@HeretoBeatmyChest's poast was a little difficult for me to decipher, but suffice it to say that we ALMOST never recruited above UCLA and USC (I think in '88 we were ahead of 1 of them). And third is always where we want to be. This 5th shit is a disaster. Oregon is basically always third now and what we used to be. Now we battle fucking Stanford and ASU.
Close the fucking program down. Fuck.
Anyway, the point I was making is that you have to have last year's class as an 'average' class and ones above that where you produce some superstars to contend for Nattys. Like, if we'd gotten Skinny this year, bam—there you go—superstar.
We don't have a fucking superstar on our radar this year, we just have some decent players (outside of guys like Lawrence and Juarez who are a million to one). Next year it's Sarrell and Ahmed in-state. We better fucking get them.
It's no big deal if Tommie Smith never becomes an All-America so long as guys like Mario Bailey does. Same thing with Kasen's class. He never became an All-America, but Marcus Peters did, so no sweat.
What you need is All Pac-12 players at every position, then some All-Americans. My suspicion is this isn't the year we'll see that.
So you're saying Beat Oregon, Nothing Else Matters?
I'm saying beat everyone but USC and UCLA, nothing else matters.
People forget that UW always recruited well in So Cal even in the waning dreck filled years of Jim Owens. James had some decent talent here when he took over. Just not enough.
He then nabbed Warren Moon out of LA to show the world that things had changed at UW and we would play a natural athlete who needed to spend more time in the film room at QB.
James did well in SO Cal and the Bay Area, the two places Oregon took over from us. When James took over the Bay Area the set the stage for decades of dominance over Cal and Stanford.
Recruiting matters. It wasn't until we dropped football that the doogs came up with this bullshit about how we can't recruit in Cali and you can't blame a kid for taking a Stanford offer and all that crap.
Now when I see we are after a kid who has an Oregon offer I know we're fucked. That's a 180 degree turn folks. We need to make it 360.
People forget that UW always recruited well in So Cal even in the waning dreck filled years of Jim Owens. James had some decent talent here when he took over. Just not enough.
He then nabbed Warren Moon out of LA to show the world that things had changed at UW and we would play a natural athlete who needed to spend more time in the film room at QB.
James did well in SO Cal and the Bay Area, the two places Oregon took over from us. When James took over the Bay Area the set the stage for decades of dominance over Cal and Stanford.
Recruiting matters. It wasn't until we dropped football that the doogs came up with this bullshit about how we can't recruit in Cali and you can't blame a kid for taking a Stanford offer and all that crap.
Now when I see we are after a kid who has an Oregon offer I know we're fucked. That's a 180 degree turn folks. We need to make it 360.
This is the whole fucking (hole fucking?) ball of wax right here.
The strategy for our recruiting has always been the same: Get 90% of the best kids in WA, Beat everyone outside of the LA schools for recruits 80% of the time, win 20% of the battles with the LA schools.
Right now we're getting about 80% of the best kids out of Washington (losing Eason is huge no matter how much I like Pete);
We're beating ASU about 50% of the time, Oregon about 15% and Stanford about 33%.
OSU, Utah, WSU, Colorado, Cal and Zona about 80% of the time.
I'd be surprised if you knew where Lucas, TX was before today
I lived in Dallas for 7 years jagoff! How do think I had those big nights at the Southlake Cheesecake Factory where I drank bottles of Champagne and ate a whole cheesecake (editor's note: this is a good way to administer a diabetic coma)?!!?
I didn't live in fucking Arlington or Sachse either.
I lived in the middle of fucking Dallas proper. 75275 bitch.
If you lived in 75275 and drove to Southlake for cheesecake factory you were really doing it wrong.
If you are ripping on driving to Southlake to go to the Cheesecake Factory followed by a trip to X's and O's ... then I'm fucking out.
People forget that UW always recruited well in So Cal even in the waning dreck filled years of Jim Owens. James had some decent talent here when he took over. Just not enough.
