Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
why can't UW just be like Clemson or Bama?!
Comments
-
Wait, you think we passed on Fozzy?CallMeBigErn said:
I want Pete to target the best players for his system. If they come from in state, cool. If they come from out of state, cool. If they were born and raised as a sherpa on the slopes of Mt. Everest, cool. We've done just fine without Fozzy, Wedington, etc. Perhaps we whiffed on Evan Weaver.HillsboroDuck said:
I’m not gonna spend the time digging them back up for you to explain them away. Each of those kids has a thread here you can read through if you are legitimately interested. I’m sure they’ve been documented as we go.CallMeBigErn said:
Devil's Advocate... perhaps they like the 3* from Texas more? It's a tough line to toe, for sure, because you're more likely to hit on your in-state guys. But if Pete thinks the 3* from Texas is a better fit than the local guy, shouldn't he pursue the player he likes best and build in-roads in the biggest football state in the nation? Stars be damned. If he offers the in-state guy, and they commit, then he likely has ZERO chance with the out-of-state guy he likes more. I understand where you're coming from. I do. I'm just seeing it from the other side of the coin too. As long as coaches are still staying in contact with the in-state guys and not completely ignoring them (we have no idea the extent to which this is happening), they do have a decent chance of getting the in-state guy to commit, even if the offer is late, as opposed to the late offer to the out-of-state guy. I don't believe for a second that those in-state bridges are completely blown up. If the kids are expressing frustration about the lack of UW offer, it means they do in fact still covet that UW offer (I'd like to see the Simon, Rogers, Latu, Scott tweets). Otherwise they wouldn't care. If the UW offer is so coveted, they will still be excited when it comes, and despite the later offer, they still know the program, and likely will still have maintained contact with the coaches. An offer is not the entire recruitment. It's just the final piece. They can't be THAT spiteful when they see how selective we are. After all, UW offers are "meaningful". We've heard it straight from recruit's mouths. Offering out-of-state guys before the in-state guys does have some sound reasoning, in my mind, if they like them more, which it seems like they do in some cases.HillsboroDuck said:
You're obviously not following these kids on Twitter so you have no clue, but the Latus, Simon, Scott, Rogers and others have publicly expressed frustration at their lack of an offer from UW. The UW offer is coveted in state, this is where Tequila is wrong. We aren't ignoring them because they don't want us. Guys like Shaq have had to come in and try and encourage these guys to be patient "Pete's just different" etc. Which is fine until they see some 3 star from Texas at the same position got offered. These kids aren't dumb.CallMeBigErn said:
As I said, it's entirely speculative as to why these kids aren't getting offered right now. There could be a damn good reason. It also doesn't mean they won't be. I'm 100% sure the coaches are in contact, offer or not. You're assuming that these in-state guys are pissed off and upset based on what? A Tracy Ford tweet? OK. We are selective. That's the reason. If we were throwing out 500 offers and none of them were to in-state guys, yes, that would be weird. But we've offered 60, 2nd lowest in the nation. Yes, I tend to lean towards trusting the people who know the program, the recruits, and talent evaluation the best. Pete's eval >>>>>>>>> Biggins' eval. Biggins isn't pumping players into the NFL. If that makes me a Dawgman doog, so be it. Remember, I'm banned from Dawgman. I'm too irrational for Dawgman and I'm too rational for HH.HillsboroDuck said:
The racism stuff is probably overstated and overplayed. The frustration about the lack of in state offers is very real. In the macro you can maybe explain Scott and Rogers being ignored. In the macro it looks real bad when you add Levi Rogers, Bruener and Pete Latu this class and Simon, Will Latu, Tinae, Alexander, and the other receivers next class.CallMeBigErn said:
You guys seem to think it's one or the other. You're actually clueless about what's happening behind the scenes in state besides what happened with Smalls (which you're just speculating on, and it may not be over) and random tweets from Tracy Ford or Gee Scott, who has a vendetta. TWEETS from spurned parties with their own interests. Not exactly a source I put a lot of stake in. Besides, Texas is a long-term play. Evaluate that strategy in 5 years.Meek said:
LOL at our Texas vs Washington State strategy, then.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
There is plenty of in state four star talent not even being offered scholarships (a lot of it high four star talent), while high three stars in Texas are popping plenty of offers.
I love Pete but this makes no damn sense. We’ve been waiting on some of these obvious kids to get offers for over two years.
It’s a big problem.
Recruiting rankings have a very high hit rate so Biggins' has plenty of guys he's evaluated highly in the NFL.
I can see having a couple highly rated in state guys that you evaluate differently. The sheer volume of kids they are ignoring or passing on is alarming. A lot of these will bite us in the ass if we don't fix it quickly.
