How Does The Recruiting Process Work?

#1
BeecherVol

BeecherVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2008
Messages
39,170
Likes
14,459
#1
Basically meaning.

Lets say QB, since that is the hot topic position this year.

Example purposes only.

Lets say the staff sits down when evaluating players and they say. Our top QB target is Bell, followed by Heaps, Sims, Scroggins, and whoever else. If this is the case, we offer Bell, we find out his interest level, we see what chance we have with him compared to other teams. So on, and so forth. Then we moved to the next on the list, and repeat the same process until we are finished the list.

From there, players start to commit, this list is adjusted. Meaning some guys move up the list, and some get added to the list. The tricky part to me is, when the 4th guy on the list is very interested (to the point of committing). If you are planning on taking 2, this puts you in a sticky situation. You have the current top 3 guys on your list that you are not sure if you will get 1, or any of them. And 3 months later the guy that you have 4th on the list at this point, may be your best option, due to other QBs going else where.

Now this opinion does not take everything in to account, but it seems to me that it is a "tight rope act" to say the least.

Thoughts?
 
#2
#2
I think guys on here will tell you they know what they do in the situation you brought up but this is just my opinion. They do like you said and are not influenced by this guy is ready to commit to us. Then they would have offered Rettig or Grayson long ago. But they do seem to react and offer not to lose a guy. This is what happened with Rees in my mind. I have been convinced by others on here that he was the guy behind Scroggins and when he was ready to commit elsewhere we offered. And then Rettig did well at the 7s camp and was about to commit to BC so we offered there. We really just want to wait and see but need a guy now for other recruits. IMO.
 
#3
#3
Jewbaccah said:
I think guys on here will tell you they know what they do in the situation you brought up but this is just my opinion. They do like you said and are not influenced by this guy is ready to commit to us. Then they would have offered Rettig or Grayson long ago. But they do seem to react and offer not to lose a guy. This is what happened with Rees in my mind. I have been convinced by others on here that he was the guy behind Scroggins and when he was ready to commit elsewhere we offered. And then Rettig did well at the 7s camp and was about to commit to BC so we offered there. We really just want to wait and see but need a guy now for other recruits. IMO.
Click to expand...

Thang God I am not a recruiter, because I would be disppointed when I did not get somone I wanted and to constantly have to readjust the board is a daunting task IMO. I have the upmost respect for coaches and the recruiting efforts they undertake not to mention the travel, calls, emails, letters, dealing with the emotions, etc. Recruiting to a rebuilding program in my book is one of the hardest things to achieve with success.
 
#4
#4
I'd suggest that if you like to read go get "Meat Market".Great book I could not put it down and it gives alot of the inside stuff.
 
#5
#5
1vol said:
I'd suggest that if you like to read go get "Meat Market".Great book I could not put it down and it gives alot of the inside stuff.
Click to expand...

Yeah I have heard a lot of talk about it the threads. I really do need to read that!
 
#6
#6
BeecherVol said:
Basically meaning.

Lets say QB, since that is the hot topic position this year.

Example purposes only.

Lets say the staff sits down when evaluating players and they say. Our top QB target is Bell, followed by Heaps, Sims, Scroggins, and whoever else. If this is the case, we offer Bell, we find out his interest level, we see what chance we have with him compared to other teams. So on, and so forth. Then we moved to the next on the list, and repeat the same process until we are finished the list.

From there, players start to commit, this list is adjusted. Meaning some guys move up the list, and some get added to the list. The tricky part to me is, when the 4th guy on the list is very interested (to the point of committing). If you are planning on taking 2, this puts you in a sticky situation. You have the current top 3 guys on your list that you are not sure if you will get 1, or any of them. And 3 months later the guy that you have 4th on the list at this point, may be your best option, due to other QBs going else where.

Now this opinion does not take everything in to account, but it seems to me that it is a "tight rope act" to say the least.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
It depends. It depends on the need at the position namely.

When you are in a position like we are where you are talent hungry, you generally will put out as many offers as you can -- as long as you feel that guy can play here. Part of the reason you do that is because the more recruits you target, the easier you find the guys with genuine interest in the program.

They have approached offense slightly differently, especially the QB position and have been much more selective with their offers. You can afford to do that IMO, when you have a depth chart like USC's, Texas' or Florida's but I think we may have made a mistake this year in waiting too long on QB prospects. Kiffin mistakenly thought a talent deprived depth chart would be enough to attract top QB prospects and it wasn't. Part of the reason is that there just isn't that much top talent to go around this year, and part is that we got in too late on some of these guys. It has proved to have not been the best tactic.
 
#7
#7
Sabanocchio said:
It depends. It depends on the need at the position namely.

When you are in a position like we are where you are talent hungry, you generally will put out as many offers as you can -- as long as you feel that guy can play here. Part of the reason you do that is because the more recruits you target, the easier you find the guys with genuine interest in the program.

They have approached offense slightly differently, especially the QB position and have been much more selective with their offers. You can afford to do that IMO, when you have a depth chart like USC's, Texas' or Florida's but I think we may have made a mistake this year in waiting too long on QB prospects. Kiffin mistakenly thought a talent deprived depth chart would be enough to attract top QB prospects and it wasn't. Part of the reason is that there just isn't that much top talent to go around this year, and part is that we got in too late on some of these guys. It has proved to have not been the best tactic.
Click to expand...

I think the problem is Lane does not have a total package to sell yet. (As far as being picky with the offers) It looks like these kids want to see more than a slim depth chart, at a bigtime school, before they jump on board.
 
#8
#8
BeecherVol said:
I think the problem is Lane does not have a total package to sell yet. (As far as being picky with the offers) It looks like these kids want to see more than a slim depth chart, at a bigtime school, before they jump on board.
Click to expand...

