Three 4* recruits

#26
#26
There are 3-4 players on that list that have the potential to become a 4* by the end of the year

Coleman, Randolph, Kerby, and Worley
 
Last edited:
#28
#28
Volgrad98 said:
I would also include Boise State, have they ever had a top 10 or 20 class?
Click to expand...

That explains why they aren't as good as the country thinks they are. Honestly, how can you say Boise could beat Bama, Oreg, Ohio St, TCU, Nebraska, Auburn, Oklahoma, Fl. St, they beat a terrible Va Tech team, nothing impressive
 
#30
#30
it would be real interesting if one of the recruiting rags/services would do an honest re-evaluation of their star charts, say five years after the signing date.

i'd buy a copy (it'd be nice to see how the nukesses and bryces really turned out). not just for that, but to see how some guys came out of no where (no stars or one or two) to end up a first round draft pick.
 
Last edited:
#31
#31
VolsByNature said:
That explains why they aren't as good as the country thinks they are. Honestly, how can you say Boise could beat Bama, Oreg, Ohio St, TCU, Nebraska, Auburn, Oklahoma, Fl. St, they beat a terrible Va Tech team, nothing impressive
Click to expand...

Never said they would beat those teams, I was responding to recruiting rankings and their worth but Boise usually does do pretty well every year with very low ranked classes. Also, they did beat Oklahoma.
 
Last edited:
#33
#33
Here's my take on 'star' ratings for whatever it's worth. I believe a random collection of 4*'s versus a random collection of 3*'s everything else being equal - coaching, S&C, system, and ratings being very accurate, etc. - the 4*'s would be better. However, we operate in a real world where everything is not equal. The evaluations are far from perfect and the difference between a high 3* and low 4* can be nominal if any real difference exists at all. The most important factor in the real world are real coaches conducting their own evaluations against roster needs and fit with system and culture. I think those factors are the most important to get right, then when you compare a few candidates that might all grade out equal in those factors you take the best athlete among them you can get. Conversely, if a group of athletes are all about equal athletically then the most important factor are the coaches' evaluation of the prospect's fit in the system, culture and character and hopefully our coaches are choosing the best available against that criteria that they can get to come to our school. Given those variables, I'm not at all concerned when they take what looks like a very high quality 3* even if a 4* star was available and a possible commit. I'll trust our coaches evaluation skills until they prove otherwise. Not to throw stones at Fulmer, but rather using him as an example, I think that is where we started breaking down in recruiting the last several years. It didn't appear that Fulmer's staff were putting in the due diligence on all the factors or even had a clear idea of what our system and culture were that they were trying to recruit good prospects for.

Dooley appears to have that vision of what our system and culture should be and is recruiting to that. Jury is still out on whether or not he succeeds in doing that, but at lest at this point there appears to be a clear plan. This helps explain why teams that don't normally have high recruiting rankings are otherwise successful - VTech, Boise, Oregon, South Carolina lately, Nebraska, Cincinnati under Kelly, Auburn under Tubberville, etc. We should expect to recruit consistently higher ranked players than those programs and if we recruit to our needs, culture, system and character we should be competing at the top.
 
Last edited:
#34
#34
VolsByNature said:
That explains why they aren't as good as the country thinks they are. Honestly, how can you say Boise could beat Bama, Oreg, Ohio St, TCU, Nebraska, Auburn, Oklahoma, Fl. St, they beat a terrible Va Tech team, nothing impressive
Click to expand...

Probably because they have beat Oregon 2 years in a row, beat Oklahoma in fiesta bowl, beat tcu last year. Ohio st is the most overated team every year. Bama got killed by Utah couple years ago in bowl game, Boise could do the same. I bet money Virginia tech still wins ACC this year. Boise st will win the national championship this year and they deserve it!!!
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#35
#35
IndianVol said:
UF, USC and Texas were doing great with their 4 and 5 star players. They're just having a down year. USC will be down for a while with their probation.
Click to expand...

