We get so worked up on recruiting

[upperdeck]

Just using ESPN as a baseline. last years class. All the guys we brought it we only got real play this year out of Estime a low 3 star, Johnson a 2 star, some nice play out of Kelly, a couple catches from moore, spot play from Luke/kirkland but some nice plays from Hodge. 7 kids in all.

you look at the the rankings Kelly at 73 played a bunch. Estime at a 71, hodge/johnson at times were 69. I would say we got solid play from all of them . You look at this year and almost every player we have committed is looked at as being better thought of than any of the kids we played for us last year.

Can we get 7 kids from this class who get on the field and produce even more than those 7 did for us last year?
if we can get one WR to play at Estime's level and make a few plays thats huge.

 

[Rocco]

It's not often true freshmen can come in and play right away. There is a big step to take coming from High School to BCS D1. The most important aspect of recruiting is to make sure we have the right kids in the right system. Quality depth with a few kids that can be game-changers is key.

The rankings are really difficult to use when translating that into how good of a college football player they will become. Most kids need a few years to develop and then become very good players. On the flip side, Jadeveon Clowney could've gone straight to the NFL out of high school.

We are a developer school and will never be able to pick from the Clowney-type of kids. It just won't happen.

 

[Sudano]

Just using ESPN as a baseline. last years class. All the guys we brought it we only got real play this year out of Estime a low 3 star, Johnson a 2 star, some nice play out of Kelly, a couple catches from moore, spot play from Luke/kirkland but some nice plays from Hodge. 7 kids in all.

you look at the the rankings Kelly at 73 played a bunch. Estime at a 71, hodge/johnson at times were 69. I would say we got solid play from all of them . You look at this year and almost every player we have committed is looked at as being better thought of than any of the kids we played for us last year.

Can we get 7 kids from this class who get on the field and produce even more than those 7 did for us last year?
if we can get one WR to play at Estime's level and make a few plays thats huge.

Huh? You realize we were 6 seconds from having a losing season. We are a .500 team. Right in the middle of the pack. The players you list are Average players reflective of an average team and an average record. I want to get better and be in the top 25 and to do that we need better players and more of them. To beat teams on the field we need to beat them on the recruiting trail. Recruiting is the single most important factor to winning games. Talent wins out. No I'm not getting worked up about recruiting. Since I'm an alumni and a big fan of SU football my passion allows me to be interested in who we recruit to facilitate our improvement as a team to work our way up the top 25. Anyone who isn't really isn't much of a fan to me.

 

[BORZAK]

Huh? You realize we were 6 seconds from having a losing season. We are a .500 team. Right in the middle of the pack. The players you list are Average players reflective of an average team and an average record. I want to get better and be in the top 25 and to do that we need better players and more of them. To beat teams on the field we need to beat them on the recruiting trail. Recruiting is the single most important factor to winning games. Talent wins out. No I'm not getting worked up about recruiting. Since I'm an alumni and a big fan of SU football my passion allows me to be interested in who we recruit to facilitate our improvement as a team to work our way up the top 25. Anyone who isn't really isn't much of a fan to me.

If talent always wins, how do you explain the Patriots?

 

[Sudano]

If talent always wins, how do you explain the Patroits!?

Devil's advocate much? Always never exists. Like I said recruiting talent is the single most important factor to college football success.

 

[OrangeinBoston]

If talent always wins, how do you explain the Patriots?

Talent in the NFL is absolutely uniform. So, other factors make the difference.

 

[dasher]

If talent always wins, how do you explain the Patriots?

the pats have one of the best qb's of all time. You know, the most important player on the team. The pats are also a very deep team. They trade down in drafts because they know that players get hurt and it's more important to have a great roster than 5 or 6 stars. They play in a weak divivion that gets them 5 or 6 wins most years. The pats have more than enough talent.

 

[OrangeinBoston]

It's not often true freshmen can come in and play right away. There is a big step to take coming from High School to BCS D1. The most important aspect of recruiting is to make sure we have the right kids in the right system. Quality depth with a few kids that can be game-changers is key.

The rankings are really difficult to use when translating that into how good of a college football player they will become. Most kids need a few years to develop and then become very good players. On the flip side, Jadeveon Clowney could've gone straight to the NFL out of high school.

We are a developer school and will never be able to pick from the Clowney-type of kids. It just won't happen.

This is old school thinking. If you are not getting a half-dozen true freshmen on the field in this era, you are not getting it done on the recruiting front. SU did pretty well last year getting about that many on the field.

 

[IHeartSUFball]

Give me all 3 star 3-4 year players and I'm happy. Like what we're doing end marrone could coach but he was getting lots of not rated and 2 stars. If we get little more talented guys I think we can develop them and be fine.

 

[Rocco]

This is old school thinking. If you are not getting a half-dozen true freshmen on the field in this era, you are not getting it done on the recruiting front. SU did pretty well last year getting about that many on the field.

