Washington vs Oregon recruiting dick measuring contest
Comments
-
Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.
The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.
With that out of the way:
Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.
Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.
Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8). -
Gimme dat Clemson off season Natty beeeeyotfhces
-
So Washington just has shitty coaching? Got it, Thanks!DoogCourics said:Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.
The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.
With that out of the way:
Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.
Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.
Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8). -
Yeah, I mean, that’s kind of what we’ve been discussing here for the last 5 months. So.....PandaOrangeChiknDuck said:
So Washington just has shitty coaching? Got it, Thanks!DoogCourics said:Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.
The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.
With that out of the way:
Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.
Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.
Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8). -
You just wait until Jimmy gets his John Donovans in there.PandaOrangeChiknDuck said:
So Washington just has shitty coaching? Got it, Thanks!DoogCourics said:Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.
The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.
With that out of the way:
Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.
Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.
Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8). -
DoogCourics said:
Yeah, I mean, that’s kind of what we’ve been discussing here for the last 5 months. So.....PandaOrangeChiknDuck said:
So Washington just has shitty coaching? Got it, Thanks!DoogCourics said:Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.
The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.
With that out of the way:
Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.
Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.
Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).
-
Apparently, Cam Cleeland thinks Oregon can't tell their story without Washington. They just can't.DoogCourics said:Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.
The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.
With that out of the way:
Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.
Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.
Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).
Hmm hmm. -
Sounds like you care about what some tight end who you don't remember thinks about Oregon...creepycoug said:
Apparently, Cam Cleeland thinks Oregon can't tell their story without Washington. They just can't.DoogCourics said:Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.
The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.
With that out of the way:
Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.
Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.
Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).
Hmm hmm. -
But why is the recruiting board worthy of relentless mockery and scorn?
#Iwasright -
I mock and laff at things about which I care and about which I don't care.haie said:
Sounds like you care about what some tight end who you don't remember thinks about Oregon...creepycoug said:
Apparently, Cam Cleeland thinks Oregon can't tell their story without Washington. They just can't.DoogCourics said:Wasn’t sure where to put this, but figured it would best go here.
The narrative is that Oregon is crushing it in recruiting like no one else on the west coast. They run it now and are the new USC. As has been hashed out plenty of times, UW has been right with them but suck at marketing so no one even knows. Plus Pete quit and the team sucked while Oregon won the Rose Bowel. So UW gets what they deserve.
With that out of the way:
Per Alger, the Ducks have 84 scholarship players — 37 on offense, 44 on defense and three specialists — and 38 who were rated four- or five-stars as recruits. That’s a blue-chip ratio of 45.2 percent. Their non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 38-of-81, or 46.9 percent.
Meanwhile, 43 of the 85 scholarship players listed on Washington’s roster were blue-chip recruits, which yields a ratio of 50.6 percent; the non-specialist blue-chip ratio is 43 of 81, or 53.0 percent. So the Huskies’ team-wide ratio is indeed higher than Oregon’s, at least for the time being.
Adhering strictly to Elliott’s methodology — blue-chip signees in the four most recent recruiting classes, not counting walk-ons or non-juco transfers — actually puts the Huskies further ahead. Best I can tell, UW’s blue-chip ratio among signees from 2017-20 is 44 of 83, or 53 percent, compared to Oregon’s 39 of 96, or 40.6 percent. Of course, when you sign larger classes, as the Ducks have, maintaining a high blue-chip ratio becomes less likely, even as you reel in considerable top-end talent. But it’s interesting that even in the past two classes, when Oregon’s recruiting really as taken off, the Huskies still have signed a greater raw number of blue-chip prospects (25 to 22) as well as a higher overall ratio (55.6 to 45.8).
Hmm hmm.
My laffing and mocking does not discriminate.
I laffed at a guy in a bar trying to pick up on woman who was 5 leagues out of his reach. I don't care about him either.
I guess you could say I like to have a good time.