I disagree man...UF and Texas both have relied heavily on super special kids to keep them from being vanilla.

UF has relied on Tebow since Meyer arrived there. His first season with all that talent...he loses to us and a few others for sure without Tebow coming in to save games for him. He rode the Tebow boat to the end. When Harvin left their passing game looked above average....relying on Tebow left, right, and up the middle week in and week out. When your qb is your leading rusher...that is sad having all those 5* rb's.

Texas rode Vince Young and Colt McCoy's success to the end as well. USC beats Texas by 2 TD's if Vince Young doesn't show he was a man amongst children in that game. He carried that team the whole season on his back in several of games that season being the difference in alot of close games. The same goes for McCoy while he was there. He goes down in a freak accident against Bama and they struggle severely with their back up and all that offensive 5*/4* talent and were out coached and out man'd in that game from there on as well as into this season too as being out coached.

USC....IMO had the greatest college coach in Pete Carroll of the last decade. Year in year out they were in it for a shot at a Nat'l Title. They put together great offenses and defenses year in and out. That offense with Lienhart and Co. was one of the greatest of all time. As well as that defense....it was nasty until the last 2 years he was there. Sure USC cheated to get 4*/5* kids there...but he put it all together on the field. If they got upset....when bowl time came they simply punished which ever ranked team they faced in their bowl appearance. But for his last 5 or so seasons always got upset by a weak super inferior talented team compared to USC's roster. Either way they were the best of those three putting it together with all that NFL talent. But always had those signature losses to scrub level teams those last 5 of so seasons under Carroll.

And yes...put UT and especially UGA & LSU in this conversation as well as recruiting great classes and being mediocre with those kids on the field.

So when you hear Dooley speaking of getting character guys there....he doesn't just mean choir boys...they are looking for football smart kids that will fit their systems on offense and defense. Kids that they feel will be able to execute their schemes to the fullest on both sides of the field. Taking 3* kids means this staff sees their potential and believe they can coach them up to 4* status.

:eek:k:..............:good!:..............:salute:
 
#37
#37
VolinDawgland said:
Here's my take on 'star' ratings for whatever it's worth. I believe a random collection of 4*'s versus a random collection of 3*'s everything else being equal - coaching, S&C, system, and ratings being very accurate, etc. - the 4*'s would be better. However, we operate in a real world where everything is not equal. The evaluations are far from perfect and the difference between a high 3* and low 4* can be nominal if any real difference exists at all. The most important factor in the real world are real coaches conducting their own evaluations against roster needs and fit with system and culture. I think those factors are the most important to get right, then when you compare a few candidates that might all grade out equal in those factors you take the best athlete among them you can get. Conversely, if a group of athletes are all about equal athletically then the most important factor are the coaches' evaluation of the prospect's fit in the system, culture and character and hopefully our coaches are choosing the best available against that criteria that they can get to come to our school. Given those variables, I'm not at all concerned when they take what looks like a very high quality 3* even if a 4* star was available and a possible commit. I'll trust our coaches evaluation skills until they prove otherwise. Not to throw stones at Fulmer, but rather using him as an example, I think that is where we started breaking down in recruiting the last several years. It didn't appear that Fulmer's staff were putting in the due diligence on all the factors or even had a clear idea of what our system and culture were that they were trying to recruit good prospects for.

Dooley appears to have that vision of what our system and culture should be and is recruiting to that. Jury is still out on whether or not he succeeds in doing that, but at lest at this point there appears to be a clear plan. This helps explain why teams that don't normally have high recruiting rankings are otherwise successful - VTech, Boise, Oregon, South Carolina lately, Nebraska, Cincinnati under Kelly, Auburn under Tubberville, etc. We should expect to recruit consistently higher ranked players than those programs and if we recruit to our needs, culture, system and character we should be competing at the top.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you man! :rock: :yu: :worship:
 
#38
#38
mooresvillevol said:
.