I agree with you. I said most kids need a few years to develop, but a few can make it out there year 1.

 

[CusefanATL]

Give me all 3 star 3-4 year players and I'm happy. Like what we're doing end marrone could coach but he was getting lots of not rated and 2 stars. If we get little more talented guys I think we can develop them and be fine.

this is football... everyone is a 3+ year guy

 

[CusefanATL]

there will always be recruiting ranking mishaps. especially in football where bodies can change so much which has a huge impact.

but overall, the better recruiting you have, the more success you will have. there is a reason we sunk with P, a nosedive with GROB and a reason we have been stuck at .500 with marrone and shafer. Our talent took a nose dive, it has slightly resurfaced but its still not there. and its because of recruiting.

P had talent and overperformed in the early 90's and slightly underperformed with it IMO in the late 90's, GROB had very little talent his 1st few years (the 03 class was especially awful) and still managed to underperform, Marrone took below average to average talent and made them average. So far Shafer has done the same thing.

We still need an upgrade to average to above average talent to make a significant leap.

we have this same recruiting debate all the time. There are outliers, plenty of them. But if we start recruiting top 25-30 classes year in and year out, we will have a good chance to be a top 25 or better team again.

Edit* i know that GROB didnt recruit the 03 class. but he coached them. Im only talking talent, not who specifically recruited them. GROB actually signed some of our best players which helped Marrones tenure.

 

[qdawgg]

Devil's advocate much? Always never exists. Like I said recruiting talent is the single most important factor to college football success.

Which explains why Notre Dame and Ped State have been such powerhouses.

Think you missed the point of the OP but your an SU graduate and you want the team to be in the top 25, so I guess it's ok.

 

[CusefanATL]

Which explains why Notre Dame and Ped State have been such powerhouses.

Think you missed the point of the OP but your an SU graduate and you want the team to be in the top 25, so I guess it's ok.

ND played for the national championship last year.
penn state was top 10 in 2008 and 2009

 

[Sudano]

Which explains why Notre Dame and Ped State have been such powerhouses.

Think you missed the point of the OP but your an SU graduate and you want the team to be in the top 25, so I guess it's ok.

Did I miss something? Did we finish 10-3 this year?
You're being deliberately obtuse. The OP was intellectual mumbo jumbo without a coherent thesis statement. He was trying to imply recruiting doesn't matter despite the obvious data to the contrary. Statistically speaking recruiting better talent is the single most important factor to improving SU to be a better team.

 

[Sudano]

ND played for the national championship last year.
penn state was top 10 in 2008 and 2009

Don't let facts get in the way of their opinions.

 

[qdawgg]

ND played for the national championship last year.
penn state was top 10 in 2008 and 2009

With the recruiting classes they've had in the last 10-15 years, they clearly haven't had as high a level of success year and year out that you would expect.

Don't let ALL the facts get in the way.

 

[upperdeck]

Huh? You realize we were 6 seconds from having a losing season. We are a .500 team. Right in the middle of the pack. The players you list are Average players reflective of an average team and an average record. I want to get better and be in the top 25 and to do that we need better players and more of them. To beat teams on the field we need to beat them on the recruiting trail. Recruiting is the single most important factor to winning games. Talent wins out. No I'm not getting worked up about recruiting. Since I'm an alumni and a big fan of SU football my passion allows me to be interested in who we recruit to facilitate our improvement as a team to work our way up the top 25. Anyone who isn't really isn't much of a fan to me.

can you read..

 

[Sudano]

With the recruiting classes they've had in the last 10-15 years, they clearly haven't had as high a level of success year and year out that you would expect.

Don't let ALL the facts get in the way.

Says you. Recruiting rankings are correlative not causative. They've finished in the top 25 alot more we have over the last 10 years. I wonder why......

 

[upperdeck]

Did I miss something? Did we finish 10-3 this year?
You're being deliberately obtuse. The OP was intellectual mumbo jumbo without a coherent thesis statement. He was trying to imply recruiting doesn't matter despite the obvious data to the contrary. Statistically speaking recruiting better talent is the single most important factor to improving SU to be a better team.

again can you read..

 

[Sudano]

can you read..

No.

 

[Sudano]

again can you read..

Yes.

 

[upperdeck]

Yes.

obviously not since nothing i said had anything to do with your response..

 

[Sudano]

obviously not since nothing i said had anything to do with your response..

I may have misconstrued something or you could have not done a good job of articulating your point. A wide variety of possiblities. But my inability to actually read is not one of them. I did read your title though, We get so worked up on recruiting. If you care to clarify we may be closer in our opinions than initially thought.

 

[CusefanATL]

With the recruiting classes they've had in the last 10-15 years, they clearly haven't had as high a level of success year and year out that you would expect.

Don't let ALL the facts get in the way.

penn st was not ranked in top 25 recruiting in 2011 or 2012.

again there are outliers. I dont blake bortles set the recruiting world on fire 5 yrs ago.