This recruiting class

[CIL]

Is really starting to remind me of WVU's resurgence under Rich Rod. For those who follow recruiting, Rich Rod got a lot of his talent from FL, DC, and the NE. They were full of skill players that could run and big road grader types in the trenches.

Most importantly, his classes were never too top heavy, they were deep and full of solid three star talent combined with some high end recruits (Devine, etc).

I am thrilled with our results thus far. We will never rival Clemson or FSU from a recruiting standpoint. This program will thrive with top 35 classes of kids that fit this system, and its apparent the staff of targeting these kids.

One of my favorite recruits is Cooper Lutz, and he is our lowest rated recruit of the year. He is a perfect example a kid that will thrive here, even though he would be positionless in a more tradition offensive system.

 

[jr4750]

Is really starting to remind me of WVU's resurgence under Rich Rod. For those who follow recruiting, Rich Rod got a lot of his talent from FL, DC, and the NE. They were full of skill players that could run and big road grader types in the trenches.

Most importantly, his classes were never too top heavy, they were deep and full of solid three star talent combined with some high end recruits (Devine, etc).

I am thrilled with our results thus far. We will never rival Clemson or FSU from a recruiting standpoint. This program will thrive with top 35 classes of kids that fit this system, and its apparent the staff of targeting these kids.

One of my favorite recruits is Cooper Lutz, and he is our lowest rated recruit of the year. He is a perfect example a kid that will thrive here, even though he would be positionless in a more tradition offensive system.

Totally agree about Lutz CIL. That's a kid that'll catch 70 + passes his junior and senior years. He's gonna kill teams in the slot.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Is really starting to remind me of WVU's resurgence under Rich Rod. For those who follow recruiting, Rich Rod got a lot of his talent from FL, DC, and the NE. They were full of skill players that could run and big road grader types in the trenches.

Most importantly, his classes were never too top heavy, they were deep and full of solid three star talent combined with some high end recruits (Devine, etc).

I am thrilled with our results thus far. We will never rival Clemson or FSU from a recruiting standpoint. This program will thrive with top 35 classes of kids that fit this system, and its apparent the staff of targeting these kids.

One of my favorite recruits is Cooper Lutz, and he is our lowest rated recruit of the year. He is a perfect example a kid that will thrive here, even though he would be positionless in a more tradition offensive system.

Babers offers something that players want to be a part of.

 

[oldpinepoint]

Lutz reminds me of those scrappy WR that the Patriots have.

 

[Jeremy L.]

Babers offers something that players want to be a part of.

Bingo

 

[RF2044]

Is really starting to remind me of WVU's resurgence under Rich Rod. For those who follow recruiting, Rich Rod got a lot of his talent from FL, DC, and the NE. They were full of skill players that could run and big road grader types in the trenches.

Most importantly, his classes were never too top heavy, they were deep and full of solid three star talent combined with some high end recruits (Devine, etc).

I am thrilled with our results thus far. We will never rival Clemson or FSU from a recruiting standpoint. This program will thrive with top 35 classes of kids that fit this system, and its apparent the staff of targeting these kids.

One of my favorite recruits is Cooper Lutz, and he is our lowest rated recruit of the year. He is a perfect example a kid that will thrive here, even though he would be positionless in a more tradition offensive system.

Great post [per usual] CIL. I think some people get too hung up on the overall class rating, when the far more important thing is system fit. If we have a strong system [which we do] and are bringing in athletes who fit what we're trying to do, then we're going to have on field success. You are 100% spot on that we will never be on equal footing on the recruiting trail with the FSUs and Clemsons, so we have to do things differently.

This isn't a perfect comparison, because we're in a P5 conference, but I think we're in a comparable situation to Boise State. Get a solid system in place with strong coaching, recruit for that system, and success will come. I think in about two years, we're going to be that team that NOBODY wants to play in conference, because we will be able to post 60 on them any given game. And I honestly believe that the defense isn't that far off, once we solve the talent issue at DT.

 

[PhatOrange]

Indeed. The way they've overhauled the offensive skill players has been something else...while adding some big time players to the defense in short order it's going to get us back on solid footing sooner than later.