He then nabbed Warren Moon out of LA to show the world that things had changed at UW and we would play a natural athlete who needed to spend more time in the film room at QB.
James did well in SO Cal and the Bay Area, the two places Oregon took over from us. When James took over the Bay Area the set the stage for decades of dominance over Cal and Stanford.
Recruiting matters. It wasn't until we dropped football that the doogs came up with this bullshit about how we can't recruit in Cali and you can't blame a kid for taking a Stanford offer and all that crap.
Now when I see we are after a kid who has an Oregon offer I know we're fucked. That's a 180 degree turn folks. We need to make it 360.
This is the whole fucking (hole fucking?) ball of wax right here.
The strategy for our recruiting has always been the same: Get 90% of the best kids in WA, Beat everyone outside of the LA schools for recruits 80% of the time, win 20% of the battles with the LA schools.
Right now we're getting about 80% of the best kids out of Washington (losing Eason is huge no matter how much I like Pete);
We're beating ASU about 50% of the time, Oregon about 15% and Stanford about 33%.
OSU, Utah, WSU, Colorado, Cal and Zona about 80% of the time.
We're beating USC and UCLA about 5% of the time.
Eason hurts IF Browning isn't what we think he is ... if he is, then it's more of a perception problem. I'm still trying to figure out how much of the fuck up here was Pete realizing he ain't in the WAC anymore versus Eason wanting to leave the area.
Getting the best kids in Washington (the ones we want) I expect to continue getting better. Pulling Budda back from Oregon is a step in the right direction. In fact, over time, I expect that our recruiting versus Oregon and Slingblade will normalize a bit compared to Chipster vs Seven.
Ideally we need to get the ASU percentage up to about 70-75% and Stanford up to 50/50 to slightly better.
UCLA and USC are different stories to me at this point. How much longer is Mora going to be there? Who do they replace him with? And how many of the same players is Pete going after compared to SC? Seven is living off the myths that he is throwing out there at the moment. Once reality sets in I expect that we'll start doing a little better in recruiting against SC. And as we all know, UW player development is going to beat USC player development every single day of the week.
People forget that UW always recruited well in So Cal even in the waning dreck filled years of Jim Owens. James had some decent talent here when he took over. Just not enough.
He then nabbed Warren Moon out of LA to show the world that things had changed at UW and we would play a natural athlete who needed to spend more time in the film room at QB.
James did well in SO Cal and the Bay Area, the two places Oregon took over from us. When James took over the Bay Area the set the stage for decades of dominance over Cal and Stanford.
Recruiting matters. It wasn't until we dropped football that the doogs came up with this bullshit about how we can't recruit in Cali and you can't blame a kid for taking a Stanford offer and all that crap.
Now when I see we are after a kid who has an Oregon offer I know we're fucked. That's a 180 degree turn folks. We need to make it 360.
This is the whole fucking (hole fucking?) ball of wax right here.
The strategy for our recruiting has always been the same: Get 90% of the best kids in WA, Beat everyone outside of the LA schools for recruits 80% of the time, win 20% of the battles with the LA schools.
Right now we're getting about 80% of the best kids out of Washington (losing Eason is huge no matter how much I like Pete);
We're beating ASU about 50% of the time, Oregon about 15% and Stanford about 33%.
OSU, Utah, WSU, Colorado, Cal and Zona about 80% of the time.
We're beating USC and UCLA about 5% of the time.
Eason hurts IF Browning isn't what we think he is ... if he is, then it's more of a perception problem. I'm still trying to figure out how much of the fuck up here was Pete realizing he ain't in the WAC anymore versus Eason wanting to leave the area.
Getting the best kids in Washington (the ones we want) I expect to continue getting better. Pulling Budda back from Oregon is a step in the right direction. In fact, over time, I expect that our recruiting versus Oregon and Slingblade will normalize a bit compared to Chipster vs Seven.
Ideally we need to get the ASU percentage up to about 70-75% and Stanford up to 50/50 to slightly better.
