Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Cooper McDonald, 2020 3* LB, Justin (Northwest), TX (Committed)
Comments
-
Personally I can't wait to get him into camp so we can get him the fuck out of here
-
Don't overthink it - he's a narcissistic dumbfuck. He's basically Trump of HH.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Lol get the fuck right out of here with that shit. Sacks by DBs and inside linebackers all of a sudden don't count because you say so. Got it.
Jesus Christ you have a complete inability to ever admit you're wrong. Shit, I'd respect you more if you just slinked away and never acknowledged the fact that you were wrong. But nah, it's always your instinct to move the goal posts and twist whatever dumb shit you initially said to try to save face and somehow prove yourself right. Which you almost never are. -
LaMichael_Corleone said:
Process isn’t just about missing the players in front. Cooper was targeted at ILB by Gregory and Gregory even took him and his family on a one on one campus tour. Once we lost Herbig, Coach K took over his recruitment, much like Bush took over WR recruiting while Lubick was fucking up last year. Then there is the lack of unofficial visits from ILBs in Cali and being late to offer Julien Simon in the midst of Gregory’s struggles connecting with players. Should we even mention Flowe who’s best friends with Cam Davis?
Grading recruiting process isn’t about grading the player because we’re at a level now where every player that comes here is going to be decent. This is about grading and evaluating coaches.
Seems like this is a bit of a moving target, but we’ve agreed:
1. McDonald is, in DDY parlance, “fine.”
2. Gregory leaves a lot to be desired.
Ballz has now infected this thread so on to the next.
-
A pass rush doesn’t matter what position you get it through you dumbass.StrongArmCobra said:
You obviously know what the fuck I meant. If we are discussing UW's pass rush, sacks from blitzing linebackers and DB's shouldn't be in the fucking discussion. That skews the data and it's a sign that you aren't good enough with your front 4 if you have to supplement the pass rush with other guys who should be in coverage. The pass rush has been a weak link for this team since Kikaha left. You're trying to say it wasn't so bad and it's bullshit. It's been bad for years now.
Eat a lot of paint chips as a kid? Live near the power lines? Huff gas? Abundance? -
This is too stupid to engage with, but I can't help myself.StrongArmCobra said:
You obviously know what the fuck I meant. If we are discussing UW's pass rush, sacks from blitzing linebackers and DB's shouldn't be in the fucking discussion. That skews the data and it's a sign that you aren't good enough with your front 4 if you have to supplement the pass rush with other guys who should be in coverage. The pass rush has been a weak link for this team since Kikaha left. You're trying to say it wasn't so bad and it's bullshit. It's been bad for years now.
Blitzing DBs and inside linebackers to cover for deficient pass rushers on the edge and still generating an effective pass rush is called great scheming. HTFH.
And shut the fuck up about "skewing data". You don't even have the data in the first place that says our ends and OLBs generate less sacks than half of the conference. But that's not the fucking point, so don't bother coming up with a half baked rebuttal to that. -
It's not great scheming you dumb ass. Blitzing weakens your coverage ability. Every DC would rather just get pressure and sacks with four guys upfront and not have to blitz.GreenRiverGatorz said:
This is too stupid to engage with, but I can't help myself.
Blitzing DBs and inside linebackers to cover for deficient pass rushers on the edge and still generating an effective pass rush is called great scheming. HTFH.
And shut the fuck up about "skewing data". You don't even have the data in the first place that says our ends and OLBs generate less sacks than half of the conference. But that's not the fucking point, so don't bother coming up with a half baked rebuttal to that. -
It does matter. Less guys in coverage to help out the pass rush is not what you want in order to generate a decent pass rush. Maybe go watch the Penn State and Ohio State games again. We haven't had a good pass rush.CuntWaffle said:
A pass rush doesn’t matter what position you get it through you dumbass.
Eat a lot of paint chips as a kid? Live near the power lines? Huff gas? Abundance? -
Ballz always struck me as a whippits kind of kid. That shit will kill your brain cells at breakneck speed.CuntWaffle said:
A pass rush doesn’t matter what position you get it through you dumbass.
