Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Austin Osbourne TBS ranks overview
Comments
-
I'm guessing more than you think ...dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
It's hard to find the data on now, but I'm thinking that at least 8-10 of USC's class they got verbals from between the December and February signing period with some of those players pulled from other schools.
So the big question that I have is whether or not it forces schools like USC to get more aggressive early in the process or do they continue to wait until the last month or two to get do the balance of their damage. For those kids that are wanting to go all the way to NSD, it will likely work. But it may keep them from being able to flip a handful of guys each year ... and that could eventually add up for them and force them to take more of their first wave of guys that they eventually tell to move on. -
Disagree completely. It's the law of expanding time, something takes as long to complete as you allow for it. SC waits because they can. Pushing the deadline up six weeks just means they'll start pushing for those flips six weeks earlier. I don't see this impacting their final classes much, if at all.Tequilla said:
I'm guessing more than you think ...dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
It's hard to find the data on now, but I'm thinking that at least 8-10 of USC's class they got verbals from between the December and February signing period with some of those players pulled from other schools.
So the big question that I have is whether or not it forces schools like USC to get more aggressive early in the process or do they continue to wait until the last month or two to get do the balance of their damage. For those kids that are wanting to go all the way to NSD, it will likely work. But it may keep them from being able to flip a handful of guys each year ... and that could eventually add up for them and force them to take more of their first wave of guys that they eventually tell to move on. -
True. But they have less time to push during the actual season than they do in January so it's not exactly the samednc said:
Disagree completely. It's the law of expanding time, something takes as long to complete as you allow for it. SC waits because they can. Pushing the deadline up six weeks just means they'll start pushing for those flips six weeks earlier. I don't see this impacting their final classes much, if at all.Tequilla said:
I'm guessing more than you think ...dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
It's hard to find the data on now, but I'm thinking that at least 8-10 of USC's class they got verbals from between the December and February signing period with some of those players pulled from other schools.
So the big question that I have is whether or not it forces schools like USC to get more aggressive early in the process or do they continue to wait until the last month or two to get do the balance of their damage. For those kids that are wanting to go all the way to NSD, it will likely work. But it may keep them from being able to flip a handful of guys each year ... and that could eventually add up for them and force them to take more of their first wave of guys that they eventually tell to move on. -
Because Nansen spends so much time and effort coaching?dhdawg said:
True. But they have less time to push during the actual season than they do in January so it's not exactly the samednc said:
Disagree completely. It's the law of expanding time, something takes as long to complete as you allow for it. SC waits because they can. Pushing the deadline up six weeks just means they'll start pushing for those flips six weeks earlier. I don't see this impacting their final classes much, if at all.Tequilla said:
I'm guessing more than you think ...dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
It's hard to find the data on now, but I'm thinking that at least 8-10 of USC's class they got verbals from between the December and February signing period with some of those players pulled from other schools.
So the big question that I have is whether or not it forces schools like USC to get more aggressive early in the process or do they continue to wait until the last month or two to get do the balance of their damage. For those kids that are wanting to go all the way to NSD, it will likely work. But it may keep them from being able to flip a handful of guys each year ... and that could eventually add up for them and force them to take more of their first wave of guys that they eventually tell to move on.
If december is like a dead period leading up to signing day then maybe but that seems massively unlikely. -
This was the exact point that I was going to make ...dhdawg said:
True. But they have less time to push during the actual season than they do in January so it's not exactly the samednc said:
Disagree completely. It's the law of expanding time, something takes as long to complete as you allow for it. SC waits because they can. Pushing the deadline up six weeks just means they'll start pushing for those flips six weeks earlier. I don't see this impacting their final classes much, if at all.Tequilla said:
I'm guessing more than you think ...dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
It's hard to find the data on now, but I'm thinking that at least 8-10 of USC's class they got verbals from between the December and February signing period with some of those players pulled from other schools.
So the big question that I have is whether or not it forces schools like USC to get more aggressive early in the process or do they continue to wait until the last month or two to get do the balance of their damage. For those kids that are wanting to go all the way to NSD, it will likely work. But it may keep them from being able to flip a handful of guys each year ... and that could eventually add up for them and force them to take more of their first wave of guys that they eventually tell to move on.
Most of the teams that are going to be negatively impacted the most are going to be those teams that are playing for something meaningful into late November and early December.
