What is your grade for this recruiting class?
Comments
-
B+
I think we can get to where we do this maybe 3 years out of 5. I don't think we'll ever be at the place where we do this five years in a row.WeakarmCobra said:@RoadDawg55
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. -
A-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. -
D+ or lowerF+
-
B+
Including Clemson in that list makes my point for me.RoadDawg55 said: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. -
B-B-. Only place where we hit our goal was WR/TE. We got some work to do.
-
B+
CB?Newsnitch said:B-. Only place where we hit our goal was WR/TE. We got some work to do.
-
Total fucks given about this classes grades now = 0. Let's see what they do and how we grade them in the Callier.
-
B+
Disagree.kh83 said:Total fucks given about this classes grades now = 0. Let's see what they do and how we grade them in the Callier.
-
BThis 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.