Yeah looks like they are waiting on results (as in wins) but it is hard to do when you dont have a QB to build around
 
#9
#9
If we dont have a QB committed, or a lower tier guy, I expect us to get another look from prospects after we win 8 games. Remember guys its 7 months till NSD.
 
#10
#10
BeecherVol said:
I think the problem is Lane does not have a total package to sell yet. (As far as being picky with the offers) It looks like these kids want to see more than a slim depth chart, at a bigtime school, before they jump on board.
Click to expand...

I agree. I also think that if you canvassed the class with offers, you'd still be in on several guys at this point.
 
#12
#12
Big Edmonds said:
Yeah looks like they are waiting on results (as in wins) but it is hard to do when you dont have a QB to build around
Click to expand...

What I meant was, Lane has not put a product on the field yet.
Easier to sell Monte to players on that side of the ball. QBs are different, you get stuck in something that doesn't fit, it is more of a career problem. For the player that is. IMO
 
#13
#13
Sabanocchio said:
I agree. I also think that if you canvassed the class with offers, you'd still be in on several guys at this point.
Click to expand...

I agree with being broad. But if you offer say 8 QBs. And you have a order in which you would take them. Meaning you would rather have 1 and 2. What happens when 5 and 7 want to commit, and you are not sure where the other 4 in front of them stand yet.

I just think it is more complicated than it seems, especially for this position.
 
#14
#14
BeecherVol said:
I agree with being broad. But if you offer say 8 QBs. And you have a order in which you would take them. Meaning you would rather have 1 and 2. What happens when 5 and 7 want to commit, and you are not sure where the other 4 in front of them stand yet.

I just think it is more complicated than it seems, especially for this position.
Click to expand...

They are taking 2 QBs in this class. What I think they should have done is look at all the prospects that could at least be a #2 QB in this class and offer them all. That's what we are doing at many other positions. It has dictated the position we find ourselves in right now. We are looking at taking a guy to be our primary QB in this class that would have been a questionable #2 take when we first started looking at QBs now.
 
#15
#15
BeecherVol said:
What I meant was, Lane has not put a product on the field yet.
Easier to sell Monte to players on that side of the ball. QBs are different, you get stuck in something that doesn't fit, it is more of a career problem. For the player that is. IMO
Click to expand...

True
 
#16
#16
Sabanocchio said:
They are taking 2 QBs in this class. What I think they should have done is look at all the prospects that could at least be a #2 QB in this class and offer them all. That's what we are doing at many other positions. It has dictated the position we find ourselves in right now. We are looking at taking a guy to be our primary QB in this class that would have been a questionable #2 take when we first started looking at QBs now.
Click to expand...

How many could be their #2 choice tho. 2 or 3? Other positions are totally different IMO. Most QBs are QBs. Easier to make a DB into a LB, or a WR to a DB, and so on. If you miss on the QB you want, you are stuck with him at the spot.
 
#17
#17
BeecherVol said:
How many could be their #2 choice tho. 2 or 3? Other positions are totally different IMO. Most QBs are QBs. Easier to make a DB into a LB, or a WR to a DB, and so on. If you miss on the QB you want, you are stuck with him at the spot.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean. You have guys that you are very confident about and you have guys that you aren't so confident about but are worth the scholarship. That's the difference between a one guy and a two guy IMO.
 
#18
#18
BeecherVol said:
How many could be their #2 choice tho. 2 or 3? Other positions are totally different IMO. Most QBs are QBs. Easier to make a DB into a LB, or a WR to a DB, and so on. If you miss on the QB you want, you are stuck with him at the spot.
Click to expand...

Some QBs can be receivers......
 
#19
#19
Sabanocchio said:
I'm not sure what you mean. You have guys that you are very confident about and you have guys that you aren't so confident about but are worth the scholarship. That's the difference between a one guy and a two guy IMO.
Click to expand...

It looks like the started at the top of the list of guys they are very confident in and are working their way down.

If it was me. I would make a list. From the guy I wanted the most down to the last guy I would take. I would offer a small amount first, starting with the top, and see after some camps and visits where I stand. At that point I would decide if I could fill my spots with these offers, or do I need to offer some more. By throwing out all your offers on the front, you open yourself up to turning down a guy that may commit early, that you would substitute for a guy you would rather have. That can be used against you in the future.
 
#20
#20
BeecherVol said:
It looks like the started at the top of the list of guys they are very confident in and are working their way down.

If it was me. I would make a list. From the guy I wanted the most down to the last guy I would take. I would offer a small amount first, starting with the top, and see after some camps and visits where I stand. At that point I would decide if I could fill my spots with these offers, or do I need to offer some more. By throwing out all your offers on the front, you open yourself up to turning down a guy that may commit early, that you would substitute for a guy you would rather have. That can be used against you in the future.
Click to expand...
I would do that too if I had a roster with 3 good QBs already on it.
 
#21
#21
BeecherVol said:
How many could be their #2 choice tho. 2 or 3? Other positions are totally different IMO. MOST QBs are QBs. EASIER to make a DB into a LB, or a WR to a DB, and so on. If you miss on the QB you want, you are stuck with him at the spot.
Click to expand...

Big Edmonds said:
Some QBs can be receivers......
Click to expand...

Most and easier, does not imply all. You are correct, some can. Most can't.
 
#22
#22
Sabanocchio said:
I would do that too if I had a roster with 3 good QBs already on it.
Click to expand...

Part of it may be this staffs achilles heel. They don't settle for something they don't want. I agree this is a need right now. They must feel comfortable with Crompton this year and Nick next year. I don't know.

But early on, I don't think they wanted to have to say no to a guy they offered, because there was better left on the board they had a shot at. I think they did not see this going the way it has.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top