How the PAC12 Recruiting Breaks Down
Comments
-
Well, this is interesting. So oregon is closer to ucla than Washington, eh. According to scout;
School Points
USC 4950
UCLA. 4088
Arizona State 3023
Oregon. 2818
Washington 2717
Stanford 2548
The bottom line is that all of these ranking systems are like forecasting the weather one month in advance. Tell me how the mid-star players (i.e., Bryce Sterk) will develop, and I'll tell you how the classes should be ranked. Until then, FS. -
I don't disagree w/this. Also, recruiting has more to do with each team's needs at given positions than overall classes. But if you've read my screed over on the Duck bored, you know that I think that Scout is probably the most worthless of the TBS systems. I like 247's best because they try to do a composite (still flawed, but credit for trying).Passion said:
The bottom line is that all of these ranking systems are like forecasting the weather one month in advance. Tell me how the mid-star players (i.e., Bryce Sterk) will develop, and I'll tell you how the classes should be ranked. Until then, FS.
My view on Oregon is that this is another in a series of 'top 20' TBS classes that, if history is a guide, turns into a top 5-10 performer on the field. Oregon has outperformed its TBS ratings before and after Chip Kelly's time in Eugene. While UO did not get any prep LBs - the two JC LBs who signed look like guys who will see the field in the coming season. Kind of like Joe Walker last year.
My view on Washington is that it was a very good class, but did not really fill a need at RB - Gaskin looks like more of a slot or TZR back to me than a true RB, which was a need for UW in this class.
Arizona State signed a great QB that completely does not fit the system they run and a white RB - so I view their class as suspect. -
Only thing that matters now is how well the kids are developed.
Oregon has proven they find kids that fit their system and can develop those kids.
UW's coach has proven he can take kids and develop them, but not at the PAC level ... yet.
The kids will either be successful, or they won't. Either way it should be interesting. -
I don't agree that recruiting has to do with need. This isn't the NFL draft. If your team needs true freshman they are fucked. Nobody talks about the great coaches recruiting for need because they recruit a balanced class every year, they evaluate well, and they develop the players they recruit.
"recruiting for need" is like "stars don't matter" #thingsloserssay
Oregon is not a loser team.
-
Eh. Sometimes more players flame out than pan out at a given position group, some years guys unexpectedly transfer out or get injured. Hence "needs." It's still forecasting because nobody competent should be recruiting someone in February to start in the fall (barring some weird stuff like Vernon Adams).
Some things aren't needs. You take a QB, an RB and some OL and DL every year. You just do. -
Gaskin and McClatcher look the type of RBs that Chip took in the late 2000s which pulled them out of Belottis regression. LaMichael James, Barner, etc.
With recruiting, I think if you get The QB right and you keep OL/DL pipeline full. That's 90% of the battle. I think Doogs > Quooks in that regard this class. Although I caveat that Waller has a very good chance to develop into a better QB than Browning, but probably not within the next two years. -
Taj Griffin, Malik Lovette and Kirk Merritt say "hi"BallSacked said:Gaskin and McClatcher look the type of RBs that Chip took in the late 2000s which pulled them out of Belottis regression. LaMichael James, Barner, etc.
-
Not related to my point at all.
Moreover I don't see the logic of shitting on 4star RBs at UW that are 5'10 ish 180 by pointing to two Oregon 4star RBs that are 5'10ish 180? They are all the same players, only difference is how fat people ranked them.
-
Equally applicable to both TBS and porn tabsCuntWaffle said:All of you involved in the arguing need to switch to your porn tab(s) and LIPO with these 18 year old fuckers.
-
BallSacked said:
Not related to my point at all.
Moreover I don't see the logic of shitting on 4star RBs at UW that are 5'10 ish 180 by pointing to two Oregon 4star RBs that are 5'10ish 180? They are all the same players, only difference is how fat people ranked them.
I just don't see Gaskin (5' 9"/185/4.5) as an every-down back in UW's offense. Part of why the scat guys do well at UO is the way we spread the field. From what I've seen of Peterman, he likes to have a bigger back to open up the middle of the field from either a shotgun or a pro-style under-center set. IMO Warren was a big miss for UW.
I was also responding your comment on the UO in that "Doogs > Quooks" when we landed three top 10 APB-type prospects. Both UO and UW did really well on the lines. UO got possibly the #1 DL in the country. -
You might be right, and this is the first class in a long time when UW got offensive linemen that I'd want for Oregon. But at the same time, here's how Rivals ranks the tackles in this class:BallSacked said:Gaskin and McClatcher look the type of RBs that Chip took in the late 2000s which pulled them out of Belottis regression. LaMichael James, Barner, etc.
