7th Annual Jesse Callier Commemorative Post-Collegiate Career Impact Ranking Initiative
Comments
-
2014 was an amazing class and you are probably right. That said, it's very frustrating when you realize that some of the elite guys in that class would not get a sniff in later years. And we had to read all about us leveling up and about the blue chip ratio when the reality is most of our blue chips were low end ones.FremontTroll said:
This is a myth.theknowledge said:That was, for the most part, the worst JCCPCCIRI I have done yet. I felt like I needed to turn the test over and see if I missed some questions. You should of added Osborn and Spiker so I could have added another one star and another two star. The elite evaluation skills the staff earned through the first few classes has taken a direct hit with the last two surveys IMHO. Outside of Molden and Taylor this survey featured a lot of JAGS and non starters. Yuck.
CP's first class was amazing. After that his classes were all more pedestrian.
I've been saying it for years but I will say it again- everybody discounts how lucky that 2014 class was especially considering CP put it together in just two months from scratch.
CP never had a class like that at Boise and was unlikely to have another class like that again at UW if he had stayed for another 20 years (unless we actually became Clemson of the West.)
Its just too bad he never found a QB to pair with Gaskin, those TEs, and that defense.
We have had some good teams (2016-2018) but have lacked an elite player or two. You sub Browning with a stud QB and we are contending for natties. Another 1st or 2nd round OL would have been huge. If Pete's offensive scheme wasn't retarded, that would have helped too. Since I've been following UW recruiting (early 2000's), we have typically recruited the same. There have been some dud classes, but Gilby, Ty, Sark, and Pete all had low end top 25 classes at some point. -
We had a chance with Petersen to see his guys play. The Baird Imperative
8 and 5 -
All of the 2014 guys would have been takes in 2015 and 2016. We weren't beating Oregon or Stanford or USC or Notre Dame or even UCLA for any out of state recruits in those cycles.RoadDawg55 said:
2014 was an amazing class and you are probably right. That said, it's very frustrating when you realize that some of the elite guys in that class would not get a sniff in later years. And we had to read all about us leveling up and about the blue chip ratio when the reality is most of our blue chips were low end ones.FremontTroll said:
This is a myth.theknowledge said:That was, for the most part, the worst JCCPCCIRI I have done yet. I felt like I needed to turn the test over and see if I missed some questions. You should of added Osborn and Spiker so I could have added another one star and another two star. The elite evaluation skills the staff earned through the first few classes has taken a direct hit with the last two surveys IMHO. Outside of Molden and Taylor this survey featured a lot of JAGS and non starters. Yuck.
CP's first class was amazing. After that his classes were all more pedestrian.
I've been saying it for years but I will say it again- everybody discounts how lucky that 2014 class was especially considering CP put it together in just two months from scratch.
CP never had a class like that at Boise and was unlikely to have another class like that again at UW if he had stayed for another 20 years (unless we actually became Clemson of the West.)
Its just too bad he never found a QB to pair with Gaskin, those TEs, and that defense.
We have had some good teams (2016-2018) but have lacked an elite player or two. You sub Browning with a stud QB and we are contending for natties. Another 1st or 2nd round OL would have been huge. If Pete's offensive scheme wasn't retarded, that would have helped too. Since I've been following UW recruiting (early 2000's), we have typically recruited the same. There have been some dud classes, but Gilby, Ty, Sark, and Pete all had low end top 25 classes at some point.
The "leveling up" didn't start until 2017 and then really 2018 and 2019 we were up against all national programs or USC/Stanford/Oregon/UCLA for every recruit.
So yeah- we might not have taken Gaines, Dissly, Pettis or Sample those last few years...but we'd already seen that we needed to "level up" to get back to the playoffs. We couldn't count on all those guys falling in our laps again like they did in 2014. -
-
Sure
-
Why do you hate me?Woof said:Poll is out via your HCH inbox. I'll keep it open for a couple days, so if you still want to participate, let me know.
-
Sorry, I wrote down bleached anus as a reminder, and just thought it was just that time of the month when I needed to bleach my anus. You have it now.BleachedAnusDawg said:
Why do you hate me?Woof said:Poll is out via your HCH inbox. I'll keep it open for a couple days, so if you still want to participate, let me know.
