Fozzy to Stanford
Comments
-
Maybe they want to play for Lake but their primary recruiter could be Strausser if they are in his regionPassion said: -
When has Washington ever gotten more than 1 elite high end OL per class? Yeah there was one year where they got Coats/Olson/Kreutz, but that seems like a major outlier and Kreutz wasn't even considered elite coming in. Otherwise Washington has historically had great OLs (James era) without a ton of elite recruits.Tequilla said:
And how many OL do you start?RoadDawg55 said:
According to 24/7 Bainivulu is the highest rated OL Petersen has ever gotten. Higher than Adams, McGary, Roberts, and Wattenberg.Tequilla said:
Go find any place where I said that ...bananasnblondes said:
So we should go ahead and add Bainavalu to your list of husky o line recruits that don't actually count?Tequilla said:
Also pretty sure Michigan was full on the OL and he may not have had a commitable offer ... Dennis or Pepsi can probably speak better to thatbackthepack said:
He was being crooted by Michigan lol STFUTequilla said:For those that like to say 1 in 3 recruiting is good ... I'd also like to point out that where that came from was that IF there were 3 elite prospects out of SoCal, the idea being that USC would get 1, UCLA would get 1, and UW would get 1 ... and that the reason the UW prospect would be better was because he'd get better coaching and have more of a chip on his shoulder. 1 in 3 never applied to local kids.
As it pertains to OL recruiting and the 1 of 3 ...
Bainivalu SHOULD have been a slam dunk given location and that he was more of a PAC recruit than he was a national recruit.
Fozzy being an in-state kid SHOULD be a minor favorite to UW but going nationally isn't a complete shock historically ... the big miss here (assuming that he goes to Stanford) wasn't that he left but that there was at best a very small window where having any expectation that we could be in the lead was reasonable.
AVT wasn't a SoCal kid ... he was a NoCal kid. Because of that, the USC/UCLA pull SHOULD have been less ... add to it the fact that he goes to a school that not only have we recruited reasonably well as of late (see Camilo Eifler), but the HC of that school is probably on the short list of all-time Husky Legends in Nip ... this is a kid that we should have been able to win over with high end recruiting ... instead he chose USC BEFORE they had even turn things around ... that's a FAIL by us in recruiting.
What I said was that you need a strong and deep class if competing at the national level ... if he is your 3rd or 4th OL that's a GREAT class ... if he is your best probably not deep enough ...
You need more than 1 elite high end guy per class ... I know that's hard for you and a few others around here to understand.
If Strausser gets one elite guy every year he's going to produce very good OLs.
And of course, he's already got one and there's 2 months still signing day. -
UW's track record with JC's isn't good - not a valid optionKobeStan said:3 OL or even 2 OL in this class is perfectly fine just as long as 2018 includes at least 5 OL 2 of which are JUCOs
-
I agree with this ... which is why I focus on the guys that they are initially pursuing as those are the guys they wantKobeStan said:
Petersen's elite is not the same as the Rivals100 though.Tequilla said:
The target really needs to be 2-3 elite guys per class ... not every elite player will pan out ... you want them to have time to develop before getting on the field. Considering that we've been under recruiting the last few years, you really need a class or two to make up for it to get the numbers where you need them going forward. -
We agree on something here, I don't see UW taking any JUCO's.Tequilla said:
UW's track record with JC's isn't good - not a valid optionKobeStan said:3 OL or even 2 OL in this class is perfectly fine just as long as 2018 includes at least 5 OL 2 of which are JUCOs
Though if Pete did sign a JC I'd have a lot more faith in his ability to get him into school than what we've seen in the past.
#AttentionToDetail -
You have to tenderize the horse before you eat it ... I know a great little joint in Switzerland that serves some dynamite horseMrsPetersen said:
-
@dnc
When it comes to pulling elite recruits out of California, it's probably true that you are looking at 1 in 3 being likely ... 1 in 2 at best
That's why it is so important to clean up with the fence around the State and keep the elite players home ... if we're rolling in-state we basically get anybody that we want
If you look at this year's class, that's basically true with the possible exception of Fozzy ... who is probably the most important of the recruits -
@Passion
You are absolutely right in what I'm saying ...
We have a good enough OL to compete for PAC titles ...
We still need more talent on the OL to compete nationally ...
I do agree with you that an elite DL can still cause problems for the most elite of OLs ... but the difference from a very good to elite OL in a game like that is probably the difference in winning or losing -
1 out of 3 in California is way too optimistic IMO. You're never going to consistently outrecruit USC and it's super optimistic to think you're going to match UCLA in California. So you're basically competing with the rest of the country for the kids that SC or UCLA didn't offer or the occasional kid who wants to leave the state.Tequilla said:@dnc
When it comes to pulling elite recruits out of California, it's probably true that you are looking at 1 in 3 being likely ... 1 in 2 at best
That's why it is so important to clean up with the fence around the State and keep the elite players home ... if we're rolling in-state we basically get anybody that we want
If you look at this year's class, that's basically true with the possible exception of Fozzy ... who is probably the most important of the recruits
1 out of 5 seems more likely and even that is optimistic IMO.
I completely agree that losing Sarrell is a big problem. We have to keep the elite kids home. If this were Ty or Sark losing him I'd be going ballistic. With Pete, I think he recognizes the importances of the local kids and is building a program that will keep those kids home in the future.
Going forward I expect to get all the in state OL of significance and supplement with mostly good but not great Cali kids and hopefully some Hawaii/Utah poly kids.
I'm really not worried about OL recruiting beyond this year, I think it will be very good, and the development will be great. I'm at the point I'd be pretty bummed if we lost Strausser.