Many of these recruits are reminding me of our 90's recruiting heyday where the majority had peer offers and a handful had 'blue blood' offers. That's happening now.

It’s exciting and it really gives me belief, with Dino’s system, that we can compete with anyone. We’re getting bigger and adding offensive speed and talent that we haven’t added/seen around here in a long time.

 

[SUFan44]

Great post [per usual] CIL. I think some people get too hung up on the overall class rating, when the far more important thing is system fit. If we have a strong system [which we do] and are bringing in athletes who fit what we're trying to do, then we're going to have on field success. You are 100% spot on that we will never be on equal footing on the recruiting trail with the FSUs and Clemsons, so we have to do things differently.

This isn't a perfect comparison, because we're in a P5 conference, but I think we're in a comparable situation to Boise State. Get a solid system in place with strong coaching, recruit for that system, and success will come. I think in about two years, we're going to be that team that NOBODY wants to play in conference, because we will be able to post 60 on them any given game. And I honestly believe that the defense isn't that far off, once we solve the talent issue at DT.

Agree with most of this. Only thing I'd quibble slightly with is saying talent is the main issue at DT. I don't think that's necessarily true - it's more about depth than anything else.

Slayton is an all-conference caliber player, Clark was too before the DQ. By all accounts, McKinley Williams is a breakout candidate. Not sure about the newbies (Harper, Grosvenor) but I wouldn't rule them out as being capable and talented enough. Harper had a couple offers from peer schools (BC, Wake Forest, Iowa State). They just might not be ready - and probably wouldn't have needed to be if Clark wasn't DQ'd.

They were probably looking at Clark/Slayton as starters with Williams/Samuels as decent backups. That's a pretty good foursome. At the very least adequately talented enough to compete in the ACC.

 

[RandomGuy]

Babers offers something that players want to be a part of.

I don't think it's just about what's on the field. These kids are talking to many intriguing programs, some with better records..

I've heard the staff genuinely cares about the players. That's just something you can't bs about.. Kids hear the same sales pitch, day in, day out. Q said cuse called the most. Obviously, he liked the people he was talking to.

One recruit. While in hcdb 's office... You'd think it'd be all cuse. But they were talking about hip hop. Dino plays him , was it sugar hill?, On vinyl.. you know, an actual conversation about music, that the kid might have with a friend.

Can you imagine Nick saban doing that? Or that he might actually know about the kids favorite vid game? Or that he could have an hour long conversation to a lineman about food? Or even 10 minutes NOT about Nick saban? Lol.

If it's true that they genuinely care.. ? (Seems to be the case) That's hard to fake. And it probably goes a long way, into winning recruiting battles, that you otherwise would have lost.

 

[RF2044]

Agree with most of this. Only thing I'd quibble slightly with is saying talent is the main issue at DT. I don't think that's necessarily true - it's more about depth than anything else.

Slayton is an all-conference caliber player, Clark was too before the DQ. By all accounts, McKinley Williams is a breakout candidate. Not sure about the newbies (Harper, Grosvenor) but I wouldn't rule them out as being capable and talented enough. Harper had a couple offers from peer schools (BC, Wake Forest, Iowa State). They just might not be ready - and probably wouldn't have needed to be if Clark wasn't DQ'd.

They were probably looking at Clark/Slayton as starters with Williams/Samuels as decent backups. That's a pretty good foursome. At the very least adequately talented enough to compete in the ACC.

But Clark isn't here, and he was the DT with the physical capabilities to match up against the Clemsons / FSUs on our schedule, to a greater extent than anybody else playing on the interior [including Slayton]. With Clark, we would have had a solid group of interior defensive linemen. Without him? Lots of question marks at this stage. I'm high on both Williams and Ruff. I don't expect much from Grosvenor based upon what I've heard. I like Harper, but he is a true freshman. Samuels needs to shed the inconsistency.

So, I believe that they'll be able to field a functional unit, especially if a few things break positively. Slayton is the best of the bunch, and depending on how improved Williams / Samuels / Ruff are, they have enough bodies to field a rotation. I expect Harper to play, just as a function of the numbers. But are these guys difference makers, or merely platoon depth? That's what I meant by talent issue -- because right now, Slayton is the only one who projects to the next level. Williams might, but he isn't a proven commodity yet. We need an infusion of depth / talent into the pipeline at DT -- that positional unit is the only one on defense that hasn't been transformed by the coaching staff at this point.