Charles Burks a 3 star from Huntington Beach CA. His offers were: Army, Boise State, Duke, Northern Arizona, San Diego State and SMU. USCjr (East) has 2 4 star players committed and obviously they are having a good year. It's real premature now to judge how this class is going to end up IMO. :)
Click to expand...

How come USCjr never wins their division if their so good?
 
#39
#39
Volgrad98 said:
I would also include Boise State, have they ever had a top 10 or 20 class?
Click to expand...

In the last 10 years Boise State has played four games against SEC opponents. Boise State has lost all 4.


2005 (10-3) Georgia 48-13 (9-4) Boise St.

2002 (9-4) Arkansas 41-14 (12-1) Boise St.

2001 (9-3) South Carolina 32-13 (8-4) Boise St.

2000 (6-6) Arkansas 38-31 (10-2) Boise St.
 
#40
#40
vols-1 said:
In the last 10 years Boise State has played four games against SEC opponents. Boise State has lost all 4.


2005 (10-3) Georgia 48-13 (9-4) Boise St.

2002 (9-4) Arkansas 41-14 (12-1) Boise St.

2001 (9-3) South Carolina 32-13 (8-4) Boise St.

2000 (6-6) Arkansas 38-31 (10-2) Boise St.
Click to expand...

That is a good point, but I'm sure some may argue that Boise State didn't really enter that BCS NC scene until about 5 years ago and haven't played an SEC team recently.

FWIW I think that Boise would lose 4-5 games this year if they had our schedule.
 
#41
#41
orangeaid said:
The idea that your recruiting rankings doesn't matter is nuts. If you consistently get low ranked classes you wont win the SEC.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

DaddyChad said:
Tell that to South Carolina they seem to be doing fine this year.
Click to expand...

Volgrad98 said:
I would also include Boise State, have they ever had a top 10 or 20 class?
Click to expand...

vols-1 said:
In the last 10 years Boise State has played four games against SEC opponents. Boise State has lost all 4.


2005 (10-3) Georgia 48-13 (9-4) Boise St.

2002 (9-4) Arkansas 41-14 (12-1) Boise St.

2001 (9-3) South Carolina 32-13 (8-4) Boise St.

2000 (6-6) Arkansas 38-31 (10-2) Boise St.
Click to expand...

When I responded I missed orangeaid's the part in bold so that was my bad. I agree, teams with low ranking classes don't bode well in or against the SEC. However, it is hard to dispute the fact that despite Boise State's low class rankings over the years, they always seem to beat a big time school every year.

Do I think they are an elite program? No, but they do well with what they get and that's all I'm trying to say.
 
#42
#42
Look the fact of it is you take strong 3*'s, believe in your coaches ability to teach/coach them up, and then you have a roster of 4*'s. If your team has some quality coached up 3*'s then you're going to have a quality team of athletes like Tubervilles's Auburn Tigers, the Oregon Ducks, the VaTech Hokies, and yes even Boise St.
 
Last edited:
#43
#43
VolsByNature said:
That explains why they aren't as good as the country thinks they are. Honestly, how can you say Boise could beat Bama, Oreg, Ohio St, TCU, Nebraska, Auburn, Oklahoma, Fl. St, they beat a terrible Va Tech team, nothing impressive
Click to expand...

it is easy, Boise St. could beat them. They beat a darn good oklahoma team a few years back. I seem to remember Utah putting one on Bama in the Sugar Bowl too. On any given day, these teams can win a single game. Don't think they could compete week in and week out in a major conference, though. Therein lies the problem as teams with the lower rankings don't seem to have the depth needed to consistently compete in a major conference.
 
#44
#44
DERELICK_MY_VOLS said:
I disagree man...UF and Texas both have relied heavily on super special kids to keep them from being vanilla.

UF has relied on Tebow since Meyer arrived there. His first season with all that talent...he loses to us and a few others for sure without Tebow coming in to save games for him. He rode the Tebow boat to the end. When Harvin left their passing game looked above average....relying on Tebow left, right, and up the middle week in and week out. When your qb is your leading rusher...that is sad having all those 5* rb's.