UCLA and USC are different stories to me at this point. How much longer is Mora going to be there? Who do they replace him with? And how many of the same players is Pete going after compared to SC? Seven is living off the myths that he is throwing out there at the moment. Once reality sets in I expect that we'll start doing a little better in recruiting against SC. And as we all know, UW player development is going to beat USC player development every single day of the week.
From what I'm following in recruiting this year UW seems close to jumping ASU in the power rankings, if they haven't already it's seems to be trending that way.
A big difference that those stuck in 1991 don't want to realize - Stanford is a major problem in recruiting now a days. I think fb players are more focused on academis, Stanford as a degree has grown in perception since then, and their team is a whole lot better. SC doesn't always beat them out anymore. UCLA never does these days. And from what I've read that Sarrell kid is a heavy lean to Stanford.
Sevens recruiting looks Alabama level right now for 2016 and especially 2017. If he throws up an 8-4 or 7-5 season maybe that crumbles, but if it doesn't he's going to build a Pete Carroll talent level advantage there. Which might be a good thing if it saves his job. Either way...
I don't think Stanford is going to go anywhere in the foreseeable future. Shaw is a good to very good coach but I'll take Petersen over him. I see both schools focusing on many of the same players and playing similar, but slightly different styles.
The ceiling for Seven as a coach IMO is Mark Richt ... except for the fact that Richt seems like at least a decent guy off the field and we all know what scum Seven is.
I agree with the posts here, but just to throw it out there, Dantonio isn't ever in the top 3 for Big Ten recruiting, but he has the 2nd best program in that conference. If Petersen can really coach and develop, he will make it work regardless of where he ends up in recruiting. As seen by the NFL draft, there are tons of good players out there that are missed by the top schools.
I agree with the posts here, but just to throw it out there, Dantonio isn't ever in the top 3 for Big Ten recruiting, but he has the 2nd best program in that conference. If Petersen can really coach and develop, he will make it work regardless of where he ends up in recruiting. As seen by the NFL draft, there are tons of good players out there that are missed by the top schools.
While true. That coincides with historically bad Michigan teams, Ohio State sanctions, Pedo State problems, and a general trend of the bottom falling out of the big10. Midwest talent generally has been trending down for awhile (especially in the state of Michigan and Detroit metro area). With Harbaugh, Urban and Franklin in place I think talent acquisition will become an even bigger struggle at MSU. MD is still a very good coach, but like this thread agrees talent matters.
People forget that UW always recruited well in So Cal even in the waning dreck filled years of Jim Owens. James had some decent talent here when he took over. Just not enough.
He then nabbed Warren Moon out of LA to show the world that things had changed at UW and we would play a natural athlete who needed to spend more time in the film room at QB.
James did well in SO Cal and the Bay Area, the two places Oregon took over from us. When James took over the Bay Area the set the stage for decades of dominance over Cal and Stanford.
Recruiting matters. It wasn't until we dropped football that the doogs came up with this bullshit about how we can't recruit in Cali and you can't blame a kid for taking a Stanford offer and all that crap.
Now when I see we are after a kid who has an Oregon offer I know we're fucked. That's a 180 degree turn folks. We need to make it 360.
This is the whole fucking (hole fucking?) ball of wax right here.
The strategy for our recruiting has always been the same: Get 90% of the best kids in WA, Beat everyone outside of the LA schools for recruits 80% of the time, win 20% of the battles with the LA schools.
Right now we're getting about 80% of the best kids out of Washington (losing Eason is huge no matter how much I like Pete);
We're beating ASU about 50% of the time, Oregon about 15% and Stanford about 33%.
OSU, Utah, WSU, Colorado, Cal and Zona about 80% of the time.
We're beating USC and UCLA about 5% of the time.
Eason hurtsIF Browning isn't what we think he is ... if he is, then it's more of a perception problem. I'm still trying to figure out how much of the fuck up here was Pete realizing he ain't in the WAC anymore versus Eason wanting to leave the area.
Getting the best kids in Washington (the ones we want) I expect to continue getting better. Pulling Budda back from Oregon is a step in the right direction. In fact, over time, I expect that our recruiting versus Oregon and Slingblade will normalize a bit compared to Chipster vs Seven.
