Attn. Troy Dannen - We? need to up the 'crootin
Let's take a look.
Here is an image of the median recruiting ratings from 247 for the four PAC-12 teams which will be heading to the BIG next year.
We can see that in 2023, UW was in last place out of the four teams. This is in contrast to 2019, where UW was top of the pack. Over the next few years, UW dropped the ball, whereas USC, Oregon, and even UCLA picked up the pace. Now UW is in fourth place among newcomers to the BIG.
This then leads us to the question - where would these teams place among the BIG teams.
First, lets focus on 2019.
We can see that UW is right up there, only behind Ohio State, Michigan and Penn State. Not at the top but respectable. Encouraging, because we know that it can be done.
This stands in stark contrast to 2023.
Not surprisingly, Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State still outrecruit us. Also not surprisingly, Oregon and USC have out recruited us. However, Michigan State and UCLA have also outrecruited us in 2023, placing us? 8th in the new BIG.
If we take a look at the median rankings for 2023 (easier to see on the picture with school labels on 2019), we can see that there are two main groups of schools. Competitive teams are scattered throughout the top, and the other non-competitive teams are all grouped together at the bottom. UW either at the very bottom of the competitive group or at the very top of the non-competitive teams.
On one hand, we are clearly going to have to rebuild after this year. Our very talented group stayed together for one last hurrah. But after this year, it is very uncertain where the future will take us. Much of the talent either graduates or has already transferred. Our lack of recruiting may come to bite us in the ass. Which again, may be okay if we were just focused on rebuilding, but with the change in scenery, there is much more on the line - establishing our pecking order in the new conference.
A silver lining is that in this new era of NIL, turnarounds can be very quick, and mistakes can be quickly rectified. With the right plan in place, we can easily become a contender in one of the two premiere CFB conferences. Perhaps it is more lucrative to take transfers of proven players versus paying exorbitant amounts of money to unproven high school kids. However, either way, the problem remains - we? need talent.
However, if the plan fails, in our current position we may easily be relegated into becoming an also-ran in this new giant football conference.
Now is always important, but some nows are yet even more so. Here's hoping that Dannen/DeBoer is the ticket that will keep Husky football relevant for the years to come.
Comments
-
I disagree with anyone that thinks the portal is the ultimate answer. Pro teams draft players for a reason. It's alot easier to have talent when they're already in your two deeps last year. Portal should be used for 4 or 5 guys a year if everything else is healthy
-
I can see it being up to 10 from the portal if you're building your roster correctly. Not as an average but at the high end in a year with a lot of talent and good fits available.Canadawg said:I disagree with anyone that thinks the portal is the ultimate answer. Pro teams draft players for a reason. It's alot easier to have talent when they're already in your two deeps last year. Portal should be used for 4 or 5 guys a year if everything else is healthy
There are going to be more players transferring out too so I don't see roster space as an issue. Even upgraded recruiting will have its share of misses and those guys don't stick around long these days.
But I want the best of both. That has to be the goal if you're the kind of killer program I assume we all want. Waving off HS recruiting like the portal itself is always going to provide you what you need in a given year is a formula for having a lot of rebuilding years. -
Shit argument. Pro teams have been stuck doing same thing for 30 years. CFB is differentCanadawg said:I disagree with anyone that thinks the portal is the ultimate answer. Pro teams draft players for a reason. It's alot easier to have talent when they're already in your two deeps last year. Portal should be used for 4 or 5 guys a year if everything else is healthy
-
IMHO the recruiting just needs a small uptick. Secure three high four, low five star kids a year (Budda, JMac, Fautano, Rosengarten types). That’s all they really need. The kids they’re bringing in now seem like high floor players. You’ll get starters and quality depth from them. If two of the three of the highly rated blue chips pan out then you’re looking at a roster that has six to eight high end athletes that can effect a game on talent alone. Say, QB, DL, LT, DB, WR, LB. Add to that from every class a few developmental players that take off (hopefully someone like Hiems) and a few guys that outperform their ratings (possibly Devin Bryant and Tybo Rogers) and you’ve got a talented roster. As @RoadDawg55 has said, you don’t need to be top 10, if you can consistently be top 15-25 in recruiting every year you’re going to be in good shape. Pair that with a handful of portal players (Zach Durfee, Jabbar) plugged into a great scheme and development program and you’ll consistently be right there. They aren’t far off.