-
I'm sure probably none of you care, but I'm going to post my "real" scores I would have put if I could have been more precise (with decimals and comments):
Bronson: 2.3 - He contributed, he started-ish for about a year, but was pretty "meh" at best. Should have been a depth filler, but Levi's leaving and Tuli's injury (or COVID) forced Bronson into more playing time than he merited.
Chin: 1.9 - he scored a couple touchdowns, but just didn't possess the "it" factor that would give any quarterback that worked with him confidence to pass to him on a regular basis. That said, we all know his impact here on HH has been higher than most.
Garbers: 0.2 - Supposedly he competed in the fall camp. That's about all we got. Maybe he'll tear it up at UCLA. Maybe he'll convert to WR there. Who knows. Who cares. -.8 from the 1 because he negatively affected our QB depth.
Ty Jones: 2.7 - He was better than Lenius/Dickey. He should have been much better but for injuries and drops. Odd that he's moving on, but I don't think we'll miss him much.
McKinney: 2.1 - His Rose Bowl performance was painful to watch. He never really stood out otherwise. Telling that Asa Turner and others passed him on the depth chart. He did play, he did fill depth, he wasn't Manu-levels of bad most of the time, but was just "meh".
Molden: 4.5 - Among the best DBs we've had, even when he was a freshman. Has a knack for being at the right place at the right time, but doesn't "wow" you with his speed. Not as big a hitter as Byron Murphy, not as visibly "maximum effort" as Myles Bryant, but phenomenal technique, instinct, and "football smarts". He will definitely be missed (unless Kyler Gordon ends up better).
Norgaard: 1.3 - Heard about him from time to time, considering Harris getting dinged up from time to time at center. Clearly not sufficient skill/talent, as he was easily surpassed by Watty and Mele. That said, he was "valuable depth", so not a flat 1.
Onwuzurike: 3.3 - I really wanted him to be a 4, and he probably would have, if he'd played this last season. That said, despite his great play in 2019, he just didn't have enough playing time or enough games to merit a 4 from me. Like Molden, he'll definitely be missed, but less so than if he'd played in 2020.
Pa'ama: 1 - No playing time, and left the team with little notice. Hope his life turns out ok, but his impact on the team was a net zero.
Jacob Sirmon: 1.8 - His aborted transfer-portaling summer of 2019 left a bad taste in my mouth. I wanted to see him do something good, but even in garbage time, he just felt awkward, unprepared, and unimpressive. Maybe he'll have better luck elsewhere. I don't count his leaving to be as negative as Garbers, because what I saw just didn't give me confidence that he was a particularly valuable backup.
Soderburg: .8 - He has been among the most consistently reviled Huskies on HH, and I don't think I've ever really dug down to the true story of why. That said, he had a scholarship and didn't ever really contribute, thus taking away from the possibility of us having another, potentially helpful player on the roster. So, -.2 points
Taylor: 3.2 - Solid contributor, physical specimen, decent techniques, but never really shone. Maybe he'll be able to improve at the next level. I don't think we'll miss him very much; we have a lot of great DBs still waiting in the wings (so long as the new DB coach doesn't screw it up...)
Thompson: 1 - Heard all fall how he was competing and neck-and-neck with the other QBs. He never made it onto the field. No idea what kind of depth he would have provided. At the same time, I'm not disappointed he's moving on.
Tryon: 2.8 - He flashed in 2019, but was inconsistent. I would have loved to have seen him in 2020, but don't blame him for opting out. That said, his lack of playing impacted the score I gave him. I like the guy, I really liked his development curve at the UW, but I just didn't see enough. He'll be missed, but not as much as Levi and Molden. With ZTF, Latu, Smalls, and others, we've got surprising depth at the position. I hope Tryon makes it at the next level.
Yary: .8 - Had Otton left, Yary's score would have been worse. Thanks to Otton's return, we won't miss Yary in 2021. That said, anytime a player causes drama, it's a net negative for the program. Hence the -.2
-
Chinvalid rating. Chin is HH 5 star. Dude left a massive impact on HHBCoveysLifeInsPolicy said:I'm sure probably none of you care, but I'm going to post my "real" scores I would have put if I could have been more precise (with decimals and comments):
Bronson: 2.3 - He contributed, he started-ish for about a year, but was pretty "meh" at best. Should have been a depth filler, but Levi's leaving and Tuli's injury (or COVID) forced Bronson into more playing time than he merited.
