Notable programs that signed equal or fewer (??) blue chips (247 composite) than UW in 2019

Comments

• UW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,673

  February 2019

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  
  
  

  I thought you said notable?

  7 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• Swaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,422

  February 2019

  STOP FUCKIGN USING COMPOSITE GODDAMNIT

  10 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• greenblood Member Posts: 14,382

  February 2019

  UW_Doog_Bot said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  
  
  

  I thought you said notable?

  you seem butthurt

  1 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• YellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,347

  February 2019

  UW_Doog_Bot said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  
  
  

  I thought you said notable?

  I did. Their 2009- 14 run is still vastly superior to our 2016- 18 run. Oregon is relevant until they aren’t.

  1 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• bananasnblondes Member Posts: 15,239

  February 2019

  It should be noted that UW had the #1 pac 12 class and #10 class nationally if you use 247 star average. I think it also holds true for composite.

  3 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• chuck Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 10,999

  February 2019

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  Ohio St
  
  
  

  But all the blue bloods stole UWs lunch money!

  5 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• UW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,673

  February 2019

  greenblood said:

  UW_Doog_Bot said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  
  
  

  I thought you said notable?

  you seem butthurt

  Nope, just taking cheap shots at little brother. It's better than being wazzu who isn't even in the conversation.

  YellowSnow said:

  UW_Doog_Bot said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  
  
  

  I thought you said notable?

  I did. Their 2009- 14 run is still vastly superior to our 2016- 18 run. Oregon is relevant until they aren’t.

  Sure, but it's not recent at all. Our 80's and 90's run was superior but it still doesn't make us nationally relevant until we are again.

  3 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• YellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,347

  February 2019

  chuck said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  Ohio St
  
  
  

  But all the blue bloods stole UWs lunch money!

  This narrative is so FS. Yeah, we sucked at WR this year at TE will continue to suck on perpetuity.
  
  The trend is clear...
  
  4,5,7,9,10,14
  
  I'm not good at Maff but seems like we are getting more and more BC's each year. And that's with 3 bowl losses in a row.

  7 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• UW_Doog_Bot Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 15,673

  February 2019

  YellowSnow said:

  chuck said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  Ohio St
  
  
  

  But all the blue bloods stole UWs lunch money!

  This narrative is so FS. Yeah, we sucked at WR this year at TE will continue to suck on perpetuity.
  
  The trend is clear...
  
  4,5,7,9,10,14
  
  I'm not good at Maff but seems like we are getting more and more BC's each year. And that's with 3 bowl losses in a row.

  It's perception. We ARE losing more battles over blue chips to blue bloods now than before but that's also because we are in it for more blue chips that blue bloods want now. It happens when you level up from diamonds in the ruff and regional battles against Boise to consensus blue chips and the national recruiting stage.

  13 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• DoogCourics Member Posts: 5,739

  February 2019

  YellowSnow said:

  chuck said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  Ohio St
  
  
  

  But all the blue bloods stole UWs lunch money!

  This narrative is so FS. Yeah, we sucked at WR this year at TE will continue to suck on perpetuity.
  
  The trend is clear...
  
  4,5,7,9,10,14
  
  I'm not good at Maff but seems like we are getting more and more BC's each year. And that's with 3 bowl losses in a row.

  I’ll be updating my recruiting trajectory and comparison vs National Champion Clemson once Puka decides.
  
  I’ll also be updating my total team talent trajectory and comparison vs National Champ Clemson once the 2019 Total talent scores are available.

  4 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• dawgs206 Member Posts: 482

  February 2019

  It’s important to note that under Petersen we will likely always have smaller classes. That has its pros and cons, but realistically it puts at a pretty big competitive disadvantage when many of the top 10 classes will sign 23-27 players each year and we’ll be closer to 20-22.
  
  Signing 3-4 more players just gives you that much better odds of players panning out while at the same time churning over the bottom of your roster suddenly senioring guys or suggesting transfers. Not everybody does it, but lots of the big boys do.
  
  Thought it was worth bringing up cause every year someone brings up “if we signed up as many players and so and so are classes would be ranked the same.”

  3 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• PostGameOrangeSlices Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 25,958

  February 2019

  dawgs206 said:

  It’s important to note that under Petersen we will likely always have smaller classes. That has its pros and cons, but realistically it puts at a pretty big competitive disadvantage when many of the top 10 classes will sign 23-27 players each year and we’ll be closer to 20-22.
  
  Signing 3-4 more players just gives you that much better odds of players panning out while at the same time churning over the bottom of your roster suddenly senioring guys or suggesting transfers. Not everybody does it, but lots of the big boys do.
  
  Thought it was worth bringing up cause every year someone brings up “if we signed up as many players and so and so are classes would be ranked the same.”

  Counterpoint is that Pete is bringing in legit walkons

  7 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• FireCohen Member Posts: 21,823

  February 2019

  dawgs206 said:

  It’s important to note that under Petersen we will likely always have smaller classes. That has its pros and cons, but realistically it puts at a pretty big competitive disadvantage when many of the top 10 classes will sign 23-27 players each year and we’ll be closer to 20-22.
  