Whiffing on the best back to back recruiting
classes in your home state history so you can maybe make some in roads in a state you’ve been trying and failing to make in roads in your entire tenure here seems like a highly effective strategy, I can see why you’d defend it. -
greenblood said:
Currently, you're right. But 5 years from now that won't be the case. West coast teams better get a wider footprint now, or they are going to suffer down the road.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
https://calmatters.org/articles/california-high-school-football-participation-drops/
I don't see this as any kind of a problem. The player pool we recruit from will be the same. It's two star and low 3 star kids maybe dropping off. The types of player that go small college or weaker major college teams.greenblood said:
Currently, you're right. But 5 years from now that won't be the case. West coast teams better get a wider footprint now, or they are going to suffer down the road.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
https://calmatters.org/articles/california-high-school-football-participation-drops/ -
Didn't say we passed on him. The situation is similar to Smalls though. He was an in-state 5* player who left and we all thought the sky was falling. Now look at him. Players don't always turn out like you expect. Throw Banner in there too. Garnett was one who did pan out.HillsboroDuck said:
Wait, you think we passed on Fozzy?CallMeBigErn said:
I want Pete to target the best players for his system. If they come from in state, cool. If they come from out of state, cool. If they were born and raised as a sherpa on the slopes of Mt. Everest, cool. We've done just fine without Fozzy, Wedington, etc. Perhaps we whiffed on Evan Weaver.HillsboroDuck said:
I’m not gonna spend the time digging them back up for you to explain them away. Each of those kids has a thread here you can read through if you are legitimately interested. I’m sure they’ve been documented as we go.CallMeBigErn said:
Devil's Advocate... perhaps they like the 3* from Texas more? It's a tough line to toe, for sure, because you're more likely to hit on your in-state guys. But if Pete thinks the 3* from Texas is a better fit than the local guy, shouldn't he pursue the player he likes best and build in-roads in the biggest football state in the nation? Stars be damned. If he offers the in-state guy, and they commit, then he likely has ZERO chance with the out-of-state guy he likes more. I understand where you're coming from. I do. I'm just seeing it from the other side of the coin too. As long as coaches are still staying in contact with the in-state guys and not completely ignoring them (we have no idea the extent to which this is happening), they do have a decent chance of getting the in-state guy to commit, even if the offer is late, as opposed to the late offer to the out-of-state guy. I don't believe for a second that those in-state bridges are completely blown up. If the kids are expressing frustration about the lack of UW offer, it means they do in fact still covet that UW offer (I'd like to see the Simon, Rogers, Latu, Scott tweets). Otherwise they wouldn't care. If the UW offer is so coveted, they will still be excited when it comes, and despite the later offer, they still know the program, and likely will still have maintained contact with the coaches. An offer is not the entire recruitment. It's just the final piece. They can't be THAT spiteful when they see how selective we are. After all, UW offers are "meaningful". We've heard it straight from recruit's mouths. Offering out-of-state guys before the in-state guys does have some sound reasoning, in my mind, if they like them more, which it seems like they do in some cases.HillsboroDuck said:
You're obviously not following these kids on Twitter so you have no clue, but the Latus, Simon, Scott, Rogers and others have publicly expressed frustration at their lack of an offer from UW. The UW offer is coveted in state, this is where Tequila is wrong. We aren't ignoring them because they don't want us. Guys like Shaq have had to come in and try and encourage these guys to be patient "Pete's just different" etc. Which is fine until they see some 3 star from Texas at the same position got offered. These kids aren't dumb.CallMeBigErn said:
As I said, it's entirely speculative as to why these kids aren't getting offered right now. There could be a damn good reason. It also doesn't mean they won't be. I'm 100% sure the coaches are in contact, offer or not. You're assuming that these in-state guys are pissed off and upset based on what? A Tracy Ford tweet? OK. We are selective. That's the reason. If we were throwing out 500 offers and none of them were to in-state guys, yes, that would be weird. But we've offered 60, 2nd lowest in the nation. Yes, I tend to lean towards trusting the people who know the program, the recruits, and talent evaluation the best. Pete's eval >>>>>>>>> Biggins' eval. Biggins isn't pumping players into the NFL. If that makes me a Dawgman doog, so be it. Remember, I'm banned from Dawgman. I'm too irrational for Dawgman and I'm too rational for HH.HillsboroDuck said:
The racism stuff is probably overstated and overplayed. The frustration about the lack of in state offers is very real. In the macro you can maybe explain Scott and Rogers being ignored. In the macro it looks real bad when you add Levi Rogers, Bruener and Pete Latu this class and Simon, Will Latu, Tinae, Alexander, and the other receivers next class.CallMeBigErn said:
You guys seem to think it's one or the other. You're actually clueless about what's happening behind the scenes in state besides what happened with Smalls (which you're just speculating on, and it may not be over) and random tweets from Tracy Ford or Gee Scott, who has a vendetta. TWEETS from spurned parties with their own interests. Not exactly a source I put a lot of stake in. Besides, Texas is a long-term play. Evaluate that strategy in 5 years.Meek said:
LOL at our Texas vs Washington State strategy, then.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
There is plenty of in state four star talent not even being offered scholarships (a lot of it high four star talent), while high three stars in Texas are popping plenty of offers.
I love Pete but this makes no damn sense. We’ve been waiting on some of these obvious kids to get offers for over two years.
It’s a big problem.
Recruiting rankings have a very high hit rate so Biggins' has plenty of guys he's evaluated highly in the NFL.
I can see having a couple highly rated in state guys that you evaluate differently. The sheer volume of kids they are ignoring or passing on is alarming. A lot of these will bite us in the ass if we don't fix it quickly.
Whiffing on the best back to back recruiting
classes in your home state history so you can maybe make some in roads in a state you’ve been trying and failing to make in roads in your entire tenure here seems like a highly effective strategy, I can see why you’d defend it. -
Doogs like doogHillsboroDuck said:
Wait, you think we passed on Fozzy?CallMeBigErn said:
I want Pete to target the best players for his system. If they come from in state, cool. If they come from out of state, cool. If they were born and raised as a sherpa on the slopes of Mt. Everest, cool. We've done just fine without Fozzy, Wedington, etc. Perhaps we whiffed on Evan Weaver.HillsboroDuck said:
I’m not gonna spend the time digging them back up for you to explain them away. Each of those kids has a thread here you can read through if you are legitimately interested. I’m sure they’ve been documented as we go.CallMeBigErn said:
Devil's Advocate... perhaps they like the 3* from Texas more? It's a tough line to toe, for sure, because you're more likely to hit on your in-state guys. But if Pete thinks the 3* from Texas is a better fit than the local guy, shouldn't he pursue the player he likes best and build in-roads in the biggest football state in the nation? Stars be damned. If he offers the in-state guy, and they commit, then he likely has ZERO chance with the out-of-state guy he likes more. I understand where you're coming from. I do. I'm just seeing it from the other side of the coin too. As long as coaches are still staying in contact with the in-state guys and not completely ignoring them (we have no idea the extent to which this is happening), they do have a decent chance of getting the in-state guy to commit, even if the offer is late, as opposed to the late offer to the out-of-state guy. I don't believe for a second that those in-state bridges are completely blown up. If the kids are expressing frustration about the lack of UW offer, it means they do in fact still covet that UW offer (I'd like to see the Simon, Rogers, Latu, Scott tweets). Otherwise they wouldn't care. If the UW offer is so coveted, they will still be excited when it comes, and despite the later offer, they still know the program, and likely will still have maintained contact with the coaches. An offer is not the entire recruitment. It's just the final piece. They can't be THAT spiteful when they see how selective we are. After all, UW offers are "meaningful". We've heard it straight from recruit's mouths. Offering out-of-state guys before the in-state guys does have some sound reasoning, in my mind, if they like them more, which it seems like they do in some cases.HillsboroDuck said:
You're obviously not following these kids on Twitter so you have no clue, but the Latus, Simon, Scott, Rogers and others have publicly expressed frustration at their lack of an offer from UW. The UW offer is coveted in state, this is where Tequila is wrong. We aren't ignoring them because they don't want us. Guys like Shaq have had to come in and try and encourage these guys to be patient "Pete's just different" etc. Which is fine until they see some 3 star from Texas at the same position got offered. These kids aren't dumb.CallMeBigErn said:
As I said, it's entirely speculative as to why these kids aren't getting offered right now. There could be a damn good reason. It also doesn't mean they won't be. I'm 100% sure the coaches are in contact, offer or not. You're assuming that these in-state guys are pissed off and upset based on what? A Tracy Ford tweet? OK. We are selective. That's the reason. If we were throwing out 500 offers and none of them were to in-state guys, yes, that would be weird. But we've offered 60, 2nd lowest in the nation. Yes, I tend to lean towards trusting the people who know the program, the recruits, and talent evaluation the best. Pete's eval >>>>>>>>> Biggins' eval. Biggins isn't pumping players into the NFL. If that makes me a Dawgman doog, so be it. Remember, I'm banned from Dawgman. I'm too irrational for Dawgman and I'm too rational for HH.HillsboroDuck said:
The racism stuff is probably overstated and overplayed. The frustration about the lack of in state offers is very real. In the macro you can maybe explain Scott and Rogers being ignored. In the macro it looks real bad when you add Levi Rogers, Bruener and Pete Latu this class and Simon, Will Latu, Tinae, Alexander, and the other receivers next class.CallMeBigErn said:
You guys seem to think it's one or the other. You're actually clueless about what's happening behind the scenes in state besides what happened with Smalls (which you're just speculating on, and it may not be over) and random tweets from Tracy Ford or Gee Scott, who has a vendetta. TWEETS from spurned parties with their own interests. Not exactly a source I put a lot of stake in. Besides, Texas is a long-term play. Evaluate that strategy in 5 years.Meek said:
LOL at our Texas vs Washington State strategy, then.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
There is plenty of in state four star talent not even being offered scholarships (a lot of it high four star talent), while high three stars in Texas are popping plenty of offers.
I love Pete but this makes no damn sense. We’ve been waiting on some of these obvious kids to get offers for over two years.
It’s a big problem.
Recruiting rankings have a very high hit rate so Biggins' has plenty of guys he's evaluated highly in the NFL.
I can see having a couple highly rated in state guys that you evaluate differently. The sheer volume of kids they are ignoring or passing on is alarming. A lot of these will bite us in the ass if we don't fix it quickly.
Whiffing on the best back to back recruiting
classes in your home state history so you can maybe make some in roads in a state you’ve been trying and failing to make in roads in your entire tenure here seems like a highly effective strategy, I can see why you’d defend it. -
Yes, but these types of kids fill out most high school rosters. You remove the majority of these kids, you will see more and more schools dropping football entirely. Many of the "non-okg" recruits don't have access to a lot of opportunities outside of their local high school. Obviously, many will find a way. Some of these private school will pay big money for a high school standout to play on their football program. But I think you're being naive to think that there won't be any drop off from this.whuggy said:greenblood said:
Currently, you're right. But 5 years from now that won't be the case. West coast teams better get a wider footprint now, or they are going to suffer down the road.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
https://calmatters.org/articles/california-high-school-football-participation-drops/
I don't see this as any kind of a problem. The player pool we recruit from will be the same. It's two star and low 3 star kids maybe dropping off. The types of player that go small college or weaker major college teams.greenblood said:
Currently, you're right. But 5 years from now that won't be the case. West coast teams better get a wider footprint now, or they are going to suffer down the road.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
https://calmatters.org/articles/california-high-school-football-participation-drops/ -
This is nonsense. Fozzy was a huge miss and it's too early to be calling him a bust. It's also moot. Because regardless of how he turns out, he was a top flight recruit in our backyard and we couldn't sell him. That's a failure.CallMeBigErn said:
Didn't say we passed on him. The situation is similar to Smalls though. He was an in-state 5* player who left and we all thought the sky was falling. Now look at him. Players don't always turn out like you expect. Throw Banner in there too. Garnett was one who did pan out.HillsboroDuck said:
Wait, you think we passed on Fozzy?CallMeBigErn said:
I want Pete to target the best players for his system. If they come from in state, cool. If they come from out of state, cool. If they were born and raised as a sherpa on the slopes of Mt. Everest, cool. We've done just fine without Fozzy, Wedington, etc. Perhaps we whiffed on Evan Weaver.HillsboroDuck said:
I’m not gonna spend the time digging them back up for you to explain them away. Each of those kids has a thread here you can read through if you are legitimately interested. I’m sure they’ve been documented as we go.CallMeBigErn said:
Devil's Advocate... perhaps they like the 3* from Texas more? It's a tough line to toe, for sure, because you're more likely to hit on your in-state guys. But if Pete thinks the 3* from Texas is a better fit than the local guy, shouldn't he pursue the player he likes best and build in-roads in the biggest football state in the nation? Stars be damned. If he offers the in-state guy, and they commit, then he likely has ZERO chance with the out-of-state guy he likes more. I understand where you're coming from. I do. I'm just seeing it from the other side of the coin too. As long as coaches are still staying in contact with the in-state guys and not completely ignoring them (we have no idea the extent to which this is happening), they do have a decent chance of getting the in-state guy to commit, even if the offer is late, as opposed to the late offer to the out-of-state guy. I don't believe for a second that those in-state bridges are completely blown up. If the kids are expressing frustration about the lack of UW offer, it means they do in fact still covet that UW offer (I'd like to see the Simon, Rogers, Latu, Scott tweets). Otherwise they wouldn't care. If the UW offer is so coveted, they will still be excited when it comes, and despite the later offer, they still know the program, and likely will still have maintained contact with the coaches. An offer is not the entire recruitment. It's just the final piece. They can't be THAT spiteful when they see how selective we are. After all, UW offers are "meaningful". We've heard it straight from recruit's mouths. Offering out-of-state guys before the in-state guys does have some sound reasoning, in my mind, if they like them more, which it seems like they do in some cases.HillsboroDuck said:
You're obviously not following these kids on Twitter so you have no clue, but the Latus, Simon, Scott, Rogers and others have publicly expressed frustration at their lack of an offer from UW. The UW offer is coveted in state, this is where Tequila is wrong. We aren't ignoring them because they don't want us. Guys like Shaq have had to come in and try and encourage these guys to be patient "Pete's just different" etc. Which is fine until they see some 3 star from Texas at the same position got offered. These kids aren't dumb.CallMeBigErn said:
As I said, it's entirely speculative as to why these kids aren't getting offered right now. There could be a damn good reason. It also doesn't mean they won't be. I'm 100% sure the coaches are in contact, offer or not. You're assuming that these in-state guys are pissed off and upset based on what? A Tracy Ford tweet? OK. We are selective. That's the reason. If we were throwing out 500 offers and none of them were to in-state guys, yes, that would be weird. But we've offered 60, 2nd lowest in the nation. Yes, I tend to lean towards trusting the people who know the program, the recruits, and talent evaluation the best. Pete's eval >>>>>>>>> Biggins' eval. Biggins isn't pumping players into the NFL. If that makes me a Dawgman doog, so be it. Remember, I'm banned from Dawgman. I'm too irrational for Dawgman and I'm too rational for HH.HillsboroDuck said:
The racism stuff is probably overstated and overplayed. The frustration about the lack of in state offers is very real. In the macro you can maybe explain Scott and Rogers being ignored. In the macro it looks real bad when you add Levi Rogers, Bruener and Pete Latu this class and Simon, Will Latu, Tinae, Alexander, and the other receivers next class.CallMeBigErn said:
You guys seem to think it's one or the other. You're actually clueless about what's happening behind the scenes in state besides what happened with Smalls (which you're just speculating on, and it may not be over) and random tweets from Tracy Ford or Gee Scott, who has a vendetta. TWEETS from spurned parties with their own interests. Not exactly a source I put a lot of stake in. Besides, Texas is a long-term play. Evaluate that strategy in 5 years.Meek said:
LOL at our Texas vs Washington State strategy, then.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
There is plenty of in state four star talent not even being offered scholarships (a lot of it high four star talent), while high three stars in Texas are popping plenty of offers.
I love Pete but this makes no damn sense. We’ve been waiting on some of these obvious kids to get offers for over two years.
It’s a big problem.
Recruiting rankings have a very high hit rate so Biggins' has plenty of guys he's evaluated highly in the NFL.
I can see having a couple highly rated in state guys that you evaluate differently. The sheer volume of kids they are ignoring or passing on is alarming. A lot of these will bite us in the ass if we don't fix it quickly.
Whiffing on the best back to back recruiting
classes in your home state history so you can maybe make some in roads in a state you’ve been trying and failing to make in roads in your entire tenure here seems like a highly effective strategy, I can see why you’d defend it.
I agree with your impulse to hold off on labeling Pete's 2020 and 2021 recruiting strategy as misguided until we see how it turns out, but trying to retrospectively excuse the legitimate recruiting misses of Pete is some Ballz level mental gymnastics. -
We have a top 5 product with top 20 sales numbers. Pete gets paid more than enough to suck it up, put his big boy pants on, and recruit some MF dawgs.
-
LolGOAT said:We have a top 5 product with top 20 sales numbers. Pete gets paid more than enough to suck it up, put his big boy pants on, and recruit some MF dawgs.
-
You're joking right? We do NOT have a top 5 product and never will unless the mission statement of the University changes to include BE ELITE IN FOOTBALL NO MATTER THE COST. We are not a blue blood, rather a high end Tier II that is capable of competing for NT's if the stars align.GOAT said:We have a top 5 product with top 20 sales numbers. Pete gets paid more than enough to suck it up, put his big boy pants on, and recruit some MF dawgs.
@AUBURNTROJAN you want to educate here? -
Win a major bowl game and you can push towards top 5.GOAT said:We have a top 5 product with top 20 sales numbers. Pete gets paid more than enough to suck it up, put his big boy pants on, and recruit some MF dawgs.
As of now you are borderline top 10 behind these programs:
Clemson
Alabama
Ohio State
Notre Dame
Oklahoma
Michigan
LSU
Georgia
Florida
-
Winning a Natty is the ultimate goal ... it’s also very difficult to do. With the exception of a few programs there’s a gap between competing for a Natty annually and needing things to break right.HillsboroDuck said:
The racism stuff is probably overstated and overplayed. The frustration about the lack of in state offers is very real. In the macro you can maybe explain Scott and Rogers being ignored. In the macro it looks real bad when you add Levi Rogers, Bruener and Pete Latu this class and Simon, Will Latu, Tinae, Alexander, and the other receivers next class.CallMeBigErn said:
You guys seem to think it's one or the other. You're actually clueless about what's happening behind the scenes in state besides what happened with Smalls (which you're just speculating on, and it may not be over) and random tweets from Tracy Ford or Gee Scott, who has a vendetta. TWEETS from spurned parties with their own interests. Not exactly a source I put a lot of stake in. Besides, Texas is a long-term play. Evaluate that strategy in 5 years.Meek said:
LOL at our Texas vs Washington State strategy, then.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
There is plenty of in state four star talent not even being offered scholarships (a lot of it high four star talent), while high three stars in Texas are popping plenty of offers.
I love Pete but this makes no damn sense. We’ve been waiting on some of these obvious kids to get offers for over two years.
It’s a big problem.
Can we compete for a Natty if things break right today? I think we are entering a phase where we can. But we still need to continue leveling up to get to that next level.
But let’s be clear that getting to that last level is really hard.
That pivots into the in-state stuff ...
I think those paying attention know why Rogers and Scott haven’t been offered
Let’s look at Bruener ... a legacy that almost assuredly verbals probably very quickly after getting an offer. Does he help ladder up to that last level? Given that he’s deciding between Oregon and Northwestern at this point (read Northwestern) ... it would seem that he’s an upper half Power 5 player. But many of those programs in that space are fighting their own battles to try to get to UW’s level.
As for 2021 guys, I haven’t looked but I don’t imagine we’ve offered a lot in that class -
Eh, I wouldn't go that far with the Ballz comparison. Also, it's May. I'll judge the 2020 class in February. And then again 3 years later.GreenRiverGatorz said:
This is nonsense. Fozzy was a huge miss and it's too early to be calling him a bust. It's also moot. Because regardless of how he turns out, he was a top flight recruit in our backyard and we couldn't sell him. That's a failure.CallMeBigErn said:
Didn't say we passed on him. The situation is similar to Smalls though. He was an in-state 5* player who left and we all thought the sky was falling. Now look at him. Players don't always turn out like you expect. Throw Banner in there too. Garnett was one who did pan out.HillsboroDuck said:
Wait, you think we passed on Fozzy?CallMeBigErn said:
I want Pete to target the best players for his system. If they come from in state, cool. If they come from out of state, cool. If they were born and raised as a sherpa on the slopes of Mt. Everest, cool. We've done just fine without Fozzy, Wedington, etc. Perhaps we whiffed on Evan Weaver.HillsboroDuck said:
I’m not gonna spend the time digging them back up for you to explain them away. Each of those kids has a thread here you can read through if you are legitimately interested. I’m sure they’ve been documented as we go.CallMeBigErn said:
Devil's Advocate... perhaps they like the 3* from Texas more? It's a tough line to toe, for sure, because you're more likely to hit on your in-state guys. But if Pete thinks the 3* from Texas is a better fit than the local guy, shouldn't he pursue the player he likes best and build in-roads in the biggest football state in the nation? Stars be damned. If he offers the in-state guy, and they commit, then he likely has ZERO chance with the out-of-state guy he likes more. I understand where you're coming from. I do. I'm just seeing it from the other side of the coin too. As long as coaches are still staying in contact with the in-state guys and not completely ignoring them (we have no idea the extent to which this is happening), they do have a decent chance of getting the in-state guy to commit, even if the offer is late, as opposed to the late offer to the out-of-state guy. I don't believe for a second that those in-state bridges are completely blown up. If the kids are expressing frustration about the lack of UW offer, it means they do in fact still covet that UW offer (I'd like to see the Simon, Rogers, Latu, Scott tweets). Otherwise they wouldn't care. If the UW offer is so coveted, they will still be excited when it comes, and despite the later offer, they still know the program, and likely will still have maintained contact with the coaches. An offer is not the entire recruitment. It's just the final piece. They can't be THAT spiteful when they see how selective we are. After all, UW offers are "meaningful". We've heard it straight from recruit's mouths. Offering out-of-state guys before the in-state guys does have some sound reasoning, in my mind, if they like them more, which it seems like they do in some cases.HillsboroDuck said:
You're obviously not following these kids on Twitter so you have no clue, but the Latus, Simon, Scott, Rogers and others have publicly expressed frustration at their lack of an offer from UW. The UW offer is coveted in state, this is where Tequila is wrong. We aren't ignoring them because they don't want us. Guys like Shaq have had to come in and try and encourage these guys to be patient "Pete's just different" etc. Which is fine until they see some 3 star from Texas at the same position got offered. These kids aren't dumb.CallMeBigErn said:
As I said, it's entirely speculative as to why these kids aren't getting offered right now. There could be a damn good reason. It also doesn't mean they won't be. I'm 100% sure the coaches are in contact, offer or not. You're assuming that these in-state guys are pissed off and upset based on what? A Tracy Ford tweet? OK. We are selective. That's the reason. If we were throwing out 500 offers and none of them were to in-state guys, yes, that would be weird. But we've offered 60, 2nd lowest in the nation. Yes, I tend to lean towards trusting the people who know the program, the recruits, and talent evaluation the best. Pete's eval >>>>>>>>> Biggins' eval. Biggins isn't pumping players into the NFL. If that makes me a Dawgman doog, so be it. Remember, I'm banned from Dawgman. I'm too irrational for Dawgman and I'm too rational for HH.HillsboroDuck said:
The racism stuff is probably overstated and overplayed. The frustration about the lack of in state offers is very real. In the macro you can maybe explain Scott and Rogers being ignored. In the macro it looks real bad when you add Levi Rogers, Bruener and Pete Latu this class and Simon, Will Latu, Tinae, Alexander, and the other receivers next class.CallMeBigErn said:
You guys seem to think it's one or the other. You're actually clueless about what's happening behind the scenes in state besides what happened with Smalls (which you're just speculating on, and it may not be over) and random tweets from Tracy Ford or Gee Scott, who has a vendetta. TWEETS from spurned parties with their own interests. Not exactly a source I put a lot of stake in. Besides, Texas is a long-term play. Evaluate that strategy in 5 years.Meek said:
LOL at our Texas vs Washington State strategy, then.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
There is plenty of in state four star talent not even being offered scholarships (a lot of it high four star talent), while high three stars in Texas are popping plenty of offers.
I love Pete but this makes no damn sense. We’ve been waiting on some of these obvious kids to get offers for over two years.
It’s a big problem.
Recruiting rankings have a very high hit rate so Biggins' has plenty of guys he's evaluated highly in the NFL.
I can see having a couple highly rated in state guys that you evaluate differently. The sheer volume of kids they are ignoring or passing on is alarming. A lot of these will bite us in the ass if we don't fix it quickly.
Whiffing on the best back to back recruiting
classes in your home state history so you can maybe make some in roads in a state you’ve been trying and failing to make in roads in your entire tenure here seems like a highly effective strategy, I can see why you’d defend it.
I agree with your impulse to hold off on labeling Pete's 2020 and 2021 recruiting strategy as misguided until we see how it turns out, but trying to retrospectively excuse the legitimate recruiting misses of Pete is some Ballz level mental gymnastics. -
I agree that a UW in-stars offer is big ... I also think we have to be selective as we try to level up because not every in-state kid is at the level that we are trying to get toHillsboroDuck said:
You're obviously not following these kids on Twitter so you have no clue, but the Latus, Simon, Scott, Rogers and others have publicly expressed frustration at their lack of an offer from UW. The UW offer is coveted in state, this is where Tequila is wrong. We aren't ignoring them because they don't want us. Guys like Shaq have had to come in and try and encourage these guys to be patient "Pete's just different" etc. Which is fine until they see some 3 star from Texas at the same position got offered. These kids aren't dumb.CallMeBigErn said:
As I said, it's entirely speculative as to why these kids aren't getting offered right now. There could be a damn good reason. It also doesn't mean they won't be. I'm 100% sure the coaches are in contact, offer or not. You're assuming that these in-state guys are pissed off and upset based on what? A Tracy Ford tweet? OK. We are selective. That's the reason. If we were throwing out 500 offers and none of them were to in-state guys, yes, that would be weird. But we've offered 60, 2nd lowest in the nation. Yes, I tend to lean towards trusting the people who know the program, the recruits, and talent evaluation the best. Pete's eval >>>>>>>>> Biggins' eval. Biggins isn't pumping players into the NFL. If that makes me a Dawgman doog, so be it. Remember, I'm banned from Dawgman. I'm too irrational for Dawgman and I'm too rational for HH.HillsboroDuck said:
The racism stuff is probably overstated and overplayed. The frustration about the lack of in state offers is very real. In the macro you can maybe explain Scott and Rogers being ignored. In the macro it looks real bad when you add Levi Rogers, Bruener and Pete Latu this class and Simon, Will Latu, Tinae, Alexander, and the other receivers next class.CallMeBigErn said:
You guys seem to think it's one or the other. You're actually clueless about what's happening behind the scenes in state besides what happened with Smalls (which you're just speculating on, and it may not be over) and random tweets from Tracy Ford or Gee Scott, who has a vendetta. TWEETS from spurned parties with their own interests. Not exactly a source I put a lot of stake in. Besides, Texas is a long-term play. Evaluate that strategy in 5 years.Meek said:
LOL at our Texas vs Washington State strategy, then.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
There is plenty of in state four star talent not even being offered scholarships (a lot of it high four star talent), while high three stars in Texas are popping plenty of offers.
I love Pete but this makes no damn sense. We’ve been waiting on some of these obvious kids to get offers for over two years.
It’s a big problem.
Recruiting rankings have a very high hit rate so Biggins' has plenty of guys he's evaluated highly in the NFL.
I can see having a couple highly rated in state guys that you evaluate differently. The sheer volume of kids they are ignoring or passing on is alarming. A lot of these will bite us in the ass if we don't fix it quickly.
It’s a delicate line to walk ... I get it and it frustrates me at times
I’m not sure I agree that we are ignoring a lot of guys ... passing because of fit may very well be the case. -
More reason from Teq. Goddamn it's refreshing. I feel like I'm drinking Sprite.Tequilla said:
I agree that a UW in-stars offer is big ... I also think we have to be selective as we try to level up because not every in-state kid is at the level that we are trying to get toHillsboroDuck said:
You're obviously not following these kids on Twitter so you have no clue, but the Latus, Simon, Scott, Rogers and others have publicly expressed frustration at their lack of an offer from UW. The UW offer is coveted in state, this is where Tequila is wrong. We aren't ignoring them because they don't want us. Guys like Shaq have had to come in and try and encourage these guys to be patient "Pete's just different" etc. Which is fine until they see some 3 star from Texas at the same position got offered. These kids aren't dumb.CallMeBigErn said:
As I said, it's entirely speculative as to why these kids aren't getting offered right now. There could be a damn good reason. It also doesn't mean they won't be. I'm 100% sure the coaches are in contact, offer or not. You're assuming that these in-state guys are pissed off and upset based on what? A Tracy Ford tweet? OK. We are selective. That's the reason. If we were throwing out 500 offers and none of them were to in-state guys, yes, that would be weird. But we've offered 60, 2nd lowest in the nation. Yes, I tend to lean towards trusting the people who know the program, the recruits, and talent evaluation the best. Pete's eval >>>>>>>>> Biggins' eval. Biggins isn't pumping players into the NFL. If that makes me a Dawgman doog, so be it. Remember, I'm banned from Dawgman. I'm too irrational for Dawgman and I'm too rational for HH.HillsboroDuck said:
The racism stuff is probably overstated and overplayed. The frustration about the lack of in state offers is very real. In the macro you can maybe explain Scott and Rogers being ignored. In the macro it looks real bad when you add Levi Rogers, Bruener and Pete Latu this class and Simon, Will Latu, Tinae, Alexander, and the other receivers next class.CallMeBigErn said:
You guys seem to think it's one or the other. You're actually clueless about what's happening behind the scenes in state besides what happened with Smalls (which you're just speculating on, and it may not be over) and random tweets from Tracy Ford or Gee Scott, who has a vendetta. TWEETS from spurned parties with their own interests. Not exactly a source I put a lot of stake in. Besides, Texas is a long-term play. Evaluate that strategy in 5 years.Meek said:
LOL at our Texas vs Washington State strategy, then.GreenRiverGatorz said:
The west is only losing the top kids that USC and UCLA are failing to sign. Bad news for the conference, but UW and Oregon are doing just fine.greenblood said:
There are two ways a west coast team can win it all.NorwegianHusky said:
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take.
1) Recruit Nationally. Pete and company need to improve in this area.
2) Hope for an usually strong recruiting group out west for 3-4 consecutive years. (With football fading out west, this seems like a futile wish)
Even if the latter does happen, the west is consistently losing their top kids to the blue bloods as it is.
And we don't need to recruit nationally. If it happens, great, but there are more than enough players on the west coast to load up on.
There is plenty of in state four star talent not even being offered scholarships (a lot of it high four star talent), while high three stars in Texas are popping plenty of offers.
I love Pete but this makes no damn sense. We’ve been waiting on some of these obvious kids to get offers for over two years.
It’s a big problem.
Recruiting rankings have a very high hit rate so Biggins' has plenty of guys he's evaluated highly in the NFL.
I can see having a couple highly rated in state guys that you evaluate differently. The sheer volume of kids they are ignoring or passing on is alarming. A lot of these will bite us in the ass if we don't fix it quickly.
It’s a delicate line to walk ... I get it and it frustrates me at times
I’m not sure I agree that we are ignoring a lot of guys ... passing because of fit may very well be the case. -
UW was Clempson before the Tigers realized they were in the fucking south and could actually recruit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I_FBS_football_win-loss_records -
This is pretty funny considering all those people were on your side.CallMeBigErn said:
Why are you starting shit with DDY? It's like going onto r/TheDonald and saying abortion is great! Sometimes I do think HH is an alt-right secret lair, to be honest. DDY loves saying beta cuck, and only angry white men say that. These people have established a fake reality based on personal shame and misinformation about masculinity. Food for thought. NorwegianHusky said:PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Seriously though DDY. Do you think a national title within 10 years is a reasonable and realistic expectation?Dennis_DeYoung said:
Luckily I don't have to.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Imagine being this dumbDennis_DeYoung said:
This is literally exactly a dawgman post.PostGameOrangeSlices said:
Says the guy who was never even a part of Husky Halfbrains.Dennis_DeYoung said:
This is proof that HH is dead.PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
El oh el.
Doogs gonna doog. Doogs are just dumb low expectation having people. They think having high standards is too painful, so they just try to lower expectations to be reasonable. They are beta cucks.
So yeah.
I love that your rationale for why we can't be Clemson is because we haven't won a NY6 game, even though we've been in 3 of them in the last 3 years. lol
Dawgman 2.0 now. I get it. You trust the coaches and it's unreasonable to think we can do well.
Congratulations. This is literally a dawgman narrative.
Good job.
"Let's win an NY6 game without adressing any of the problems that are preventing us from doing that."PostGameOrangeSlices said:Christ. I hate this board.
Maybe because UW hasnt won a fucking nationally relevant game since 2000?
Let's win a single NY6 game before we start talking about catching these 2 programs.
You are so completely oblivious to how stupid you sound. You seriously can't fathom that we want the same thing and the only difference is that we're willing to look at what it's going to actually take. -
Top 5 product in terms of developing talent was my point. Not top 5 on the field.
-
Although great, recruits don’t really look at that. They should, but they don’t. Most recruits care more about relationships, on field performance, early playing time, weather (Hi SAC), and girls.GOAT said:Top 5 product in terms of developing talent was my point. Not top 5 on the field.
