Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

"Looking the part"

2»

Comments

  • TTJTTJ Member Posts: 4,823

    Fixed.
    T H I S .
  • DawgFaderDawgFader Member Posts: 1,414
    edited February 2017

    Yeah, the only big misses were really Fozzy or AVT, Marlon and - I would have added a QB and IPM.

    I love DJ, but you aren't going to get a fucking all star team. Tryon is plenty good enough.

    And fuck saying we are going to get kids to come in and compete next year on the lines. Only kids who are superstars should see the field in the first year, and those kids should be far away from the ball (WR, DB).
    Looking for QB recruiting to evolve. Glad SC is trying to snatch kids that are buying what Petersen is selling, means the program is a destination in the recruiting game and we are in on top flight talent.

    I like Tyron a lot, he should be a great add to the rotation in 18 months. I'm not advocating for 18 year olds to have to play on the lines at all.

    Just saying there were a number of kids that would have protected the rush from being in a rush and against injury.

    Come next cycle and moving forward I would hope that the class can land in the top 15 consistently with the small classes and contend with larger classes for the top 10.

    Marlon, AVT, IPM, DJ, Echols (and QB... etc.) any two of these guys takes the class to elite. We were one of them away from with a week to go.

    Wouldn't that have been an all star class for lack of a better term? I'm pumped with the class but trying to keep some prespective on where the potential ceiling might be.
  • TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,985
    I would look strongly at where we recruited in this class ... of the 18 guys in the class they came from as follows:

    California: 7
    Washington: 6
    Oregon: 2
    Utah: 2
    Australia: 1

    This is what our recruiting class should look like from a composition standpoint. You could turn Utah into "Other" to account for an Idaho/Wyoming/Montana, etc. type of kid. It would be nice to get back into Hawaii particularly for OL/DL types.

    It's possible over time that we might get back into Texas or even start getting a guy here or there from a national standpoint that wants to play at UW. But in-state Washington normally produces in the 8-10 range of solid D1 prospects per year ... we normally get what we want. We have good depth in NoCal (Sacramento) and in some of the SoCal schools in the southern region (Orange County).

    QB recruiting will improve when we get rid of Babushka
  • TurdBomberTurdBomber Member Posts: 19,992 Standard Supporter
    edited February 2017
    Tequilla said:

    I would look strongly at where we recruited in this class ... of the 18 guys in the class they came from as follows:

    California: 7
    Washington: 6
    Oregon: 2
    Utah: 2
    Australia: 1

    This is what our recruiting class should look like from a composition standpoint. You could turn Utah into "Other" to account for an Idaho/Wyoming/Montana, etc. type of kid. It would be nice to get back into Hawaii particularly for OL/DL types.

    It's possible over time that we might get back into Texas or even start getting a guy here or there from a national standpoint that wants to play at UW. But in-state Washington normally produces in the 8-10 range of solid D1 prospects per year ... we normally get what we want. We have good depth in NoCal (Sacramento) and in some of the SoCal schools in the southern region (Orange County).

    QB recruiting will improve when we get rid of Babushka

    Thank you for your endorsement, Tequila. Coker? Do I have two of TSIO's three on board?
    image
Sign In or Register to comment.