Chin: 1.9 - he scored a couple touchdowns, but just didn't possess the "it" factor that would give any quarterback that worked with him confidence to pass to him on a regular basis. That said, we all know his impact here on HH has been higher than most.
Garbers: 0.2 - Supposedly he competed in the fall camp. That's about all we got. Maybe he'll tear it up at UCLA. Maybe he'll convert to WR there. Who knows. Who cares. -.8 from the 1 because he negatively affected our QB depth.
Ty Jones: 2.7 - He was better than Lenius/Dickey. He should have been much better but for injuries and drops. Odd that he's moving on, but I don't think we'll miss him much.
McKinney: 2.1 - His Rose Bowl performance was painful to watch. He never really stood out otherwise. Telling that Asa Turner and others passed him on the depth chart. He did play, he did fill depth, he wasn't Manu-levels of bad most of the time, but was just "meh".
Molden: 4.5 - Among the best DBs we've had, even when he was a freshman. Has a knack for being at the right place at the right time, but doesn't "wow" you with his speed. Not as big a hitter as Byron Murphy, not as visibly "maximum effort" as Myles Bryant, but phenomenal technique, instinct, and "football smarts". He will definitely be missed (unless Kyler Gordon ends up better).
Norgaard: 1.3 - Heard about him from time to time, considering Harris getting dinged up from time to time at center. Clearly not sufficient skill/talent, as he was easily surpassed by Watty and Mele. That said, he was "valuable depth", so not a flat 1.
Onwuzurike: 3.3 - I really wanted him to be a 4, and he probably would have, if he'd played this last season. That said, despite his great play in 2019, he just didn't have enough playing time or enough games to merit a 4 from me. Like Molden, he'll definitely be missed, but less so than if he'd played in 2020.
Pa'ama: 1 - No playing time, and left the team with little notice. Hope his life turns out ok, but his impact on the team was a net zero.
Jacob Sirmon: 1.8 - His aborted transfer-portaling summer of 2019 left a bad taste in my mouth. I wanted to see him do something good, but even in garbage time, he just felt awkward, unprepared, and unimpressive. Maybe he'll have better luck elsewhere. I don't count his leaving to be as negative as Garbers, because what I saw just didn't give me confidence that he was a particularly valuable backup.
Soderburg: .8 - He has been among the most consistently reviled Huskies on HH, and I don't think I've ever really dug down to the true story of why. That said, he had a scholarship and didn't ever really contribute, thus taking away from the possibility of us having another, potentially helpful player on the roster. So, -.2 points
Taylor: 3.2 - Solid contributor, physical specimen, decent techniques, but never really shone. Maybe he'll be able to improve at the next level. I don't think we'll miss him very much; we have a lot of great DBs still waiting in the wings (so long as the new DB coach doesn't screw it up...)
Thompson: 1 - Heard all fall how he was competing and neck-and-neck with the other QBs. He never made it onto the field. No idea what kind of depth he would have provided. At the same time, I'm not disappointed he's moving on.
Tryon: 2.8 - He flashed in 2019, but was inconsistent. I would have loved to have seen him in 2020, but don't blame him for opting out. That said, his lack of playing impacted the score I gave him. I like the guy, I really liked his development curve at the UW, but I just didn't see enough. He'll be missed, but not as much as Levi and Molden. With ZTF, Latu, Smalls, and others, we've got surprising depth at the position. I hope Tryon makes it at the next level.
Yary: .8 - Had Otton left, Yary's score would have been worse. Thanks to Otton's return, we won't miss Yary in 2021. That said, anytime a player causes drama, it's a net negative for the program. Hence the -.2 -
Here is how I do it
1- Zero impact
2-Played some
3-Starter....getting good at this point and am noticing you
4- You going to the league. Making plays every game and earning postseason honors
5- Balls out Playa/Wardaddy Not many get a 5. Nobody this year. Levi would have prolly but he quit
