Get the fuck off of where we finish with recruiting rankings ... it is all about quality for us because we don't have the quantity yearly now that we have a grown up that runs the program
The fact that we are taking anywhere from 15-20 a year per class versus a full 25 actually makes it EASIER for us to recruit well going forward
But keep posting Roady ... you sure are showing DDY what's up
Get the fuck off of where we finish with recruiting rankings ... it is all about quality for us because we don't have the quantity yearly now that we have a grown up that runs the program
The fact that we are taking anywhere from 15-20 a year per class versus a full 25 actually makes it EASIER for us to recruit well going forward
But keep posting Roady ... you sure are showing DDY what's up
But the point was about rankings?? I agree we are recruiting well and can do even better.
Are Alabama and every other fucking school I listed not concerned about quality?
I don't disagree with DDY about his overall philosophies on recruiting. To think we are going to consistently be top 10 (by any measure) is absurd. Arguing against that is literally ignoring years of data. I'm pretty sure the schools I listed will mostly continue to recruit well. It can't be any more clear, but believe what you want.
Get the fuck off of where we finish with recruiting rankings ... it is all about quality for us because we don't have the quantity yearly now that we have a grown up that runs the program
The fact that we are taking anywhere from 15-20 a year per class versus a full 25 actually makes it EASIER for us to recruit well going forward
But keep posting Roady ... you sure are showing DDY what's up
But the point was about rankings?? I agree we are recruiting well and can do even better.
Are Alabama and every other fucking school I listed not concerned about quality?
Because the rankings as reported aren't standardized ... the way to standardize is based on quality not quantity
Split the top 30 recruiting teams into 3 tiers. 1-10 tier one, 10-20 tier 2, 20-30 tier 3.
Right now we are borderline tier 2, more likely tier 3. The original blue bloods listed are tier one. Getting into tier 2 and occasionally getting into tier one is definitely feasible.
Consistently getting into tier one probably isn't happening. It's simple stuff. We aren't geographically favored and those teams mostly win big every year (USC and Texas sometimes not). There is hardly a year those schools aren't top 10 in recruiting.
That leaves 3 or 4 spots open in tier one for 15 or so schools that are tier 2/ tier 3.
Alabama, Ohio State, USC, Texas, FSU, Michigan, Georgia, and LSU aren't going to stop pulling in great classes. You can argue quanity/quality, but I'm sure their average star ranking is high too.
Schools like Florida, Oklahoma, A&M, Penn State, Auburn, Clemson, Miami, etc are going to likely going to continue to recruit well like they do every fucking year. They get a lot of 4 star guys and occasionally a 5. All get more 5 star guys than UW. There are teams that suck and still reel in very good classes most years like Tennessee and UCLA.
It's not doogish, it doesn't mean we can't win (we already are). It's just the way it is. It doesn't mean we can't or won't recruit better. We can.
It's really not that difficult to understand. I'm not making any outlandish claim. I can't believe this is really an argument.
Split the top 30 recruiting teams into 3 tiers. 1-10 tier one, 10-20 tier 2, 20-30 tier 3.
Right now we are borderline tier 2, more likely tier 3. The original blue bloods listed are tier one. Getting into tier 2 and occasionally getting into tier one is definitely feasible.
Consistently getting into tier one probably isn't happening. It's simple stuff. We aren't geographically favored and those teams mostly win big every year (USC and Texas sometimes not). There is hardly a year those schools aren't top 10 in recruiting.
That leaves 3 or 4 spots open in tier one for 15 or so schools that are tier 2/ tier 3.
Alabama, Ohio State, USC, Texas, FSU, Michigan, Georgia, and LSU aren't going to stop pulling in great classes. You can argue quanity/quality, but I'm sure their average star ranking is high too.
Schools like Florida, Oklahoma, A&M, Penn State, Auburn, Clemson, Miami, etc are going to likely going to continue to recruit well like they do every fucking year. They get a lot of 4 star guys and occasionally a 5. All get more 5 star guys than UW. There are teams that suck and still reel in very good classes most years like Tennessee and UCLA.
It's not doogish, it doesn't mean we can't win (we already are). It's just the way it is. It doesn't mean we can't or won't recruit better. We can.
It's really not that difficult to understand. I'm not making any outlandish claim. I can't believe this is really an argument.
Including Clemson in that list makes my point for me.
This might be the best class at UW since Romar landed Pondexter, Nelson, Oliver and Hawes. If Marlon wasn't on the DNF list it would have been up there with that all Asian golf class a few years back.
We were any one or combination of IPM, Ah Chu, AVT or a Echols type away from it being a front runner.
Comments
A- Roady? How? Degree of difficulty?
The fact that we are taking anywhere from 15-20 a year per class versus a full 25 actually makes it EASIER for us to recruit well going forward
But keep posting Roady ... you sure are showing DDY what's up
Are Alabama and every other fucking school I listed not concerned about quality?
I don't disagree with DDY about his overall philosophies on recruiting. To think we are going to consistently be top 10 (by any measure) is absurd. Arguing against that is literally ignoring years of data. I'm pretty sure the schools I listed will mostly continue to recruit well. It can't be any more clear, but believe what you want.
If we keep producing 10+ wins seasons and send kids to NFL, we should be able to recruit top 10 recruiting classes on a star averages.
Right now we are borderline tier 2, more likely tier 3. The original blue bloods listed are tier one. Getting into tier 2 and occasionally getting into tier one is definitely feasible.
Consistently getting into tier one probably isn't happening. It's simple stuff. We aren't geographically favored and those teams mostly win big every year (USC and Texas sometimes not). There is hardly a year those schools aren't top 10 in recruiting.
That leaves 3 or 4 spots open in tier one for 15 or so schools that are tier 2/ tier 3.
Alabama, Ohio State, USC, Texas, FSU, Michigan, Georgia, and LSU aren't going to stop pulling in great classes. You can argue quanity/quality, but I'm sure their average star ranking is high too.
Schools like Florida, Oklahoma, A&M, Penn State, Auburn, Clemson, Miami, etc are going to likely going to continue to recruit well like they do every fucking year. They get a lot of 4 star guys and occasionally a 5. All get more 5 star guys than UW. There are teams that suck and still reel in very good classes most years like Tennessee and UCLA.
It's not doogish, it doesn't mean we can't win (we already are). It's just the way it is. It doesn't mean we can't or won't recruit better. We can.
It's really not that difficult to understand. I'm not making any outlandish claim. I can't believe this is really an argument.
Get a goddamn avatar.
We were any one or combination of IPM, Ah Chu, AVT or a Echols type away from it being a front runner.