USC relies on getting kids on campus in January to really throw all of their efforts on ...
In this class, perhaps they would have been able to flip Marlon and get him to sign prior to the early signing period with the lies that Nansen came up with. I'm not sure though. Given the immigration issue, this wouldn't have even started until Trump won (guarantee you that nobody was thinking that this was realistic back in October in California). From that point forward, USC would have had one month to get this plan set in motion and executed. Doable but not entirely sure. On top of that, Tui wouldn't have been at the Army game yet and formed the relationship with Jay Tufele at that point making the move to SC more palpable. Would SC have been able to get Marlon down in time for an official? Maybe. And, even if they would have flipped him, it would have given UW 2 months to find a good secondary option versus the two weeks that they had. -
That's an excellent poont.Tequilla said:
This was the exact point that I was going to make ...dhdawg said:
True. But they have less time to push during the actual season than they do in January so it's not exactly the samednc said:
Disagree completely. It's the law of expanding time, something takes as long to complete as you allow for it. SC waits because they can. Pushing the deadline up six weeks just means they'll start pushing for those flips six weeks earlier. I don't see this impacting their final classes much, if at all.Tequilla said:
I'm guessing more than you think ...dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
It's hard to find the data on now, but I'm thinking that at least 8-10 of USC's class they got verbals from between the December and February signing period with some of those players pulled from other schools.
So the big question that I have is whether or not it forces schools like USC to get more aggressive early in the process or do they continue to wait until the last month or two to get do the balance of their damage. For those kids that are wanting to go all the way to NSD, it will likely work. But it may keep them from being able to flip a handful of guys each year ... and that could eventually add up for them and force them to take more of their first wave of guys that they eventually tell to move on.
Most of the teams that are going to be negatively impacted the most are going to be those teams that are playing for something meaningful into late November and early December.
USC relies on getting kids on campus in January to really throw all of their efforts on ...
In this class, perhaps they would have been able to flip Marlon and get him to sign prior to the early signing period with the lies that Nansen came up with. I'm not sure though. Given the immigration issue, this wouldn't have even started until Trump won (guarantee you that nobody was thinking that this was realistic back in October in California). From that point forward, USC would have had one month to get this plan set in motion and executed. Doable but not entirely sure. On top of that, Tui wouldn't have been at the Army game yet and formed the relationship with Jay Tufele at that point making the move to SC more palpable. Would SC have been able to get Marlon down in time for an official? Maybe. And, even if they would have flipped him, it would have given UW 2 months to find a good secondary option versus the two weeks that they had.
I think the Marlon thing is a massive outlier in virtually every way. I wouldn't build too much of a future projection based off of it. -
Does it show the actual breakdown of who rated them what or just an overall average?BlowItUp said:247 composite does that shit for you
-
Exactly, for us, I don't think it will in any way hurt us. I would expect that at least 75% of the class that we end up signing will be guys that have been verbals to us for a long period of time.dnc said:
That's an excellent poont.Tequilla said:
This was the exact point that I was going to make ...dhdawg said:
True. But they have less time to push during the actual season than they do in January so it's not exactly the samednc said:
Disagree completely. It's the law of expanding time, something takes as long to complete as you allow for it. SC waits because they can. Pushing the deadline up six weeks just means they'll start pushing for those flips six weeks earlier. I don't see this impacting their final classes much, if at all.Tequilla said:
I'm guessing more than you think ...dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
It's hard to find the data on now, but I'm thinking that at least 8-10 of USC's class they got verbals from between the December and February signing period with some of those players pulled from other schools.
So the big question that I have is whether or not it forces schools like USC to get more aggressive early in the process or do they continue to wait until the last month or two to get do the balance of their damage. For those kids that are wanting to go all the way to NSD, it will likely work. But it may keep them from being able to flip a handful of guys each year ... and that could eventually add up for them and force them to take more of their first wave of guys that they eventually tell to move on.
Most of the teams that are going to be negatively impacted the most are going to be those teams that are playing for something meaningful into late November and early December.
USC relies on getting kids on campus in January to really throw all of their efforts on ...