Eat a lot of paint chips as a kid? Live near the power lines? Huff gas? Abundance? -
Sounds like you're speaking from experience.GreenRiverGatorz said:
Ballz always struck me as a whippits kind of kid. That shit will kill your brain cells at breakneck speed. -
GreenRiverGatorz said:
This is too stupid to engage with, but I can't help myself.
Blitzing DBs and inside linebackers to cover for deficient pass rushers on the edge and still generating an effective pass rush is called great scheming. HTFH.
And shut the fuck up about "skewing data". You don't even have the data in the first place that says our ends and OLBs generate less sacks than half of the conference. But that's not the fucking point, so don't bother coming up with a half baked rebuttal to that.
-
I’m going to laugh if this guy turns out to be really good
-
I think he is going to be good,Tequilla said:I’m going to laugh if this guy turns out to be really good
-
All depends if he has the necessary athletic ability
-
Him being developed and turning out pretty good was never the point of contention here.
-
FirePete said:
I think he is going to be good,
@NLdawg this is an example of what I meant by evaluating the process of recruiting isn’t about grading the player, it’s about grading the coach.Tequilla said:I’m going to laugh if this guy turns out to be really good
No one thinks Cooper McDonald or Mason West are going to be bad players. At least I don’t and I really try not criticize abilities and projections of HS kids. Differentiating a player’s abilities and how well of a job a coach did recruiting isn’t really a “strawman argument” when people often blur the lines by saying stuff like this or saying that UDUB did a good job of recruiting LB’s in 2017 just because Joe Tryon is good. -
Ohh I understand that the coach is not doing their part.LaMichael_Corleone said:
@NLdawg this is an example of what I meant by evaluating the process of recruiting isn’t about grading the player, it’s about grading the coach.
No one thinks Cooper McDonald or Mason West are going to be bad players. At least I don’t and I really try not criticize abilities and projections of HS kids. Differentiating a player’s abilities and how well of a job a coach did recruiting isn’t really a “strawman argument” when people often blur the lines by saying stuff like this or saying that UDUB did a good job of recruiting LB’s in 2017 just because Joe Tryon is good.
But I am looking at from a roster point of view he has the tools to be a good player. So he is not Kyler many who is eating up roster spot -
No I got you. I just wanted to show examples of how people can read what you posted and then make the jump to equate: if a player is good = the job of recruiting by the coachFirePete said:
Ohh I understand that the coach is not doing their part.
But I am looking at from a roster point of view he has the tools to be a good player. So he is not Kyler many who is eating up roster spot -
I agree to an extent. But if you’re saying we can’t evaluate the quality of a coach’s recruiting work relative to how that player turns out, I think that’s wrong. A big (maybe the biggest) part of recruiting is projecting how a guy will develop after 2-3 years in the program. That’s where we’ve separated ourselves from most programs.LaMichael_Corleone said:
No I got you. I just wanted to show examples of how people can read what you posted and then make the jump to equate: if a player is good = the job of recruiting by the coach
The counter to this is the thought that nearly everyone will develop to their potential in our program so we need to go after the highest ceiling guys bc our program is sure to get them to that ceiling. While it’s certainly true that our program can be gas on the fire for the most talented guys, the buy in we expect is extraordinary. There are guys who lack the make up to handle it and flame out. If a coach fails to project in that regard and we waste a scholly, that’s as bad or worse than missing on targets or process failures.
TLDR: How a player turns out is relevant to evaluation of the recruiting job.
-
It’s really not that relevant tho. That’s moving the goalposts. If Skinny turns out to be a stud for us for two years even, does that mean we did a good job recruiting him? Of course not. Just because BBK has a good year doesn’t mean you did a good job of recruiting LB’s in 2015.NLdawg said:
I agree to an extent. But if you’re saying we can’t evaluate the quality of a coach’s recruiting work relative to how that player turns out, I think that’s wrong. A big (maybe the biggest) part of recruiting is projecting how a guy will develop after 2-3 years in the program. That’s where we’ve separated ourselves from most programs.
The counter to this is the thought that nearly everyone will develop to their potential in our program so we need to go after the highest ceiling guys bc our program is sure to get them to that ceiling. While it’s certainly true that our program can be gas on the fire for the most talented guys, the buy in we expect is extraordinary. There are guys who lack the make up to handle it and flame out. If a coach fails to project in that regard and we waste a scholly, that’s as bad or worse than missing on targets or process failures.
TLDR: How a player turns out is relevant to evaluation of the recruiting job.
Nick Harris is a good player who didn’t have ANY other D1 offers. Good job on evaluating, horrible job selling your program to the other guys the coaches themselves had ranked higher. Just because Nick Harris is good doesn’t mean we must retroactively go back and say Strausser did a better job recruiting than we thought.
Talent evaluation =\= ability to recruit.
Huff deserves eval credit for Gaard but everyone and their mother have offered Murao, Hatchett, Rosengarten. Huff sold those guys and didn’t need to be a great evaluator of hidden talent in order to close the best class possible.
Jimmy Lake offering Esteen early is a great example of evaluating. Jimmy Lake offering and whiffing on every other guy out west until he offered Jacobe way later than the rest of his top schools an example of poor recruiting sales/management. -
77 Rose Bowl we trick whipped Michigan and held on to win
81 Rose Bowl Michigan whipped us physically
84 Orange Bowl we belonged with Oklahoma but our recruiting was flawed leading to 5 years in the desert.
James could develop and coach but realized he needed better players
By 91 we could whip anyone. The fumes lasted until 94 with wins over the Buckeyes and Canes.
Then we started losing big games again because we didn't develop and recruiting slid
By Gilby we had nothing
Everything does matter because nothing lasts forever
Petersen is close but you can't be satisfied. Ever.
Talent, coaching, facilities, and support. -
Dont lie Race I see you on here now and thenRaceBannon said:77 Rose Bowl we trick whipped Michigan and held on to win
81 Rose Bowl Michigan whipped us physically
84 Orange Bowl we belonged with Oklahoma but our recruiting was flawed leading to 5 years in the desert.
James could develop and coach but realized he needed better players
By 91 we could whip anyone. The fumes lasted until 94 with wins over the Buckeyes and Canes.
Then we started losing big games again because we didn't develop and recruiting slid
By Gilby we had nothing
Everything does matter because nothing lasts forever
Petersen is close but you can't be satisfied. Ever.
Talent, coaching, facilities, and support. -
So I guess this is where we differ. To me, talent evaluation is a huge part or one’s ability to recruit. Every dude in the bar can spot the hot chicks. The Bruce Wayne we want closes the one that isn’t going to steal all his money and be on meth after 4-5 years.LaMichael_Corleone said:
It’s really not that relevant tho. That’s moving the goalposts. If Skinny turns out to be a stud for us for two years even, does that mean we did a good job recruiting him? Of course not. Just because BBK has a good year doesn’t mean you did a good job of recruiting LB’s in 2015.
Nick Harris is a good player who didn’t have ANY other D1 offers. Good job on evaluating, horrible job selling your program to the other guys the coaches themselves had ranked higher. Just because Nick Harris is good doesn’t mean we must retroactively go back and say Strausser did a better job recruiting than we thought.
Talent evaluation =\= ability to recruit.
Huff deserves eval credit for Gaard but everyone and their mother have offered Murao, Hatchett, Rosengarten. Huff sold those guys and didn’t need to be a great evaluator of hidden talent in order to close the best class possible.
Jimmy Lake offering Esteen early is a great example of evaluating. Jimmy Lake offering and whiffing on every other guy out west until he offered Jacobe way later than the rest of his top schools an example of poor recruiting sales/management. -
Sorry man I usually don’t downvote stuff but this is just such a reach that it can’t go without acknowledging how stupid this is.NLdawg said:
So I guess this is where we differ. To me, talent evaluation is a huge part or one’s ability to recruit. Every dude in the bar can spot the hot chicks. The Bruce Wayne we want closes the one that isn’t going to steal all his money and be on meth after 4-5 years. -
spoken like a true sageRaceBannon said:77 Rose Bowl we trick whipped Michigan and held on to win
81 Rose Bowl Michigan whipped us physically
84 Orange Bowl we belonged with Oklahoma but our recruiting was flawed leading to 5 years in the desert.
James could develop and coach but realized he needed better players
By 91 we could whip anyone. The fumes lasted until 94 with wins over the Buckeyes and Canes.
Then we started losing big games again because we didn't develop and recruiting slid
By Gilby we had nothing
Everything does matter because nothing lasts forever
Petersen is close but you can't be satisfied. Ever.
Talent, coaching, facilities, and support. -
That Race post deserves its own thread
-
Happy to be proven wrong but it’s unrealistic to think you are always going to get your top choices ... few schools at best even sniff this IMO
Back in the day it was always recruit the top 3 in the West and we’re doing our job if we got one ... the LA schools were always going to be tough to beat ... but the key was getting comparable talent and then developing it better
By and large Gregory isn’t considered a strong recruiter and he’s an easy target because of it
For better or worse, this commit is proof that the work and messaging we are doing in Texas is starting to pay off ... the real proof will come if we’re ever able to pull elite kids West -
Sure, but it's the measuring stick for how well a coach recruits. When year in and year out certain coaches routinely miss their top 2, 3, 5 guys, yeah, they won't be considered strong recruiters. It's not too complicated. Gregory is an 'easy target' because he keeps missing.Tequilla said:Happy to be proven wrong but it’s unrealistic to think you are always going to get your top choices ... few schools at best even sniff this IMO
Back in the day it was always recruit the top 3 in the West and we’re doing our job if we got one ... the LA schools were always going to be tough to beat ... but the key was getting comparable talent and then developing it better
By and large Gregory isn’t considered a strong recruiter and he’s an easy target because of it
For better or worse, this commit is proof that the work and messaging we are doing in Texas is starting to pay off ... the real proof will come if we’re ever able to pull elite kids West
As for Texas, it's always been about resources spent and results to show for it. Results haven't matched up with the opportunity cost, and Coop doesn't really move the needle (that's what I call my dick.) -
I don’t think anybody is claiming that Gregory is a strong recruiter ... so you’re not disagreeing with really anybodyExtraChrisB said:
Sure, but it's the measuring stick for how well a coach recruits. When year in and year out certain coaches routinely miss their top 2, 3, 5 guys, yeah, they won't be considered strong recruiters. It's not too complicated. Gregory is an 'easy target' because he keeps missing.
As for Texas, it's always been about resources spent and results to show for it. Results haven't matched up with the opportunity cost, and Coop doesn't really move the needle (that's what I call my dick.)
What I’m suggesting is that what is being considered the bar (do you close your top targets) needs to benchmarked to determine performance. Right now it’s just pissing and moaning. My guess is that few programs get their top targets consistently ... taking a look at the number of offers extended by schools really confirms this.
As for Texas, time will tell. There’s got to be a reason why we’re pumping resources into Texas ... there’s a reason besides that the coaches are stupid -
race does the current state of the program feel like the late 80 again?RaceBannon said:77 Rose Bowl we trick whipped Michigan and held on to win
81 Rose Bowl Michigan whipped us physically
84 Orange Bowl we belonged with Oklahoma but our recruiting was flawed leading to 5 years in the desert.
James could develop and coach but realized he needed better players
By 91 we could whip anyone. The fumes lasted until 94 with wins over the Buckeyes and Canes.
Then we started losing big games again because we didn't develop and recruiting slid
By Gilby we had nothing
Everything does matter because nothing lasts forever
Petersen is close but you can't be satisfied. Ever.
Talent, coaching, facilities, and support. -
Cool man. Let’s hire Adrian Klemm. If we’re going to get nasty in the middle of a perfectly civil discussion, let’s start with your behavior toward our recruits on Twitter.LaMichael_Corleone said:
Sorry man I usually don’t downvote stuff but this is just such a reach that it can’t go without acknowledging how stupid this is.
