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.

Washington vs Oregon recruiting dick measuring contest

1235

Comments

  • Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.

    The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.

    With that out of the way:




    Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.

    Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.

    Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).

    So Washington just has shitty coaching? Got it, Thanks!
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,251

    Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.

    The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.

    With that out of the way:




    Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.

    Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.

    Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).

    Apparently, Cam Cleeland thinks Oregon can't tell their story without Washington. They just can't.

    Hmm hmm.
  • haiehaie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 21,900 Swaye's Wigwam

    Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.

    The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.

    With that out of the way:




    Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.

    Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.

    Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).

    Apparently, Cam Cleeland thinks Oregon can't tell their story without Washington. They just can't.

    Hmm hmm.
    Sounds like you care about what some tight end who you don't remember thinks about Oregon...
  • coronabruincoronabruin Member Posts: 1,490
    But why is the recruiting board worthy of relentless mockery and scorn?

    #Iwasright
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,251
    haie said:

    Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.

    The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.

    With that out of the way:




    Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.

    Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.

    Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).

    Apparently, Cam Cleeland thinks Oregon can't tell their story without Washington. They just can't.

    Hmm hmm.
    Sounds like you care about what some tight end who you don't remember thinks about Oregon...
    I mock and laff at things about which I care and about which I don't care.

    My laffing and mocking does not discriminate.

    I laffed at a guy in a bar trying to pick up on woman who was 5 leagues out of his reach. I don't care about him either.

    I guess you could say I like to have a good time.
  • haiehaie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 21,900 Swaye's Wigwam

    haie said:

    Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.

    The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.

    With that out of the way:




    Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.

    Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.

    Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).

    Apparently, Cam Cleeland thinks Oregon can't tell their story without Washington. They just can't.

    Hmm hmm.
    Sounds like you care about what some tight end who you don't remember thinks about Oregon...
    I mock and laff at things about which I care and about which I don't care.

    My laffing and mocking does not discriminate.

    I laffed at a guy in a bar trying to pick up on woman who was 5 leagues out of his reach. I don't care about him either.

    I guess you could say I like to have a good time.
    I know.

    It's why you're entertaining.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,251
    edited February 2020
    haie said:

    haie said:

    Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.

    The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.

    With that out of the way:




    Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.

    Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.

    Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).

    Apparently, Cam Cleeland thinks Oregon can't tell their story without Washington. They just can't.

    Hmm hmm.
    Sounds like you care about what some tight end who you don't remember thinks about Oregon...
    I mock and laff at things about which I care and about which I don't care.

    My laffing and mocking does not discriminate.

    I laffed at a guy in a bar trying to pick up on woman who was 5 leagues out of his reach. I don't care about him either.

    I guess you could say I like to have a good time.
    I know.

    It's why you're entertaining.

  • coronabruincoronabruin Member Posts: 1,490
    Kurt Cobain is still a fag who made shitty music and didn’t bang hawt models. Typical Seattle.
  • creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 23,251

    Kurt Cobain is still a fag who made shitty music and didn’t bang hawt models. Typical Seattle.

    Stop following me J. It's creepy.


  • justthrowitinthebagjustthrowitinthebag Member Posts: 150

    Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.

    The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.

    With that out of the way:




    Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.

    Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.

    Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).

    All very true. But the advantage Oregon has is signing those ELITE 5-star difference makers at the top. Kayvon Thibs, Jonathan Flowe, Penei Sewell, etc...maybe Savell, Jalen, etc. become that, but right now I think those 5 star elite guys Oregon gets closes the small gap.
  • IPukeOregonGrellowIPukeOregonGrellow Member Posts: 2,183

    Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.

    The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.

    With that out of the way:




    Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.

    Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.

    Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).

    All very true. But the advantage Oregon has is signing those ELITE 5-star difference makers at the top. Kayvon Thibs, Jonathan Flowe, Penei Sewell, etc...maybe Savell, Jalen, etc. become that, but right now I think those 5 star elite guys Oregon gets closes the small gap.
    I think it’s going to be funny in 2021 when Crystalball signs all four stars and Worshington has fewer blue chips but moor five-stars.
  • FenwickFenwick Member Posts: 1,174
    A ton of wishful thinking here by you dawgs.
  • FireCohenFireCohen Member Posts: 21,823
    Who won the rose bowl
Sign In or Register to comment.