But this group isn't nearly as strong without Clark anchoring the middle. His lost can't be overstated. Ma

 

[bigmike]

Here is how I picture Saban approaching a player..

 

[VirginiaOrange]

I would not be surprised to see Froumy end up at DT based on his size and strength.

 

[SUFan44]

But Clark isn't here, and he was the DT with the physical capabilities to match up against the Clemsons / FSUs on our schedule, to a greater extent than anybody else playing on the interior [including Slayton]. With Clark, we would have had a solid group of interior defensive linemen. Without him? Lots of question marks at this stage. I'm high on both Williams and Ruff. I don't expect much from Grosvenor based upon what I've heard. I like Harper, but he is a true freshman. Samuels needs to shed the inconsistency.

So, I believe that they'll be able to field a functional unit, especially if a few things break positively. Slayton is the best of the bunch, and depending on how improved Williams / Samuels / Ruff are, they have enough bodies to field a rotation. I expect Harper to play, just as a function of the numbers. But are these guys difference makers, or merely platoon depth? That's what I meant by talent issue -- because right now, Slayton is the only one who projects to the next level. Williams might, but he isn't a proven commodity yet. We need an infusion of depth / talent into the pipeline at DT -- that positional unit is the only one on defense that hasn't been transformed by the coaching staff at this point.

But this group isn't nearly as strong without Clark anchoring the middle. His lost can't be overstated. Ma

That's fair. It may be more of a combination based on your assessment - my thought was that the talent that we had was good enough with Clark. Therefore if we keep recruiting the talent level that we had with him, with additional depth, we'll be fine. But in general, more talent can't hurt.

Agree wholeheartedly about Clark. The Slayton/Clark combo could have been one of our best in a long time. Even on the top defensive teams Shafer had, our DTs weren't anything special. Add that to what I think will be a drastically improved DE unit, and it could have allowed us to have a heckuva improvement on the defensive side of the ball this year.

As it is, I still think there can be a massive improvement, and would be disappointed if there wasn't one.

 

[bnoro]

I would not be surprised to see Froumy end up at DT based on his size and strength.

He earned a camp offer at OT. We're not moving him to DL.

 

[bigmike]

Looking forward to the program being in a position to offer wins and bowl games to recruits as opposed early playing time.

 

[cusefan88]

Grad transfer at DT next season makes a lot of sense. Hopefully they can find another 5-6 in the next two cycles to develop.

 

[tep624]

What are the odds that if Rutgers goes 2-10 again or even 3-9 Ash gets canned?

That could open up some doors for us later in the game especially if Rutgers lands some of the DL we've targeted like Tyler Friday or Earlington.

 

[RF2044]

That's fair. It may be more of a combination based on your assessment - my thought was that the talent that we had was good enough with Clark. Therefore if we keep recruiting the talent level that we had with him, with additional depth, we'll be fine. But in general, more talent can't hurt.

Agree wholeheartedly about Clark. The Slayton/Clark combo could have been one of our best in a long time. Even on the top defensive teams Shafer had, our DTs weren't anything special. Add that to what I think will be a drastically improved DE unit, and it could have allowed us to have a heckuva improvement on the defensive side of the ball this year.

As it is, I still think there can be a massive improvement, and would be disappointed if there wasn't one.

Clark / Slayton would have been an above average tandem inside -- maybe the best we've had since the Gachelin / Ferrara days. Agree that if we can continue to recruit Clarks, we'll be good. I just don't see any prospects like that out there that we're currently involved with. I'm guessing that as we get further into the fall, we're going to look to poach some good system fits who've committed to MAC programs, and non-P5s. Could be some diamonds in the rough out there who's names haven't popped up as yet.

