Those Who Think Recruiting is Marrone's Saving Grace

[alphaorange]

Wake has 4 more recruits. More recruits = more points.

If SU had twice as many recruits, they'd have twice as many points, and be ranked in the Top 50.

Exactly...averaging stars is no different than averaging points. A couple of players with a high point total effectively does the same thing.

 

[tipphill]

recruit nj we won with them and are losing w/o them.post all the stats you like, the bottom line is we need a presence there again -----as well as hcdm presence in nyc li etc.---it was a winning formula we are 1-3???ru is winning we are not

 

[tep624]

The rankings aren't just based on number of players and average, either. It's the total points that Rivals assigns to each recruit. For additional reference, Syracuse has 480 points, while Wake has 675.

Definitely agree that this class still gets an "incomplete" however. Lots of recruiting still to be done.

Agreed. My biggest complaint of those in our fanbase complaining about the sheer # of recruits that we have currently lies with two things that have been mentioned ad nauseum here: 1) Myles Hilliard is part of this class, even though he is at Milford. He was a consensus 3 star last year and only adds to the quality of the class - we have 9 recruits. 2) We are taking a smaller class this year, probably in the 18 range or so, and it isn't necessarily fair to compare our recruiting on a sheer number of recruits basis. Many of the ACC programs on that list are going to take a full complement of 25, or more. Most of them are going to need 8-10 commits to complete their classes out, just like we do.

Looking at average and average alone, our current recruiting class of 9 puts us at an average of 2.78 - which would be 3rd currently in the Big East, and 9th in the ACC (10th if you include Notre Dame). Points are not a fair metric because it discards the fact that some schools are not going to take as many recruits as others. Nationally, a 2.78 average ranking puts us at #62 nationally. (This needs a disclaimer as well since there are a number of schools immediately ahead of us with a 3 average ranking that have numerous NR recruits in their class that aren't affecting their overall average - once rivals gets around to ranking those players, most likely with most falling in the 2 star range, those schools will sink and we'll move ahead of them. Taking that into consideration, we're really in the upper 50's if you look at it from an average ranking perspective).

Stanford currently has 6 commits and is ranked by Rivals as a class at #64 - would you rather have their recruiting class - which looks like a quality class - or UCONN's 15 commit class, which is ranked at #56 and is one of the worst recruiting classes from a quality of ranking perspective on paper of the BCS schools...

(My analysis is all per Rivals current rankings)

 

[PhatOrange]

Some excellent info there. Does anybody know which top recruits (other than Onudeko and Smith who I believe will never set foot on campus) SU is in the running for?

These kids either are officially visiting or will likelly take official visits to Syracuse:

Shane Curtis – OL Orlando, FL
Iowa State – visit
Miss State
NC State
South Florida
Syracuse – visit
Virginia – visited
Wake Forest – visited
Uconn
Illinois
Kentucky
Louisville
North Carolina
Cincinnati

Rakim Peters – DE Winder, GA
Cincinnati
Clemson
Kentucky
Miss State
Missouri
Purdue
Syracuse
Wake Forest

Laray Smith – RB Brooklyn, NY
Uconn
Indiana
Purdue
Syracuse
Tennessee

Justin Moody – DE/DT Philly
Pitt
Purdue
Rutgers
Temple
Central Florida

Alex Officer – OL Rochester, NY
Boston College
Uconn
LVille
Pitt
Purdue
Syracuse
Temple

Al Rasheed Benton – MLB Newark, NJ
Pitt
Syracuse
West Virginia – visit this weekend
Temple
Georgia Tech
Kansas
Maryland
Penn State
Virginia

Ramar Dennis – LB/DE Orlando, FL
Cincinnati
Illinois
Syracuse
Temple

 

[BlueCurtain]

Debate numbers ad nauseam - bottom line is there has not been an appreciable uptick. It takes at least 2 or 3 classes ranked in the 20s-40s before you would see that translate to the field.

The Jeffersons we ain't.

 

[xc84]

Debate numbers ad nauseam - bottom line is there has not been an appreciable uptick. It takes at least 2 or 3 classes ranked in the 20s-40s before you would see that translate to the field.

The Jeffersons we ain't.

Why wasn't it like that for teams like Boise St.? If a good team gets a kid, they are ranked higher...if a lower performing team gets a kid they are not ranked as high. Once a team gets good, they get more credit.

