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

On that Clemson path

135

Comments

  • Canadawg
    Canadawg Member Posts: 5,905
    sonics1993 said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    sonics1993 said:

    Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.

    There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.
    For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • sonics1993
    sonics1993 Member Posts: 1,460
    Canadawg said:

    sonics1993 said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    sonics1993 said:

    Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.

    There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.
    For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.

    Great, a day before the early signing day that had a top ten class. By February this class will be in the mid to late teens.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tequilla
    Tequilla Member Posts: 20,223
    This thread is fucking stupid ... and the usual cast of idiots are nowhere to be found

    GTFO with this settling excise making BS

    This is a strong class in a number of ways ...

    UW will never out recruit the true blue bloods ... shitty metric to measure against

    The key is can we get enough talent and then put the pieces together in a way that the sum is maximized

    Sick and tired of loser mindsets
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tequilla
    Tequilla Member Posts: 20,223
    I take recruiting ranking with a grain of salt ... there’s a bare minimum that you need to be at the table

    After that, it’s all about what you do when you get them on campus

    We are entering the territory you need ... you don’t play 85 players per game

    We have never landed a class at the top tier nationally ... expecting us to do so as a sign of success is bound for disappointment. Aspirational goal ... absolutely.

    The discussion in this thread is Top 10 ... it’s completely arbitrary. But when you separate and normalize the gaps in this range with the next handful of teams on either side what you find is comparable results. In that light ... there’s enough there to compete at the highest levels,


    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • sonics1993
    sonics1993 Member Posts: 1,460
    edited December 2019
    Canadawg said:

    sonics1993 said:

    Canadawg said:

    sonics1993 said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    sonics1993 said:

    Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.

    There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.
    For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.

    Great, a day before the early signing day that had a top ten class. By February this class will be in the mid to late teens.
    You may be right but saying they need a perfect class to get top 10 is a stretch. If they landed Ringo it would probably be there. Not far off
    That's true but you have to remember that USC is dead right now in terms of recruiting. That's only going to last one more year and once they get rid of Clay, they will wake up and start getting the majority of the talent out west. That's when recruiting will get real tough.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Tequilla
    Tequilla Member Posts: 20,223
    Canadawg said:

    sonics1993 said:

    Canadawg said:

    sonics1993 said:

    RoadDawg55 said:

    sonics1993 said:

    Compare the talent in the south to the west, that's why we will never be Clemson.

    There is no reason we can’t have top 10 classes, but there are so many more players to pull in the South than the West Coast. It’s not an excuse, it’s a reality.
    For UW to have a top 10 class they need to have the best instate class ever and they need to land every single one of them along with hitting most of there other targets. In the south, you can miss a lot more since theres so much talent. Plus USC needs to be terrible because if USC is on then you can forget about it.

    Great, a day before the early signing day that had a top ten class. By February this class will be in the mid to late teens.
    You may be right but saying they need a perfect class to get top 10 is a stretch. If they landed Ringo it would probably be there. Not far off
    And on top of that, what’s the right metric to measure against? Points? Avg rating? Avg rating excluding kickers?

    It’s just not something to get worked up about
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dtd
    dtd Member Posts: 5,594 Standard Supporter
    Tequilla said:

    This thread is fucking stupid ... and the usual cast of idiots are nowhere to be found

    Um...irony alert?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Beno4Life
    Beno4Life Member Posts: 533
    Tequilla said:

    I take recruiting ranking with a grain of salt ... there’s a bare minimum that you need to be at the table

    After that, it’s all about what you do when you get them on campus

    We are entering the territory you need ... you don’t play 85 players per game

    We have never landed a class at the top tier nationally ... expecting us to do so as a sign of success is bound for disappointment. Aspirational goal ... absolutely.

    The discussion in this thread is Top 10 ... it’s completely arbitrary. But when you separate and normalize the gaps in this range with the next handful of teams on either side what you find is comparable results. In that light ... there’s enough there to compete at the highest levels,


    I'm sorry, but huh? I have no idea what in the hell you're trying to communicate through words, which reminds me of Fatters' writing style. Please clarify.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter