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

YellowSnow · February 2019

LSU
Oregon
Climpson
Auburn
Tenn
Florida State
USC
Ohio St

UW_Doog_Bot · February 2019

YellowSnow said:
LSU
Oregon
Climpson
Auburn
Tenn
Florida State
USC

I thought you said notable?

Swaye · February 2019

STOP FUCKIGN USING COMPOSITE GODDAMNIT

greenblood · February 2019

UW_Doog_Bot said:

YellowSnow said:
LSU
Oregon
Climpson
Auburn
Tenn
Florida State
USC

I thought you said notable?

you seem butthurt

YellowSnow · 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.

bananasnblondes · 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.

chuck · February 2019

YellowSnow said:
LSU
Oregon
Climpson
Auburn
Tenn
Florida State
USC
Ohio St

But all the blue bloods stole UWs lunch money!

UW_Doog_Bot · 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.

YellowSnow · 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.

UW_Doog_Bot · 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.

DoogCourics · 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.

dawgs206 · 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.”

PostGameOrangeSlices · 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

FireCohen · 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

YellowSnow · 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.

animate · 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.

dawgs206 · 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).

dirtysouwfdawg · February 2019

YellowSnow said:
LSU
Oregon
Climpson
Auburn
Tenn
Florida State
USC
Ohio St

Your yellow ass looks great in those pants 👀

RaceBannon · 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

FremontTroll · 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.

RaceBannon · 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

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

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

Comments