I share your opinion that defensive improvement will happen this year. Love what we've done at DE, I'm excited about the LB upgrades, and I am ecstatic about the reshaped secondary. I just wish the Clark situation hadn't blown up -- I think we're going to be much poorer against the run than we otherwise might have been. And the "talent" reference above was really about DT lagging behind in terms of being upgraded, like all the other positional units on defense have been. We're starting to bring in recruits that are bigger, faster, more athletic, and have better offers than the ones Babers inherited at DE, LB, CB, and S. Defensive tackle is the one position on defense where we can't say that [yet] -- although I readily acknowledge that Williams / Ruff / Harper haven't had a chance to show what they can do yet.

We snare a couple of Harpers in the class of 2018, and maybe a JUCO to bolster the unit immediately next year, and I'll feel a whole lot better about the long term prospects of the DT group.

 

[PhatOrange]

What are the odds that if Rutgers goes 2-10 again or even 3-9 Ash gets canned?

That could open up some doors for us later in the game especially if Rutgers lands some of the DL we've targeted like Tyler Friday or Earlington.

the guys i'd target are any frontline grad transfer eligible defensive lineman. for them that might be kevin wilkins but I have no idea. I'd also apply this to any program's grad transfer eligible DL kids who lose coaches.

 

[RMH44]

But Clark isn't here, and he was the DT with the physical capabilities to match up against the Clemsons / FSUs on our schedule, to a greater extent than anybody else playing on the interior [including Slayton]. With Clark, we would have had a solid group of interior defensive linemen. Without him? Lots of question marks at this stage. I'm high on both Williams and Ruff. I don't expect much from Grosvenor based upon what I've heard. I like Harper, but he is a true freshman. Samuels needs to shed the inconsistency.

So, I believe that they'll be able to field a functional unit, especially if a few things break positively. Slayton is the best of the bunch, and depending on how improved Williams / Samuels / Ruff are, they have enough bodies to field a rotation. I expect Harper to play, just as a function of the numbers. But are these guys difference makers, or merely platoon depth? That's what I meant by talent issue -- because right now, Slayton is the only one who projects to the next level. Williams might, but he isn't a proven commodity yet. We need an infusion of depth / talent into the pipeline at DT -- that positional unit is the only one on defense that hasn't been transformed by the
Day Twenty Two Fall Camp: Thurs August 24, 2017

coaching staff at this point.

But this group isn't nearly as strong without Clark anchoring the middle. His lost can't be overstated. Ma

I couldn't agree more regarding Steven. I think Williams is going to surprise a lot of people especially with his increased size. He uses his hands really well.

 

[cuse309]

Lutz reminds me of those scrappy WR that the Patriots have.

Why scrappy? You could have gone with any of the following "code words".
1) Scrappy
2) High motor
3) Gamer
4) Sneaky athletic
5) Gritty
6) Winner
7) High football IQ
8) Good fundamentals
9) Plays the game the right way
10) Lunch pail guy
11) Heady and/or cerebral
12) Deceptive speed
13) Gym rat
14) Intangibles
15) Gets the most out of his abilities
16) Has a lot of heart
17) Grinder
18) Out-hustles

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Why scrappy? You could have gone with any of the following "code words".
1) Scrappy
2) High motor
3) Gamer
4) Sneaky athletic
5) Gritty
6) Winner
7) High football IQ
8) Good fundamentals
9) Plays the game the right way
10) Lunch pail guy
11) Heady and/or cerebral
12) Deceptive speed
13) Gym rat
14) Intangibles
15) Gets the most out of his abilities
16) Has a lot of heart
17) Grinder
18) Out-hustles

I nominate this for post of the year. Just a masterpiece.

 

[cuse309]

I nominate this for post of the year. Just a masterpiece.

 

[SmilinBob]

Like another famous Lutz:

 

[HOFCeluck]

Why scrappy? You could have gone with any of the following "code words".
1) Scrappy
2) High motor
3) Gamer
4) Sneaky athletic
5) Gritty
6) Winner
7) High football IQ
8) Good fundamentals
9) Plays the game the right way
10) Lunch pail guy
11) Heady and/or cerebral
12) Deceptive speed
13) Gym rat
14) Intangibles
15) Gets the most out of his abilities
16) Has a lot of heart
17) Grinder
18) Out-hustles

You know you really have no idea how many um, euphemisms there are until they're all listed.

Is Lutzs dad a coach?