Ideally we need to get the ASU percentage up to about 70-75% and Stanford up to 50/50 to slightly better.
UCLA and USC are different stories to me at this point. How much longer is Mora going to be there? Who do they replace him with? And how many of the same players is Pete going after compared to SC? Seven is living off the myths that he is throwing out there at the moment. Once reality sets in I expect that we'll start doing a little better in recruiting against SC. And as we all know, UW player development is going to beat USC player development every single day of the week.
I guess my point on Eason is that the magnitude that he hurts all depends on Browning ... if Browning is who we think he is, then the pain will be dulled significantly.
I agree with the posts here, but just to throw it out there, Dantonio isn't ever in the top 3 for Big Ten recruiting, but he has the 2nd best program in that conference. If Petersen can really coach and develop, he will make it work regardless of where he ends up in recruiting. As seen by the NFL draft, there are tons of good players out there that are missed by the top schools.
While true. That coincides with historically bad Michigan teams, Ohio State sanctions, Pedo State problems, and a general trend of the bottom falling out of the big10. Midwest talent generally has been trending down for awhile (especially in the state of Michigan and Detroit metro area). With Harbaugh, Urban and Franklin in place I think talent acquisition will become an even bigger struggle at MSU. MD is still a very good coach, but like this thread agrees talent matters.
Fair enough, but the Pac 12's best program is coached by Sark, the bottom of the conference is terrible, and Chip is gone at Oregon.
Ohio State's sanctions only affected them one year when Fickell was their coach. They were really good under Tressell and they've lost two games in three years under Meyer. Penn State had a couple good seasons since 2000, but were mostly average. They weren't that great before the pedo stuff. Wisconsin has been good since Dantonio came along. Discrediting Dantonio is like discrediting Oregon because USC has been down and UW has sucked during their run.
And I fully agree that talent matters. And the teams with the best recruiting rankings are typically the best teams. I'm just saying there is plenty of talent that the TBSers under value or don't even know about.
I guess my point on Eason is that the magnitude that he hurts all depends on Browning ... if Browning is who we think he is, then the pain will be dulled significantly.
Here he is as a HS senior, stepping up in the pocket, avoiding the rush, and threading the needle against our secondary.
I guess my point on Eason is that the magnitude that he hurts all depends on Browning ... if Browning is who we think he is, then the pain will be dulled significantly.
Here he is as a HS senior, stepping up in the pocket, avoiding the rush, and threading the needle against our secondary.
It's a nice play, but jeez. Enough about he's a HS senior. The kid had multiple practices and has played QB his whole life.
I guess my point on Eason is that the magnitude that he hurts all depends on Browning ... if Browning is who we think he is, then the pain will be dulled significantly.
Here he is as a HS senior, stepping up in the pocket, avoiding the rush, and threading the needle against our secondary.
It's a nice play, but jeez. Enough about he's a HS senior. The kid had multiple practices and has played QB his whole life.
Fine, he's a fucking freshman. What more do you want?
I agree with the posts here, but just to throw it out there, Dantonio isn't ever in the top 3 for Big Ten recruiting, but he has the 2nd best program in that conference. If Petersen can really coach and develop, he will make it work regardless of where he ends up in recruiting. As seen by the NFL draft, there are tons of good players out there that are missed by the top schools.
While true. That coincides with historically bad Michigan teams, Ohio State sanctions, Pedo State problems, and a general trend of the bottom falling out of the big10. Midwest talent generally has been trending down for awhile (especially in the state of Michigan and Detroit metro area). With Harbaugh, Urban and Franklin in place I think talent acquisition will become an even bigger struggle at MSU. MD is still a very good coach, but like this thread agrees talent matters.
Fair enough, but the Pac 12's best program is coached by Sark, the bottom of the conference is terrible, and Chip is gone at Oregon.
