on him.

But in the end, that's probably the only way forward.
 
Lou_C said:
I know it's a different situation, but a lot of FSU fans have been freaking out because FSU took an unusual number of three stars this year...half the class. We got four five stars, so we were top and bottom heavy, thin at the 4 star level. It's the opposite of last year where we had 0 or 1 five-star, but only a few three stars.

The question that we look at...is this player a three star because they are a high ceiling project, but with a high-ish bust potential, or are they low ceiling but high floor guys. For FSU, they want a three star that has the measurables, but maybe only has two years of high school football, or played suspect competition (like the 6'7" tight end from Maine they got). That player at least has a chance to start if they reach their ceiling. What they aren't looking for in a three star is a high-floor, low ceiling kid. Like a 5'9 230 lb DT that is really smart and a coaches son, and dominated his league with a high motor. That kid probably isn't contributing at FSU on the field, short of an unforeseen growth spurt, no matter what he or the coaching staff does.

I don't know what you guys need more...guys that are most dependable to provide a steady baseline, or guys that could bust but also could end up being 4-star caliber performers. I don't know your recruits, you would have to give an honest assessment of which kind of three star they are. I have read a few times that you're getting taller an bigger with this class, which implies to me Dino might be looking at kids based more on potential than high school production and field readiness, and is putting on his staff to coach them up. That has the most upside, but the most potential for growing pains and total busts as well.
Expand...

Yeah but even your 6'7 TE from NH still had offers from Alabama, USC, Nebraska, UCLA, LSU, etc. He may have been a 3 star but we would kill for recruits with those measurables with offer sheets like that regardless of star rankings.

You look at most of Marrone's classes, you probably can count on a few fingers (and that's being generous) the number of recruits he had that had really great measurables and solid offer sheets like your NH TE. Move into Shafer's first full class, it seemed we were landing more of those types of kids than we had in the past but we quickly found out that there was a reason for that and that reason was that they were generally non-qualifiers.

What I like about Dino's first full cycle class is that there are no non-qualifiers, all of the kids are pretty solid height/weight wise, and a few look ready to contribute legitimately as true freshman because they are physically ready rather than due to lack of depth. We beat out Ole Miss and Texas A&M for Devito, LSU among others for Pierce (JUCO AA) and Fagan, FSU and Tennessee for Jonathan (him reclassifying from '18 to '17 really helped us there) and Michigan for Melifonwu. Williams and Guthrie are both 1st team JUCO AA's and Williams was a rivals 250 kid out of high school.

I know that the pace may be slow for others but for me, this looks like we're moving in the right direction. It takes time to build a program. This offseason most of the non-contributors transferred out which I think will also help with the forward vision of the program, competition, morale, etc.
 
Pyle said:
I'd go in the opposite direction. Most schools are recruiting for their system as it is, therefore their ranking are on point. However, plugging a class ranked in the 50's into a system they weren't recruited for has the effect of dropping that class a good 20 spots or so.

I'd also like to add that the people saying it's crapshoot between 60 and 40 are talking coachspeak and sorry but acting as apologists. The schools recruiting around the 40's are schools like Pitt who has beaten us consistently over the past decade while we hang out in the 60's range. Are you telling me there's no difference between a 55th ranked class and a 75th one? What I've come to learn over the years is that yes, star ratings are a crapshoot...per individual player. But overall recruiting rankings aren't completely made up of smoke and mirrors. A bad class is a bad class, kinda like our 2012 one was.
Expand...
i agree, but i do not think this is a bad class---it is decent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
    • Like
Return of the slobbernocker
Replies
22
Views
2K
orangefog
orangefog

Forum statistics

Threads
167,585
Messages
4,713,666
Members
5,908
Latest member
jc824

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
65
Guests online
1,844
Total visitors
1,909
Totals may include hidden visitors.


Top Bottom