 

[OrangeinBoston]

These kids either are officially visiting or will likelly take official visits to Syracuse:

Shane Curtis – OL Orlando, FL
Iowa State – visit
Miss State
NC State
South Florida
Syracuse – visit
Virginia – visited
Wake Forest – visited
Uconn
Illinois
Kentucky
Louisville
North Carolina
Cincinnati

Rakim Peters – DE Winder, GA
Cincinnati
Clemson
Kentucky
Miss State
Missouri
Purdue
Syracuse
Wake Forest

Laray Smith – RB Brooklyn, NY
Uconn
Indiana
Purdue
Syracuse
Tennessee

Justin Moody – DE/DT Philly
Pitt
Purdue
Rutgers
Temple
Central Florida

Alex Officer – OL Rochester, NY
Boston College
Uconn
LVille
Pitt
Purdue
Syracuse
Temple

Al Rasheed Benton – MLB Newark, NJ
Pitt
Syracuse
West Virginia – visit this weekend
Temple
Georgia Tech
Kansas
Maryland
Penn State
Virginia

Ramar Dennis – LB/DE Orlando, FL
Cincinnati
Illinois
Syracuse
Temple

Thanks. What do you think? Does SU have a real shot at any of these?

 

[BlueCurtain]

Why wasn't it like that for teams like Boise St.? If a good team gets a kid, they are ranked higher...if a lower performing team gets a kid they are not ranked as high. Once a team gets good, they get more credit.

Teams like Boise St? Name the others. BSU is the rare exception.

 

[ImperialOrange]

Teams like Boise St? Name the others. BSU is the rare exception.

Take a look at WVU's recruit rankings through the early 2000s. I'd say 2 star Pat White was pretty good and 3 star Steve Slaton was ok as well I'd say. Can't forget about NR Chris Henry, NR Adam Jones, 3 star Darius Reynaud, 2 star Scooter Berry, low 3 star Jock Sanders, etc. etc.

Recruiting rankings, like preseason polls, usually follow good performance rather than proceed them unless you are a football factory.

See Boise St, TCU, Texas Tech, etc before they were winning consistantly every year. The recruits that started their regualar winning way weren't highly regarded

 

[xc84]

Teams like Boise St? Name the others. BSU is the rare exception.

They are the rare exception because they have went from nowhere to somewhere. But the fact remains. they did it with low-rated recruits who happened to be better than ranking agencies "projected". Why? Because ranking agencies don't really rank...they look at who is pursuing guys and who is getting guys. To a lesser extent, teams like Cincy have done what Boise did...same formula. "Oh, he committed to Cincy...give him 2 or 3 stars". If Alabama steals that kid, he's upgraded to 4.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

Take a look at WVU's recruit rankings through the early 2000s. I'd say 2 star Pat White was pretty good and 3 star Steve Slaton was ok as well I'd say. Can't forget about NR Chris Henry, NR Adam Jones, 3 star Darius Reynaud, 2 star Scooter Berry, low 3 star Jock Sanders, etc. etc.

Recruiting rankings, like preseason polls, usually follow good performance rather than proceed them unless you are a football factory.

See Boise St, TCU, Texas Tech, etc before they were winning consistantly every year. The recruits that started their regualar winning way weren't hihgly regarded

I agree with your argument, but I have footnote it. If you look through recruiting classes for 10 years ago, there are a lot more NRs and such. Now, these sites are more plugged in and have access to way more guys.

 

[ImperialOrange]

I agree with your argument, but I have footnote it. If you look through recruiting classes for 10 years ago, there are a lot more NRs and such. Now, these sites are more plugged in and have access to way more guys.

You're right of course but even still you can just focus on the guys they did have rated.

Aside from the WVU guys there was 2 star Michael Crabtree at WR, 2 star Tank Carder at LB, 2 star QB Andy Dalton, Low 3 star wr's Titus Young and Austin Pettis, 2 star RB Doug Martin, 2 star RB Ian Johnson.

Those teams all had coaches that could identify talent better than the recruiting sites. It could turn out that we do as well.

 

[tep624]

Debate numbers ad nauseam - bottom line is there has not been an appreciable uptick. It takes at least 2 or 3 classes ranked in the 20s-40s before you would see that translate to the field.

The Jeffersons we ain't.

Getting up in arms about sheer numbers vs getting up in arms about the quality of recruits are two entirely different arguments, and that's the point. But I definitely agree, having classes ranked in the 20's consistently and having classes ranked in the 50's consistently are two different beasts. In the 20's, you pretty much have to have a quality class regardless of the number of recruits you bring in. In the 50's - 60's, it plays out differently. You can have a top heavy class that lands int he 50's and still have some immediate impact makers in there, or you can have a pile of projects that becuase you have 25 of them, you fall in the 50's to 60's. It's all relative.