Ohio State's sanctions only affected them one year when Fickell was their coach. They were really good under Tressell and they've lost two games in three years under Meyer. Penn State had a couple good seasons since 2000, but were mostly average. They weren't that great before the pedo stuff. Wisconsin has been good since Dantonio came along. Discrediting Dantonio is like discrediting Oregon because USC has been down and UW has sucked during their run.
And I fully agree that talent matters. And the teams with the best recruiting rankings are typically the best teams. I'm just saying there is plenty of talent that the TBSers under value or don't even know about.
Not discrediting, I am citing a reason, and questioning if it will continue. SC being down clearly created a void for teams to step up into - Oregon and UCLA probably being primary beneficiaries. Same with Dantonio. Michigan sucking created an opportunity for MSU, I question if its sustainable for him if Harbaugh gets it going in Ann Arbor. Recruiting and talent dynamics in the Midwest are less attractive than the west coast in my opinion.
Comments
He then nabbed Warren Moon out of LA to show the world that things had changed at UW and we would play a natural athlete who needed to spend more time in the film room at QB.
James did well in SO Cal and the Bay Area, the two places Oregon took over from us. When James took over the Bay Area the set the stage for decades of dominance over Cal and Stanford.
Recruiting matters. It wasn't until we dropped football that the doogs came up with this bullshit about how we can't recruit in Cali and you can't blame a kid for taking a Stanford offer and all that crap.
Now when I see we are after a kid who has an Oregon offer I know we're fucked. That's a 180 degree turn folks. We need to make it 360.
The strategy for our recruiting has always been the same: Get 90% of the best kids in WA, Beat everyone outside of the LA schools for recruits 80% of the time, win 20% of the battles with the LA schools.
Right now we're getting about 80% of the best kids out of Washington (losing Eason is huge no matter how much I like Pete);
We're beating ASU about 50% of the time, Oregon about 15% and Stanford about 33%.
OSU, Utah, WSU, Colorado, Cal and Zona about 80% of the time.
We're beating USC and UCLA about 5% of the time.
Getting the best kids in Washington (the ones we want) I expect to continue getting better. Pulling Budda back from Oregon is a step in the right direction. In fact, over time, I expect that our recruiting versus Oregon and Slingblade will normalize a bit compared to Chipster vs Seven.
Ideally we need to get the ASU percentage up to about 70-75% and Stanford up to 50/50 to slightly better.
UCLA and USC are different stories to me at this point. How much longer is Mora going to be there? Who do they replace him with? And how many of the same players is Pete going after compared to SC? Seven is living off the myths that he is throwing out there at the moment. Once reality sets in I expect that we'll start doing a little better in recruiting against SC. And as we all know, UW player development is going to beat USC player development every single day of the week.
A big difference that those stuck in 1991 don't want to realize - Stanford is a major problem in recruiting now a days. I think fb players are more focused on academis, Stanford as a degree has grown in perception since then, and their team is a whole lot better. SC doesn't always beat them out anymore. UCLA never does these days. And from what I've read that Sarrell kid is a heavy lean to Stanford.
Sevens recruiting looks Alabama level right now for 2016 and especially 2017. If he throws up an 8-4 or 7-5 season maybe that crumbles, but if it doesn't he's going to build a Pete Carroll talent level advantage there. Which might be a good thing if it saves his job. Either way...
The ceiling for Seven as a coach IMO is Mark Richt ... except for the fact that Richt seems like at least a decent guy off the field and we all know what scum Seven is.
Ohio State's sanctions only affected them one year when Fickell was their coach. They were really good under Tressell and they've lost two games in three years under Meyer. Penn State had a couple good seasons since 2000, but were mostly average. They weren't that great before the pedo stuff. Wisconsin has been good since Dantonio came along. Discrediting Dantonio is like discrediting Oregon because USC has been down and UW has sucked during their run.
And I fully agree that talent matters. And the teams with the best recruiting rankings are typically the best teams. I'm just saying there is plenty of talent that the TBSers under value or don't even know about.
Here he is as a HS senior, stepping up in the pocket, avoiding the rush, and threading the needle against our secondary.