Okay, I never post much but ppl need to chill with the 3 star "the sky is falling" posts. Could recruiting be better? Of course but look at the talent on the roster for 2015. We could have the most 1st round draft picks in 10 years this season. It's too early to tell but Jaylon, Stanley, Day, Russell, and Robinson could all be 1st or 2nd round picks. That isn't even including guys like Fuller, Roshell, Jones, etc who could all get drafted as well. I think you have to trust the staff that they have an eye for talent and developing kids. We will never recruit like Bama, FSU, USC, and that is fine, you just have to develop guys and make them 4 to 5 year players. I just get tired of the "3 star" the sky is falling posts. Look more at the offer lists. We were second to LSU in draft picks in 2012, so obviously we have some really good players come through. There's no reason we can't win around 10 games a year and then have some really good seasons like we could in 2015. Sorry for the rant.
2015 Recruiting
- Thread starter fpeaugh
- Start date
Bodizephax
I've posted how many times?
so your rant reminds me of the same points made when the "8-4 is the new standard" debate is waged.
like a wobbly table, if you try to level it and shave one leg but it still wobbles, then try another leg...you keep going until it is on the floor!
like a wobbly table, if you try to level it and shave one leg but it still wobbles, then try another leg...you keep going until it is on the floor!
Fans only have the star ratings as a way to determine the success of recruiting. I would love to have all 5 star players, but check out TCU, Boise, Oregon and Michigan St. over the last several years. They have all been very successful and have signed many more 3 star players than 4 stars. And they rarely sign a 5 star. Some of these schools have signed a lot of 2 star players. The star system is an INDICATOR, but not necessarily a predictor.
remember how giddy this board was for TE'O? Tuitt? Young? Williams? Bryant? Nelson? why the excitment?
the only fans that need to think that way, and put forward that argument, are the fans of teams not recruiting with the elite teams.
in particular the player rankings are not foolproof predictors; in general they indicate which teams will be in the top tier. The top tier maybe being 6-8 teams.
Since the remaining prospects are more closely rated in ability and that there are many more 2, 3, 4 star prospects it stands to reason those teams would have a roster reflecting that.
Oregon is an interesting case; the real success has been during the USC sanction period. Of course they had about as much success in the NC as ND did in 2012.?
Key point you are missing...
Of all the guys you named and some that are missing,
Jaylon Smith: 5 Star
Ronnie Stanley: 4 Star
Sheldon Day: 4 Star
Will Fuller: 4 Star
Isaac Rochell: 4 Star
Jarron Jones: 4 star
Kei Russell: 4 Star
Max Redfield: 4 Star
Manti Te'o: 5 Star
Stephon Tuitt: 4 Star
Zack Martin: 4 Star
Louis Nix: 4 Star
Chris Watt: 4 Star
Troy Niklas: 4 Star
The VAST MAJORITY of ND's high draft picks, or soon to be high draft picks, we're appropriately ranked as 4/5 star players coming out of high school. Yes development at the college level is key, but it helps a great deal if the kids you are developing have the raw talent to be very good to elite players.
Of all the guys you named and some that are missing,
Jaylon Smith: 5 Star
Ronnie Stanley: 4 Star
Sheldon Day: 4 Star
Will Fuller: 4 Star
Isaac Rochell: 4 Star
Jarron Jones: 4 star
Kei Russell: 4 Star
Max Redfield: 4 Star
Manti Te'o: 5 Star
Stephon Tuitt: 4 Star
Zack Martin: 4 Star
Louis Nix: 4 Star
Chris Watt: 4 Star
Troy Niklas: 4 Star
The VAST MAJORITY of ND's high draft picks, or soon to be high draft picks, we're appropriately ranked as 4/5 star players coming out of high school. Yes development at the college level is key, but it helps a great deal if the kids you are developing have the raw talent to be very good to elite players.
No doubt we need to recruit raw talent.
But I'm not overly enamored with the development of our "talented" recruits.
I think about last season:
The 2011 class, who should have been awesomely developed seniors, included Tuitt, Ishaq, Lynch, George Atkinson, Davaris Daniels, and Troy Niklas. None of those guys were around last season. And Hardy was absent for the first half of the season.
That's last year's performance of 7/10 of the four stars from the 2011 class.
The remaining recruits from that class were Koyack, Hegarty, and Councell.
