Fozzy to Stanford
Comments
-
Hopefully strausser leaves so we can get klem? Imagine all the recruits that would be lining up.dnc said:
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. -
If you are building a truly elite offensive line, here is what you need (in order of importance)
1. Coaching/Player Development - Strausser seems to be excellent at this including going back to his days at Boise
2. Experience/Depth - we don't have this. We have 2 sophomore tackles, a true freshman who got a ton of time at guard, and only 1 senior on offensive line. As backups, we have a whole bunch of RS freshmen and sophomores. If you want proof of the importance of this, go back and look at Jake Eldrenkamp (or any all-conference lineman) 2 years ago.
3. Recruiting stars - for almost all offensive line coaches, this part comes after they have established their program as having a strong offensive line. With UW finally having a good line, and 3 all-conference guys, I expect that the 2018 class will have a bunch of elite linemen looking at, and committing to, UW. Elite kids don't automatically migrate to a school that was 7-6 and hasn't had an all-conference lineman in 15 years. There are very few OL coaches that have a reputation as "recruiters". Klemm is the only one I can think of and he's quite possibly one of the worst "coaches" in the conference.
Tl;dr - our o line coaching is great, our depth and experience is getting better, the recruits will come. -
Signing Pola-Mao would be a great leap forward.NEsnake12 said:
-
It is true that coaches tend to recruit areas and do most of the legwork on the recruit.NEsnake12 said:
However, ultimately the position coach and their relationship with the player that will be in their position group goes a long way in whether you get that recruit to commit or not. -
@Tequilla
I pointed out that the recruiting rankings on the OLs UW has recruited since the transition class are in line with the rest of players Petersen and his staff have recruited. I have done it before in response to your diatribes. You never respond. Why is that? -
Great post.bananasnblondes said:If you are building a truly elite offensive line, here is what you need (in order of importance)
1. Coaching/Player Development - Strausser seems to be excellent at this including going back to his days at Boise
2. Experience/Depth - we don't have this. We have 2 sophomore tackles, a true freshman who got a ton of time at guard, and only 1 senior on offensive line. As backups, we have a whole bunch of RS freshmen and sophomores. If you want proof of the importance of this, go back and look at Jake Eldrenkamp (or any all-conference lineman) 2 years ago.
3. Recruiting stars - for almost all offensive line coaches, this part comes after they have established their program as having a strong offensive line. With UW finally having a good line, and 3 all-conference guys, I expect that the 2018 class will have a bunch of elite linemen looking at, and committing to, UW. Elite kids don't automatically migrate to a school that was 7-6 and hasn't had an all-conference lineman in 15 years. There are very few OL coaches that have a reputation as "recruiters". Klemm is the only one I can think of and he's quite possibly one of the worst "coaches" in the conference.
Tl;dr - our o line coaching is great, our depth and experience is getting better, the recruits will come. -
This has been hashed out before:AIRWOLF said:@Tequilla
I pointed out that the recruiting rankings on the OLs UW has recruited since the transition class are in line with the rest of players Petersen and his staff have recruited. I have done it before in response to your diatribes. You never respond. Why is that?
-Adams, Roberts (and now Bainavalu) don't count because they are from the area
-McGary doesn't count because he was originally a D-Linemen (even though it was well known he would end up on offense)
-Wattenberg didn't count because his final 2 came down to UW and Duke
-Harris doesn't count because no one thought he would be good.
The only guys who count are the 4 guys they signed in January of the transition year after they were hired. -
You forgot that Foster Sarrells plan B recruit won't count either.bananasnblondes said:
This has been hashed out before:AIRWOLF said:@Tequilla
I pointed out that the recruiting rankings on the OLs UW has recruited since the transition class are in line with the rest of players Petersen and his staff have recruited. I have done it before in response to your diatribes. You never respond. Why is that?
-Adams, Roberts (and now Bainavalu) don't count because they are from the area
-McGary doesn't count because he was originally a D-Linemen (even though it was well known he would end up on offense)
-Wattenberg didn't count because his final 2 came down to UW and Duke
-Harris doesn't count because no one thought he would be good.
The only guys who count are the 4 guys they signed in January of the transition year after they were hired. -
We need more talent everywhere to compete with Alabama. So does everyone else. We will very likely never be Alabama. Water is wet.Tequilla said:@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
At least we will likely get a chance to see where we measure up. You are basically saying not winning a title means we aren't elite which is odd considering you aren't exactly known for high standards.
After Alabama, there is a very reasonable case that UW is the next best team.
Ohio State struggled all game with Michigan's DL. They are elite. Our OL is good. Deal with it. 4 starters back next year with a lot of competition with the young guys and Kirkland for the final guard spot.
If we get Fozzy there will be no argument at all. If we don't, recruit some other guys and coach them the fuck up. That's what we have seen so far. No reason to believe it won't continue.