In this class, perhaps they would have been able to flip Marlon and get him to sign prior to the early signing period with the lies that Nansen came up with. I'm not sure though. Given the immigration issue, this wouldn't have even started until Trump won (guarantee you that nobody was thinking that this was realistic back in October in California). From that point forward, USC would have had one month to get this plan set in motion and executed. Doable but not entirely sure. On top of that, Tui wouldn't have been at the Army game yet and formed the relationship with Jay Tufele at that point making the move to SC more palpable. Would SC have been able to get Marlon down in time for an official? Maybe. And, even if they would have flipped him, it would have given UW 2 months to find a good secondary option versus the two weeks that they had.
I think the Marlon thing is a massive outlier in virtually every way. I wouldn't build too much of a future projection based off of it.
Where it may see some change in our process is when do you cut bait on a player and move on to your next level guy? For example, in this class, at what point should we have moved on from Fozzy knowing we weren't going to get him? With an early signing period, does Kirkland sign early with UCLA? Do we have to offer him earlier to ensure that we get him earlier?
The other question that I have is what happens to anybody that you have as a verbal prior to the early signing period that doesn't sign during the early period ... that's got to be a bit of a red flag right? -
With Peterman's verbal policy I'd imagine they move on immediately except in the case they absolutely LOVE the kid (i.e. Ty Jones). I'm guessing a pre-early signing period verbal to UW will now mean "I'm committed to signing in December".Tequilla said:
Exactly, for us, I don't think it will in any way hurt us. I would expect that at least 75% of the class that we end up signing will be guys that have been verbals to us for a long period of time.dnc said:
That's an excellent poont.Tequilla said:
This was the exact point that I was going to make ...dhdawg said:
True. But they have less time to push during the actual season than they do in January so it's not exactly the samednc said:
Disagree completely. It's the law of expanding time, something takes as long to complete as you allow for it. SC waits because they can. Pushing the deadline up six weeks just means they'll start pushing for those flips six weeks earlier. I don't see this impacting their final classes much, if at all.Tequilla said:
I'm guessing more than you think ...dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
It's hard to find the data on now, but I'm thinking that at least 8-10 of USC's class they got verbals from between the December and February signing period with some of those players pulled from other schools.
So the big question that I have is whether or not it forces schools like USC to get more aggressive early in the process or do they continue to wait until the last month or two to get do the balance of their damage. For those kids that are wanting to go all the way to NSD, it will likely work. But it may keep them from being able to flip a handful of guys each year ... and that could eventually add up for them and force them to take more of their first wave of guys that they eventually tell to move on.
Most of the teams that are going to be negatively impacted the most are going to be those teams that are playing for something meaningful into late November and early December.
USC relies on getting kids on campus in January to really throw all of their efforts on ...
In this class, perhaps they would have been able to flip Marlon and get him to sign prior to the early signing period with the lies that Nansen came up with. I'm not sure though. Given the immigration issue, this wouldn't have even started until Trump won (guarantee you that nobody was thinking that this was realistic back in October in California). From that point forward, USC would have had one month to get this plan set in motion and executed. Doable but not entirely sure. On top of that, Tui wouldn't have been at the Army game yet and formed the relationship with Jay Tufele at that point making the move to SC more palpable. Would SC have been able to get Marlon down in time for an official? Maybe. And, even if they would have flipped him, it would have given UW 2 months to find a good secondary option versus the two weeks that they had.
I think the Marlon thing is a massive outlier in virtually every way. I wouldn't build too much of a future projection based off of it.
Where it may see some change in our process is when do you cut bait on a player and move on to your next level guy? For example, in this class, at what point should we have moved on from Fozzy knowing we weren't going to get him? With an early signing period, does Kirkland sign early with UCLA? Do we have to offer him earlier to ensure that we get him earlier?
The other question that I have is what happens to anybody that you have as a verbal prior to the early signing period that doesn't sign during the early period ... that's got to be a bit of a red flag right? -
I still don't understand how this will work. Are they going to keep the date the same for early entrants for the NFL draft? Because if someone starts telling their coach they're likely entering and then changes their mind, it leads to a new set of problems. I also don't think it would be fair to move up that deadline to enter the draft when some colleges are still practicing for playoffs and bowl games and such.dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
-
Most coaches know who is leaving and who isn't ... there's a reason most guys announce pretty much the day after or whatnot from the end of their season.FKA_Mousecop said:
I still don't understand how this will work. Are they going to keep the date the same for early entrants for the NFL draft? Because if someone starts telling their coach they're likely entering and then changes their mind, it leads to a new set of problems. I also don't think it would be fair to move up that deadline to enter the draft when some colleges are still practicing for playoffs and bowl games and such.dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
I expect that the December-February period will still be tied to evaluating and securing those recruits that hit during their Senior seasons that still need to come to campus, etc. For example, the Cole Norgaard type of recruits.