Texas rode Vince Young and Colt McCoy's success to the end as well. USC beats Texas by 2 TD's if Vince Young doesn't show he was a man amongst children in that game. He carried that team the whole season on his back in several of games that season being the difference in alot of close games. The same goes for McCoy while he was there. He goes down in a freak accident against Bama and they struggle severely with their back up and all that offensive 5*/4* talent and were out coached and out man'd in that game from there on as well as into this season too as being out coached.

USC....IMO had the greatest college coach in Pete Carroll of the last decade. Year in year out they were in it for a shot at a Nat'l Title. They put together great offenses and defenses year in and out. That offense with Lienhart and Co. was one of the greatest of all time. As well as that defense....it was nasty until the last 2 years he was there. Sure USC cheated to get 4*/5* kids there...but he put it all together on the field. If they got upset....when bowl time came they simply punished which ever ranked team they faced in their bowl appearance. But for his last 5 or so seasons always got upset by a weak super inferior talented team compared to USC's roster. Either way they were the best of those three putting it together with all that NFL talent. But always had those signature losses to scrub level teams those last 5 of so seasons under Carroll.

And yes...put UT and especially UGA & LSU in this conversation as well as recruiting great classes and being mediocre with those kids on the field.

So when you hear Dooley speaking of getting character guys there....he doesn't just mean choir boys...they are looking for football smart kids that will fit their systems on offense and defense. Kids that they feel will be able to execute their schemes to the fullest on both sides of the field. Taking 3* kids means this staff sees their potential and believe they can coach them up to 4* status.

:eek:k:..............:good!:..............:salute:
Click to expand...


Yes UF, Texas and USC all depended on their superstar players to carry them often but they got those superstars because they recruited them. I wouldn't mind recruiting a player that could carry us to a national championship. The players that carried them(Vince Young, Colt McCoy, Reggie Bush, Tim Tebow, Percy Harvin) were all highly ranked players (4 stars and above). Those players came from classes filled with highly ranked players. When a team recruits as many 4 and 5 stars players as UF, Texas and USC then the odds are that a couple of those players will be the type that can carry a team or at least be a type of player that is a game changer.
 
#45
#45
I think more 4 and 5 stars guys will start to look at us after we prove we are moving in a positive direction. Players want to play early but they'd also like to win. Until we win some games or at least start to compete harder most of those guys aren't going to look at us unless early playing time is their main focus. I know we have tradition and that we are awesome but I don't think the typical 5 star recruit looks at that as much as they do winning and seeing a program on the rise or at the top.

...not that we need all 5 star players to win.
 
#46
#46
Blackburn said:
I think more 4 and 5 stars guys will start to look at us after we prove we are moving in a positive direction. Players want to play early but they'd also like to win. Until we win some games or at least start to compete harder most of those guys aren't going to look at us unless early playing time is their main focus. I know we have tradition and that we are awesome but I don't think the typical 5 star recruit looks at that as much as they do winning and seeing a program on the rise or at the top.

...not that we need all 5 star players to win.
Click to expand...

It has pretty much been proven that other than the can't miss 5 stars, such as the Lattimores, Greens, and Richardsons of the world, the entire recruiting star system is pretty corrupted. The only service Rivals does is let us the see offer sheet.
 
#47
#47
wags33 said:
According to ESPN we currently have three 4* recruits. A.J Johnson, P Martin, A Posey. with Worley expected to be by seasons end i heard that from luginbill. Did anyone else no that? I know the trolls and sadly some fans have been complaining that we ere not getting any 4 or 5 star players...:dance2::groupwave:
Click to expand...

I no knothing.
 
#48
#48
We keep bringing up Oregon but prior to 2009, USC won outright or shared in seven consecutive titles. Do you know why? They have better players. Virginia Tech doesn't have Bama, UF, UGA, Auburn and LSU to compete with.
Is there much difference between the top twelve? Probably not, but is there a difference in the top thirty? You better believe it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top