With recruiting, I think if you get The QB right and you keep OL/DL pipeline full. That's 90% of the battle. I think Doogs > Quooks in that regard this class. Although I caveat that Waller has a very good chance to develop into a better QB than Browning, but probably not within the next two years.
The caveat to this list is that Okun is the highest rated Oregon lineman across the board and the only remaining commit who was offered by both Oregon and UW, and Oregon still has Hanson and Aiello to Washington's Hilgard. Offensive line recruiting is a numbers game more than anything because injuries that diminish skill sets are high at the position. I'll take what Oregon did there over Washington for that reason. -
Jesus this thread sucks.
-
Gaskin is 5'9" 195. He will be over 200 soon. He's plenty big to be an every down back. Petersen hasn't had an under center offense for a few years now.AZDuck said:BallSacked said:Not related to my point at all.
Moreover I don't see the logic of shitting on 4star RBs at UW that are 5'10 ish 180 by pointing to two Oregon 4star RBs that are 5'10ish 180? They are all the same players, only difference is how fat people ranked them.
I just don't see Gaskin (5' 9"/185/4.5) as an every-down back in UW's offense. Part of why the scat guys do well at UO is the way we spread the field. From what I've seen of Peterman, he likes to have a bigger back to open up the middle of the field from either a shotgun or a pro-style under-center set. IMO Warren was a big miss for UW.
I was also responding your comment on the UO in that "Doogs > Quooks" when we landed three top 10 APB-type prospects. Both UO and UW did really well on the lines. UO got possibly the #1 DL in the country. -
I hate myself for starting it.Swaye said:Jesus this thread sucks.
-
I'm rivals and I like to rank linemen who didn't even get an offer from the in-state school over linemen with offers from the entire pac-12 who were Army All-American selections. I like to do that.IPukeOregonGrellow said:
You might be right, and this is the first class in a long time when UW got offensive linemen that I'd want for Oregon. But at the same time, here's how Rivals ranks the tackles in this class:BallSacked said:Gaskin and McClatcher look the type of RBs that Chip took in the late 2000s which pulled them out of Belottis regression. LaMichael James, Barner, etc.
With recruiting, I think if you get The QB right and you keep OL/DL pipeline full. That's 90% of the battle. I think Doogs > Quooks in that regard this class. Although I caveat that Waller has a very good chance to develop into a better QB than Browning, but probably not within the next two years.
The caveat to this list is that Okun is the highest rated Oregon lineman across the board and the only remaining commit who was offered by both Oregon and UW, and Oregon still has Hanson and Aiello to Washington's Hilgard. Offensive line recruiting is a numbers game more than anything because injuries that diminish skill sets are high at the position. I'll take what Oregon did there over Washington for that reason. -
Wow, what a fucking dreck of a list.bananasnblondes said:
I'm rivals and I like to rank linemen who didn't even get an offer from the in-state school over linemen with offers from the entire pac-12 who were Army All-American selections. I like to do that.IPukeOregonGrellow said:
You might be right, and this is the first class in a long time when UW got offensive linemen that I'd want for Oregon. But at the same time, here's how Rivals ranks the tackles in this class:BallSacked said:Gaskin and McClatcher look the type of RBs that Chip took in the late 2000s which pulled them out of Belottis regression. LaMichael James, Barner, etc.
With recruiting, I think if you get The QB right and you keep OL/DL pipeline full. That's 90% of the battle. I think Doogs > Quooks in that regard this class. Although I caveat that Waller has a very good chance to develop into a better QB than Browning, but probably not within the next two years.
The caveat to this list is that Okun is the highest rated Oregon lineman across the board and the only remaining commit who was offered by both Oregon and UW, and Oregon still has Hanson and Aiello to Washington's Hilgard. Offensive line recruiting is a numbers game more than anything because injuries that diminish skill sets are high at the position. I'll take what Oregon did there over Washington for that reason.
What I think is even more appalling than the Washington State OTs is that they have Chidi Valentine-Okeke as the 38th best OT in the country. What the fuck.
Kid is a consensus Top 100 recruit. The other recruiting services have him at 7th best OT, 6th best OT and 2nd best OT. Rivals says 38th. Fuck Rivals. -
Fine, then we'll use ESPN's ratings and place Adams first. But then it's Hanson in second four spots behind him and it's Lemieux, Roberts and Aiello in a virtual dead heat in the mid-50s.bananasnblondes said:
I'm rivals and I like to rank linemen who didn't even get an offer from the in-state school over linemen with offers from the entire pac-12 who were Army All-American selections. I like to do that.
But that gets away from the point that you've got 8 kids who, with the possible exception of Okun, will be tasked with lifting weights and consuming 6000 calories a day. The only reason Okun gets a pass is that he has a six-month head start in doing that. And by the time we get to the more important rerank in 2020, there are going to be a lot of blown knees in that group.
