Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Deserves own thread - the emerging SEC value proposition for top West Coast players
DoubleJDawg
Member Posts: 627
Pulling this out of the Toots thread -- I think @RaceBannon is right as usual: the combination of a big boy conference, available bag men and accessibility to THE PORTAL is increasing the attractiveness for top end kids to try out the SEC AND potentially, allegedly get paid.
I don't know if this is an intentional strategy on the part of SEC schools, but it seems like they could easily be telling (and may be telling) West Coast kids:
1) You should come play big boy football and you'll play early (sure.gif on the second part)
2) If you get homesick, of course we won't stand in the way of you transferring to schools that are closer to home (non-binding commitment, may change if you're actually good)
3) Money? We do not do pay-for-play (possibly, allegedly money might make its way to your father/coach/barber/etc.)
That's a pretty compelling value proposition! Try the SEC and come back home if it doesn't work out -- and maybe (allegedly) you get paid, too. Yeah, it *could* fuck up your long-term development and NFL prospects, but you'd still have 4 to play 4 if you left after one season, and you can improve a lot in 3-4 seasons if you land in the many solid to good programs who will take you no questions asked even after a year in the SEC meatgrinder.
What's our counter to that? Judging from the discussion in the To'oto'o thread, seems we could:
1) Drop any kid who appears caught up in the above value proposition and use the effort elsewhere (though please not Texas)
2) Don't drop anyone and just take it as a "cost of doing business" that we'll lose a small number of kids each year to the above value prop
3) Don't drop anyone, know you'll lose some kids, and come back around on them when they show up in the PORTAL (in other words, develop a PORTAL strategy as other poasters have noted in other threads)
Is this SEC thing a mirage, or is it going to become a more compelling option to West Coast kids in coming seasons? (especially as more West Coast players have success out there) What should Peterman do, and what will he do?
I don't know if this is an intentional strategy on the part of SEC schools, but it seems like they could easily be telling (and may be telling) West Coast kids:
1) You should come play big boy football and you'll play early (sure.gif on the second part)
2) If you get homesick, of course we won't stand in the way of you transferring to schools that are closer to home (non-binding commitment, may change if you're actually good)
3) Money? We do not do pay-for-play (possibly, allegedly money might make its way to your father/coach/barber/etc.)
That's a pretty compelling value proposition! Try the SEC and come back home if it doesn't work out -- and maybe (allegedly) you get paid, too. Yeah, it *could* fuck up your long-term development and NFL prospects, but you'd still have 4 to play 4 if you left after one season, and you can improve a lot in 3-4 seasons if you land in the many solid to good programs who will take you no questions asked even after a year in the SEC meatgrinder.
What's our counter to that? Judging from the discussion in the To'oto'o thread, seems we could:
1) Drop any kid who appears caught up in the above value proposition and use the effort elsewhere (though please not Texas)
2) Don't drop anyone and just take it as a "cost of doing business" that we'll lose a small number of kids each year to the above value prop
3) Don't drop anyone, know you'll lose some kids, and come back around on them when they show up in the PORTAL (in other words, develop a PORTAL strategy as other poasters have noted in other threads)
Is this SEC thing a mirage, or is it going to become a more compelling option to West Coast kids in coming seasons? (especially as more West Coast players have success out there) What should Peterman do, and what will he do?
Comments
that the only way someone else beats you out is by illegal means is exactly what losers do. Winners control what they can control and don't waste time on external bullshit. Blaming refs when you lose and blaming bagmen when you don't get a recruit is a waste of time and energy. If Petersen wants to get better classes then get better recruiters that sell your message better. He gets top 15 classes with deadwood on his staff. If he ever decides to cut the deadwood then maybe we'll have a truly exciting late signing day to look forward to.
I don't think anyone disagrees Peterman needs to upgrade the recruiting capabilities of his staff. Maybe as you say that's all that it will take to close players like Kaho, To'oto'o, etc.. More and more kids overall are leaving the West, though, spurning even the recruiting geniuses with a swaggier brand at Oregon, so doesn't seem like it's completely a recruiter capability thing.
Maybe the "try before you buy" sort of thing isn't truly front of mind or important currently (and certainly isn't what every recruit would go for), but it certainly could evolve into one if the SEC/Clemson recruiters were to really push it as a direct selling point. As more and more SEC players descend into the PORTAL after a year or two and then land back in the Pac (and hey, we have the most prominent example of this model in Eason!), the easier it's going to be to convince recruits they can take a low-risk shot at a bigger stage and fall back to their second or third choice in the West/Pac if needed. This is even before you account for bag men in the process, which may or may not exist or be involved depending on what you believe.
But I guess "coffee is for closers," right? As a UW recruiter/salesman, what would be the best counterargument against this "fallback" idea in your view?
Here is how the Top-10 recruits in California have played out this decade:
Here is how the Top-50 have gone:
Top-10:
Top-50:
and the Lubick no show this season is a direct reflection on both Boner and Petersen. I'm still not convinced Pete is 100% into recruiting. The years of him achieving at Boise with lesser talent are tough impressions to forget. Edit: I was in no way calling you personally a loser, just that way of thinking.
Only one conference got consistently shat on yesterday.
Edit: God damn poof. It was a tweet counting number of P5 schools in top 25 recruiting per conference. SEC with a shit ton. Big10 had 5 schools. Pac12 was 3rd with 4 schools. ACC/Big12 has 2 schools each.
Played as a true freshman, had a very good sophomore year, fell off a bit as a junior, declared for NFL draft, went undrafted.