I would imagine that we'll always keep at least a handful of spots available to evaluate some of those players as well as for some of the elite targets that we've missed on by December.
The bigger issue that I see will be for guys like Joe Tryon who may be tied to a mid-level school hoping for a bigger offer from a school like Washington who may not sign early and allow the process to still play out.
There are probably only 15-20 schools that are probably in a position where the guys that they have prior to December are guys that are going to 100% want to jump on board because they've already had their time to figure out what they wanted and the schools that they were considering likely all wanted them. -
I know that for the most part they have a general idea, but it seems like with Vea it was still up in the air. I guess a Dec-Feb recruit could still be an option for a late decision like that. I have the feeling those recruits like Norgaard will feel pressured to sign with a lesser school (like Nevada) in December too, because they might be worried that they won't have a spot at all if the college in question doesn't decide to offer them.Tequilla said:
Most coaches know who is leaving and who isn't ... there's a reason most guys announce pretty much the day after or whatnot from the end of their season.FKA_Mousecop said:
I still don't understand how this will work. Are they going to keep the date the same for early entrants for the NFL draft? Because if someone starts telling their coach they're likely entering and then changes their mind, it leads to a new set of problems. I also don't think it would be fair to move up that deadline to enter the draft when some colleges are still practicing for playoffs and bowl games and such.dnc said:
Just looked it up, three days in mid-December. Probably doesn't alter things that much.Tequilla said:There was talk of one during the Summer that got almost universally shot down
I expect that the December-February period will still be tied to evaluating and securing those recruits that hit during their Senior seasons that still need to come to campus, etc. For example, the Cole Norgaard type of recruits.
I would imagine that we'll always keep at least a handful of spots available to evaluate some of those players as well as for some of the elite targets that we've missed on by December.
-
Schools like Nevada are the ones that the early signing period really won't change the situation for them on. Norgaard is a P5 level player that ends up in a non-P5 school because he falls through the cracks. Programs like Nevada advance up the MWC ladder by getting as many of those guys as possible. I can't imagine that they have the ability to go to a player like that and say sign or else. On the other hand, Norgaard if he truly believes that he's a P5 player has no reason to sign early and hold out unless he's dead set on going to the school like Nevada.
As for Vea, there will always be a handful of guys that you could see go either way. Generally speaking, my thoughts are that you recruit as if the player is leaving, communicate that to the +1 that you are recruiting letting them know the situation, and then if the player leaves you execute and accept the verbal. -
I guess what could happen in a similar situation is that for someone like Norgaard, they don't sign at the initial date, but keep contact with a school like Nevada in case they don't end up getting a better offer. I just feel there's a lot of grey area in it.Tequilla said:Schools like Nevada are the ones that the early signing period really won't change the situation for them on. Norgaard is a P5 level player that ends up in a non-P5 school because he falls through the cracks. Programs like Nevada advance up the MWC ladder by getting as many of those guys as possible. I can't imagine that they have the ability to go to a player like that and say sign or else. On the other hand, Norgaard if he truly believes that he's a P5 player has no reason to sign early and hold out unless he's dead set on going to the school like Nevada.
As for Vea, there will always be a handful of guys that you could see go either way. Generally speaking, my thoughts are that you recruit as if the player is leaving, communicate that to the +1 that you are recruiting letting them know the situation, and then if the player leaves you execute and accept the verbal. -
Is the early signing period a done deal?
-
Not quite yet, implemented this coming December if it passes in April. Also, if passed in April, the 10th assistant coach could be a done deal too.CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:Is the early signing period a done deal?
-
10th assistant may be a bigger deal for us ... Strausser help neededCokeGreaterThanPepsi said:
Not quite yet, implemented this coming December if it passes in April. Also, if passed in April, the 10th assistant coach could be a done deal too.CFetters_Nacho_Lover said:Is the early signing period a done deal?