-
I agree that we don't need top classes like current Ohio State or USC in the 2000's to complete for national championships, although it sure doesn't hurt. It's a bit unrealistic to see that in our near future. Roaddawg may be correct in aspiring for annual top 15-25 classes.theknowledge said:IMHO the recruiting just needs a small uptick. Secure three high four, low five star kids a year (Budda, JMac, Fautano, Rosengarten types). That’s all they really need. The kids they’re bringing in now seem like high floor players. You’ll get starters and quality depth from them. If two of the three of the highly rated blue chips pan out then you’re looking at a roster that has six to eight high end athletes that can effect a game on talent alone. Say, QB, DL, LT, DB, WR, LB. Add to that from every class a few developmental players that take off (hopefully someone like Hiems) and a few guys that outperform their ratings (possibly Devin Bryant and Tybo Rogers) and you’ve got a talented roster. As @RoadDawg55 has said, you don’t need to be top 10, if you can consistently be top 15-25 in recruiting every year you’re going to be in good shape. Pair that with a handful of portal players (Zach Durfee, Jabbar) plugged into a great scheme and development program and you’ll consistently be right there. They aren’t far off.
That being said, right now our talent on average looks marginally better at best compared to the rest of the BIG.
What will set us apart? Coaching? With our current staff, sure, that is likely to be the case. We can probably outperform our on-paper talent, and still take some games that we otherwise shouldn't based on raw athleticism and skill.
But still, if we don't manage to improve our recruiting back to at least ~25th on a bad year ( as opposed to it being closer to our better years), that will place a cap on our potential as a program. Then what incentive would there be for DeBoer et al. to stick around if his coaching is hamstrung by the lack of talent ?
We need to separate ourselves from the pack - NIL is a cornerstone to enable this. -
It will be Chinteresting to see how how UW's model evolves and particularly for the Class of 2025. I think UW had fifty 2025 recruits at the game.
Here's UW's NIL link for those who are wondering: https://gohuskies.com/sports/nil?path=nil -
I agree with @Canadawg ideally we want 6-8 Portal guys to fill in past recruiting misses, attrition etc.
Penix Jr has allowed us to win games when our roster isn't equal to the opponent across both sides. Year two, the Washington coaches are showing they can coach and are no longer unknown. I think KD needs to move into that closer role like Pete was. We knew going in we're likely not going to get outstanding recruiting from Morrell. We can't let USC and Oregon suck up all the LA talent.
I don't think we can sustain Blue Blood level recruiting but a marked improvement in Blue Chip ratio and solid player evaluations will keep us competitive.
-
Dannen's comments about embracing NIL, and the positive notes regarding Tulane's NIL program are getting me to doog.
Still if everything goes right it's going to take a couple years. By 2026 I would hope for a top ~12 recruiting class. It's absolutely possible, but it needs serious NIL support. Succeeding or failing in this part should define Dannen's career here. -
UW’s stance on HS recruiting and NIL to date has been highly flawed
We’ve been able to leverage the portal to help fill in the gaps whether because of lack of recruiting or flame outs or whatever
We should have no problem attracting offensive talent with what we are doing … RB might be the exception but there’s increasing evidence that there’s room to produce at a high level there
What UW can’t necessarily find easily in their back yard and need to be NIL competitive in is in the defensive front … DL play is not a west coast strength and high end LB play has been hit or miss.
If you want to beat the top on a consistent basis you need to have a high performing group at these levels … it’s an area we most definitely can improve in -
I have reason to believe that with our new AD and his new ADtitude, we'll see more NIL in recruitingTequilla said:UW’s stance on HS recruiting and NIL to date has been highly flawed
We’ve been able to leverage the portal to help fill in the gaps whether because of lack of recruiting or flame outs or whatever
We should have no problem attracting offensive talent with what we are doing … RB might be the exception but there’s increasing evidence that there’s room to produce at a high level there
What UW can’t necessarily find easily in their back yard and need to be NIL competitive in is in the defensive front … DL play is not a west coast strength and high end LB play has been hit or miss.
If you want to beat the top on a consistent basis you need to have a high performing group at these levels … it’s an area we most definitely can improve in