The 2012 class, who should have been relatively developed juniors, included Gunner Kiel, Davonte Neal, Tee Shepard, Will Mahone, and KeiVarae Russell, none of whom played a single down last season. That's the performance of 5/9 of the four stars from the 2012 class.
The remaining recruits from that class were Day, Jones, Shumate, and Stanley.
You can't develop talented players if you can't keep them eligible or in the program.
But I'm not overly enamored with the development of our "talented" recruits.
I think about last season:
The 2011 class, who should have been awesomely developed seniors, included Tuitt, Ishaq, Lynch, George Atkinson, Davaris Daniels, and Troy Niklas. None of those guys were around last season. And Hardy was absent for the first half of the season.
That's last year's performance of 7/10 of the four stars from the 2011 class.
The remaining recruits from that class were Koyack, Hegarty, and Councell.
The 2012 class, who should have been relatively developed juniors, included Gunner Kiel, Davonte Neal, Tee Shepard, Will Mahone, and KeiVarae Russell, none of whom played a single down last season. That's the performance of 5/9 of the four stars from the 2012 class.
The remaining recruits from that class were Day, Jones, Shumate, and Stanley.
You can't develop talented players if you can't keep them eligible or in the program.
out of a typical class 40-42 % will be significant contributors; but even then potential starters are generally RR 5.8 and >.
after 10 committments this year the average is 3.1 - bar far lower than any class in 10 years.
Defensive front 7 continues to be problematic and this will soon manifest itself on the field.
after 10 committments this year the average is 3.1 - bar far lower than any class in 10 years.
Defensive front 7 continues to be problematic and this will soon manifest itself on the field.
Last edited:
So it has gotten so bad that we are putting all of our hope that some of Kelly's 3 star recruits become 4 star fringe recruits. Wow.
Recruiting rankings are a self created industry by the various services.
The guys doing the rankings have for the most part background which I'll be kind and call " limited ".
Evaluating kids off the Highlight tapes is ludicrous-----every above average HS player has 25 good plays you can look at over the course of a 10 game season.
At the end of the day you have to trust the coaches of whatever school you root for.
Just my opinion.
The guys doing the rankings have for the most part background which I'll be kind and call " limited ".
Evaluating kids off the Highlight tapes is ludicrous-----every above average HS player has 25 good plays you can look at over the course of a 10 game season.
At the end of the day you have to trust the coaches of whatever school you root for.
Just my opinion.
Just don't believe a retired Mailman from Chicago knows more than a D-1 HFC.
1. Saying you buy into the rankings doesn't equate to saying the scouts know more than the D-1 HFC
2. The scouts that write and work to make the rankings only watch high school players, they go to camps, they watch tape, they go to games, a D-1 coach can't do that, they have a team to coach.
3. The rankings are more often then not a good indicator of success and ceiling, there are outliers and surprises on both sides but in general they are helpful tools.
4. If rankings were BS then why is it that players that are ranked high generally have way more offers and better quality offers then players ranked lower?
5. Its their job, they are successful enough at it to make it a career belittling them because of a generalized stereo type you have about who the scouts are for recruiting services doesn't address the fact that they are good at identifying talent.
2. The scouts that write and work to make the rankings only watch high school players, they go to camps, they watch tape, they go to games, a D-1 coach can't do that, they have a team to coach.
3. The rankings are more often then not a good indicator of success and ceiling, there are outliers and surprises on both sides but in general they are helpful tools.
4. If rankings were BS then why is it that players that are ranked high generally have way more offers and better quality offers then players ranked lower?
5. Its their job, they are successful enough at it to make it a career belittling them because of a generalized stereo type you have about who the scouts are for recruiting services doesn't address the fact that they are good at identifying talent.
your not relying on either; the results are the past and you learn from that or ... get more of the same.
Bodizephax
I've posted how many times?
Bodi why are you bumping all these stupid threads that say the same things? Just curious
Star rankings aren't fool proof but I think it is safe to say that, in general, teams with higher average star rankings usually fill the higher spots in the polls.
So we should "chill" because we will have "hopefully" a good season this year? What does 2015 recruiting have to do with this season? Some bad logic you are using. Three years from now is when these recruits will be needed. We don't need them now.
Currently, he hasn't any stars, but, I think BK needs to recruit surfer Mick Fanning. I know he's only 5'9" and weighs 165 soaking wet but anyone who can punch a shark on the shark's home turf and live to tell the tale has to be a tough guy. Maybe another tough guy that can fortify the Irish "D".
Bodizephax
I've posted how many times?
Similar threads