  Signing 3-4 more players just gives you that much better odds of players panning out while at the same time churning over the bottom of your roster suddenly senioring guys or suggesting transfers. Not everybody does it, but lots of the big boys do.
  
  Thought it was worth bringing up cause every year someone brings up “if we signed up as many players and so and so are classes would be ranked the same.”

  Some are fucking project that time to develop. King was not amazing until his Sr year. So

  0 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• YellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 35,347

  February 2019

  UW_Doog_Bot said:

  greenblood said:

  UW_Doog_Bot said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  
  
  

  I thought you said notable?

  you seem butthurt

  Nope, just taking cheap shots at little brother. It's better than being wazzu who isn't even in the conversation.

  YellowSnow said:

  UW_Doog_Bot said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  
  
  

  I thought you said notable?

  I did. Their 2009- 14 run is still vastly superior to our 2016- 18 run. Oregon is relevant until they aren’t.

  Sure, but it's not recent at all. Our 80's and 90's run was superior but it still doesn't make us nationally relevant until we are again.

  Quit living in the passed.

  6 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• animate Member Posts: 4,237

  February 2019

  dawgs206 said:

  It’s important to note that under Petersen we will likely always have smaller classes. That has its pros and cons, but realistically it puts at a pretty big competitive disadvantage when many of the top 10 classes will sign 23-27 players each year and we’ll be closer to 20-22.
  
  Signing 3-4 more players just gives you that much better odds of players panning out while at the same time churning over the bottom of your roster suddenly senioring guys or suggesting transfers. Not everybody does it, but lots of the big boys do.
  
  Thought it was worth bringing up cause every year someone brings up “if we signed up as many players and so and so are classes would be ranked the same.”

  It's the lesser of two evils for Pete.
  
  "honor and integrity" versus "whatever it takes"
  
  given his (lack of) apparent coffee cup stance, it is what it is.
  
  We have to live with it and deal with the ongoing high blood pressure TBS'ing.

  3 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• dawgs206 Member Posts: 482

  February 2019

  animate said:

  dawgs206 said:

  It’s important to note that under Petersen we will likely always have smaller classes. That has its pros and cons, but realistically it puts at a pretty big competitive disadvantage when many of the top 10 classes will sign 23-27 players each year and we’ll be closer to 20-22.
  
  Signing 3-4 more players just gives you that much better odds of players panning out while at the same time churning over the bottom of your roster suddenly senioring guys or suggesting transfers. Not everybody does it, but lots of the big boys do.
  
  Thought it was worth bringing up cause every year someone brings up “if we signed up as many players and so and so are classes would be ranked the same.”

  It's the lesser of two evils for Pete.
  
  "honor and integrity" versus "whatever it takes"
  
  given his (lack of) apparent coffee cup stance, it is what it is.
  
  We have to live with it and deal with the ongoing high blood pressure TBS'ing.

  Yea, I agree. Wasn't saying what is right or wrong, more so for the argument of stacking classes we are going to be at a disadvantage.
  
  Look at the top 7 schools (Sorry Swaye, for ease of use I went composite)
  
  Bama - 27, 22, 29, 25 ---> 103
  Georgia - 24, 26, 26, 23 ---> 99
  Texas AM - 25, 23, 28, 21 --->97
  Oklahoma - 24, 23, 28, 21 ---> 96
  Oregon - 26, 24, 25, 21 ---> 96
  Michigan - 26, 19, 30, 28 ---> 103
  
  UW - 22, 20, 18, 17 ---> 77
  
  That is 19-26 more players for these teams over a 4 year cycle. That is equivalent to a large recruiting class for UW EVERY 4 YEARS. Recruiting is all a numbers game. The more highly rated players you sign, the higher likelihood that some pan out. We have to hit at a much higher rate and develop much better to have success against the top teams. Yes, I know the rules have changed, but you can still mess with the numbers each class.
  
  Getting walk-ons is a counter point, especially this year, but it doesn't close the gap much (considering how many less players we are signing). Myles Bryant is by far the best walk-on under Petersen and 1/2 the bored hates him (I stand with Myles).

  6 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• dirtysouwfdawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 12,968

  February 2019

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  Ohio St
  
  
  

  Your yellow ass looks great in those pants 👀

  2 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• RaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 105,458

  February 2019

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  Ohio St
  
  
  

  Other than Clemson those teams are notable for being in decline
  
  Ohio State lost the best recruiter in the game
  
  

  1 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• FremontTroll Member Posts: 4,744

  February 2019

  RaceBannon said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  Ohio St
  
  
  

  Other than Clemson those teams are notable for being in decline
  
  Ohio State lost the best recruiter in the game
  
  

  Other than Clemson every program in the country is in decline.

  5 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
• RaceBannon Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 105,458

  February 2019

  FremontTroll said:

  RaceBannon said:

  YellowSnow said:

  LSU
  Oregon
  Climpson
  Auburn
  Tenn
  Florida State
  USC
  Ohio St
  
  
  

  Other than Clemson those teams are notable for being in decline
  
  Ohio State lost the best recruiter in the game
  
  

  Other than Clemson every program in the country is in decline.

  But still

  0 · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter