Wilner on other Power 5s poaching the west
Comments
-
How will the Pac 10 respond?
-
Lot of capital over there in the Land of China. Maybe we could start a new program of visas in exchange for Chinese bag men.RaceBannon said:How will the Pac 10 respond?
-
We fuct.
-
Agree. We put on our pimp Tommy Bahama shirt and went down to the luau to fuck.Swaye said:We fuct.
-
Pete does have a mean streak. Beating Auburn in Atlanta and then going to the sea burning 5 star recruits along the way would be great
-
He didn't list who the 8 players deciding on signing day were but Penis Swell chose Oregon and nearly all the rest chose USC. So the article is slightly melodramatic.
That being said I've been sounding the alarm bells on this for years. We should never cheer when some CA kid chooses Oklahoma or Notre Dame over USC or UCLA.
California, and the West in general, has greater competition for fewer elite recruits than the Southeast or Texas. Then if the outflows are greater than the inflows from outside the region it makes the conference even weaker.
Also every kid USC misses out on means more competition for the next kid down the line since we almost never go outside the region.
To some extent this is all mitigated by USC, Stanford, and even Oregon going national but ultimately if UW is going to win a National Championship we don't just need our own program to recruit at an elite level- we need the conference as a whole to be strong as well. -
Great women’s tennis analogy as alwaysRaceBannon said:How will the Pac 10 respond?
-
I fear Browning is no Sherman.RaceBannon said:Pete does have a mean streak. Beating Auburn in Atlanta and then going to the sea burning 5 star recruits along the way would be great
-
I think this article is a little misleading. It starts with 2011 (which I'm assuming is the furthest back the composite rankings go) so it makes the trend look alarming - from one lost kid to six in only six years! But I think 2011 is the outlier. We?ve lost kids to the Miamis and Oklahomas as long as I've followed recruiting. Hell we? lost Luke Huard to UNC and Jared Jones to FSU and Carlos Pierre Antoine to ND the very first year I bought a recruiting publication, and that was just from in the state of Washington.
If you take the average of this sample it's less alarming: The six year average is 6.71. This year we lost six. Last year we lost seven. So we're basically right in line with the sample.
@FremontTroll's poont is spot on - the Pac loosing these kids almost never helps UW. Stanford, SC and Oregon bringing in kids from outside the footprint almost always helps UW. Kids leaving is an issue.
I'm just not convinced it's a bigger issue than it's ever been. -
Add Lake Dawson & another LB (Dubose?) from O'dea to the list of ND recruits lost. I don't give a shit about any other teams in the PAC and generally enjoy watching them lost but there is a perception issue when the conference does as poorly as it did in bowel games in 2017 and right now, we? need all the perception help we? can get.dnc said:I think this article is a little misleading. It starts with 2011 (which I'm assuming is the furthest back the composite rankings go) so it makes the trend look alarming - from one lost kid to six in only six years! But I think 2011 is the outlier. We?ve lost kids to the Miamis and Oklahomas as long as I've followed recruiting. Hell we? lost Luke Huard to UNC and Jared Jones to FSU and Carlos Pierre Antoine to ND the very first year I bought a recruiting publication, and that was just from in the state of Washington.
If you take the average of this sample it's less alarming: The six year average is 6.71. This year we lost six. Last year we lost seven. So we're basically right in line with the sample.
@FremontTroll's poont is spot on - the Pac loosing these kids almost never helps UW. Stanford, SC and Oregon bringing in kids from outside the footprint almost always helps UW. Kids leaving is an issue.
I'm just not convinced it's a bigger issue than it's ever been.
All that being said, Jake Browning still sucks. -
This is an issue for UW IF we aren’t expanding our geographic footprint.
What it tells me is that the P12 is going to lose West Coast kids (that has never not been the case). Those schools that can supplement will be fine. Those that rely on the West Coast to drive their recruiting are in big trouble.
This is why it is so important that we are able to find kids in Texas that can help supplement. If we are losing say 3 kids a year out of our geographic area we need to get 3 kids to replace.
My bigger concern is that the P12 starts moving in the direction of the Big 12 where you have definite have’s and definite have not’s. While we will be a have in the P12 model, the implications for the conference is that the margin for error will get smaller. -
Pac-12 PRIDEFremontTroll said:we need the conference as a whole to be strong as well.
-
I always root for Pac 12 schools when they aren't playing us other than WSU, UO, OSU, Cal, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Arizona, ASU, CU, and Utah
-
Kids want to play in front of packed houses, on big stages, for big stakes. They want good facilities and they want great coaching. They want to go to the next level, but if not, they want to be a college legend.
And in between games they want hot mid-west and southern dance team ass!
The training facilities in the Pac, and the coaching is largely adequate or above adequate. But you look at some of the apathetic fan bases (Cal, Stanford, Arizona); rinky dink stadiums (OSU, WSU); and large but usually empty settings (USC, UCLA, ASU). More than half the league is less than an ideal stage or setting for college football IMHO.
Contrast that with BIG 10, SEC, and Big 12 stadiums that are packed even when the teams stink. Football is devoured in those parts of the country and occupies a higher and more revered place in the community and so are the players.
Furthermore, west coast chicks aren't hot enough, aside from portions of Cali and Arizona. Most chicks in Washington and Oregon no longer shave there underarms for christ's sake.
Before each game was televised I would imagine a kid would stay closer to home so that his family could participate in his career. That is no longer necessary with the widespread coverage of the sport and with the ease of today's communication.
Not sure what the solution is, but it is a difficult problem to overcome. I would suggest getting back to a more traditional schedule with set kick off times to get the crowds back but I know that would hurt TV revenue.
In closing, hotter cheerleaders wouldn't hurt (SC makes everyone else look stupid in this department).
So ya, the west coast IS fucked! -
Skinny thinks the Georgia strange is nothing special after spending a few years there.DawgWagonDan said:Kids want to play in front of packed houses, on big stages, for big stakes. They want good facilities and they want great coaching. They want to go to the next level, but if not, they want to be a college legend.
And in between games they want hot mid-west and southern dance team ass!
The training facilities in the Pac, and the coaching is largely adequate or above adequate. But you look at some of the apathetic fan bases (Cal, Stanford, Arizona); rinky dink stadiums (OSU, WSU); and large but usually empty settings (USC, UCLA, ASU). More than half the league is less than an ideal stage or setting for college football IMHO.
Contrast that with BIG 10, SEC, and Big 12 stadiums that are packed even when the teams stink. Football is devoured in those parts of the country and occupies a higher and more revered place in the community and so are the players.
Furthermore, west coast chicks aren't hot enough, aside from portions of Cali and Arizona. Most chicks in Washington and Oregon no longer shave there underarms for christ's sake.
Before each game was televised I would imagine a kid would stay closer to home so that his family could participate in his career. That is no longer necessary with the widespread coverage of the sport and with the ease of today's communication.
Not sure what the solution is, but it is a difficult problem to overcome. I would suggest getting back to a more traditional schedule with set kick off times to get the crowds back but I know that would hurt TV revenue.
In closing, hotter cheerleaders wouldn't hurt (SC makes everyone else look stupid in this department).
So ya, the west coast IS fucked! -
"Skinny thinks the Georgia strange is nothing special after spending a few years there."
It's never better than PT.
-
Kids are traveling between regions more than ever before as are families. They are less tied to the "hometown" than ever before. Recruiting reflects this. Either become a national brand or watch as your geographic footprint gets picked apart by those who are.FremontTroll said:He didn't list who the 8 players deciding on signing day were but Penis Swell chose Oregon and nearly all the rest chose USC. So the article is slightly melodramatic.
That being said I've been sounding the alarm bells on this for years. We should never cheer when some CA kid chooses Oklahoma or Notre Dame over USC or UCLA.
California, and the West in general, has greater competition for fewer elite recruits than the Southeast or Texas. Then if the outflows are greater than the inflows from outside the region it makes the conference even weaker.
Also every kid USC misses out on means more competition for the next kid down the line since we almost never go outside the region.
To some extent this is all mitigated by USC, Stanford, and even Oregon going national but ultimately if UW is going to win a National Championship we don't just need our own program to recruit at an elite level- we need the conference as a whole to be strong as well. -
I know this is sort of the CW (the DM guys said five years ago the notion of "the fence" was obsolete because Twitter), I'm just not sure there's any hard evidence to back it up.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Kids are traveling between regions more than ever before as are families. They are less tied to the "hometown" than ever before. Recruiting reflects this. Either become a national brand or watch as your geographic footprint gets picked apart by those who are.FremontTroll said:He didn't list who the 8 players deciding on signing day were but Penis Swell chose Oregon and nearly all the rest chose USC. So the article is slightly melodramatic.
That being said I've been sounding the alarm bells on this for years. We should never cheer when some CA kid chooses Oklahoma or Notre Dame over USC or UCLA.
California, and the West in general, has greater competition for fewer elite recruits than the Southeast or Texas. Then if the outflows are greater than the inflows from outside the region it makes the conference even weaker.
Also every kid USC misses out on means more competition for the next kid down the line since we almost never go outside the region.
To some extent this is all mitigated by USC, Stanford, and even Oregon going national but ultimately if UW is going to win a National Championship we don't just need our own program to recruit at an elite level- we need the conference as a whole to be strong as well.
I'm with Coker and DDY that the fence is always priority one. -
It is just so much more convenient, less selling, closer travel, easier access, kids GET IT, etc, etc.dnc said:
I know this is sort of the CW (the DM guys said five years ago the notion of "the fence" was obsolete because Twitter), I'm just not sure there's any hard evidence to back it up.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Kids are traveling between regions more than ever before as are families. They are less tied to the "hometown" than ever before. Recruiting reflects this. Either become a national brand or watch as your geographic footprint gets picked apart by those who are.FremontTroll said:He didn't list who the 8 players deciding on signing day were but Penis Swell chose Oregon and nearly all the rest chose USC. So the article is slightly melodramatic.
That being said I've been sounding the alarm bells on this for years. We should never cheer when some CA kid chooses Oklahoma or Notre Dame over USC or UCLA.
California, and the West in general, has greater competition for fewer elite recruits than the Southeast or Texas. Then if the outflows are greater than the inflows from outside the region it makes the conference even weaker.
Also every kid USC misses out on means more competition for the next kid down the line since we almost never go outside the region.
To some extent this is all mitigated by USC, Stanford, and even Oregon going national but ultimately if UW is going to win a National Championship we don't just need our own program to recruit at an elite level- we need the conference as a whole to be strong as well.
I'm with Coker and DDY that the fence is always priority one. -
Its not twitter its demographics. Jobs and families move more now(if you want I could pull actual research etc. There's plenty out there.) If a kid grew up in Wa and such Id consider the fence a real thing. If he moved here at 14 after stops at two other locations along the way its much less a factor even if hes considered a "Washington" recruit.dnc said:
I know this is sort of the CW (the DM guys said five years ago the notion of "the fence" was obsolete because Twitter), I'm just not sure there's any hard evidence to back it up.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Kids are traveling between regions more than ever before as are families. They are less tied to the "hometown" than ever before. Recruiting reflects this. Either become a national brand or watch as your geographic footprint gets picked apart by those who are.FremontTroll said:He didn't list who the 8 players deciding on signing day were but Penis Swell chose Oregon and nearly all the rest chose USC. So the article is slightly melodramatic.
That being said I've been sounding the alarm bells on this for years. We should never cheer when some CA kid chooses Oklahoma or Notre Dame over USC or UCLA.
California, and the West in general, has greater competition for fewer elite recruits than the Southeast or Texas. Then if the outflows are greater than the inflows from outside the region it makes the conference even weaker.
Also every kid USC misses out on means more competition for the next kid down the line since we almost never go outside the region.
To some extent this is all mitigated by USC, Stanford, and even Oregon going national but ultimately if UW is going to win a National Championship we don't just need our own program to recruit at an elite level- we need the conference as a whole to be strong as well.
I'm with Coker and DDY that the fence is always priority one. -
I agree with all this, I’m just not sure that the percentages are massively different than they used to be, especially not with kids who are most likely to be athletes.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Its not twitter its demographics. Jobs and families move more now(if you want I could pull actual research etc. There's plenty out there.) If a kid grew up in Wa and such Id consider the fence a real thing. If he moved here at 14 after stops at two other locations along the way its much less a factor even if hes considered a "Washington" recruit.dnc said:
I know this is sort of the CW (the DM guys said five years ago the notion of "the fence" was obsolete because Twitter), I'm just not sure there's any hard evidence to back it up.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Kids are traveling between regions more than ever before as are families. They are less tied to the "hometown" than ever before. Recruiting reflects this. Either become a national brand or watch as your geographic footprint gets picked apart by those who are.FremontTroll said:He didn't list who the 8 players deciding on signing day were but Penis Swell chose Oregon and nearly all the rest chose USC. So the article is slightly melodramatic.
That being said I've been sounding the alarm bells on this for years. We should never cheer when some CA kid chooses Oklahoma or Notre Dame over USC or UCLA.
California, and the West in general, has greater competition for fewer elite recruits than the Southeast or Texas. Then if the outflows are greater than the inflows from outside the region it makes the conference even weaker.
Also every kid USC misses out on means more competition for the next kid down the line since we almost never go outside the region.
To some extent this is all mitigated by USC, Stanford, and even Oregon going national but ultimately if UW is going to win a National Championship we don't just need our own program to recruit at an elite level- we need the conference as a whole to be strong as well.
I'm with Coker and DDY that the fence is always priority one. -
That's a nice narrative, but I do think it is a bigger issue than it used to be.dnc said:I think this article is a little misleading. It starts with 2011 (which I'm assuming is the furthest back the composite rankings go) so it makes the trend look alarming - from one lost kid to six in only six years! But I think 2011 is the outlier. We?ve lost kids to the Miamis and Oklahomas as long as I've followed recruiting. Hell we? lost Luke Huard to UNC and Jared Jones to FSU and Carlos Pierre Antoine to ND the very first year I bought a recruiting publication, and that was just from in the state of Washington.
If you take the average of this sample it's less alarming: The six year average is 6.71. This year we lost six. Last year we lost seven. So we're basically right in line with the sample.
@FremontTroll's poont is spot on - the Pac loosing these kids almost never helps UW. Stanford, SC and Oregon bringing in kids from outside the footprint almost always helps UW. Kids leaving is an issue.
I'm just not convinced it's a bigger issue than it's ever been.
I looked at the data from my '08-'16 data set and there does appear to be a trend towards a larger percentage of the "Blue Chip" recruits from the Pac-12 recruiting footprint heading East to school.
This includes recruits from AZ, CO, HI, UT, CA, OR, WA, ID, and NV. Four and five star recruits only. I rated them as "poached" if they went to a school from outside the region.
That is 99 "Blue Chip" recruits over nine recruiting cycles, or 11 per cycle.
Notre Dame has accounted for a quarter of those:
-
It wasn’t a narrative, it was pointing out that his data didn’t fit his conclusion.AIRWOLF said:
That's a nice narrative, but I do think it is a bigger issue than it used to be.dnc said:I think this article is a little misleading. It starts with 2011 (which I'm assuming is the furthest back the composite rankings go) so it makes the trend look alarming - from one lost kid to six in only six years! But I think 2011 is the outlier. We?ve lost kids to the Miamis and Oklahomas as long as I've followed recruiting. Hell we? lost Luke Huard to UNC and Jared Jones to FSU and Carlos Pierre Antoine to ND the very first year I bought a recruiting publication, and that was just from in the state of Washington.
If you take the average of this sample it's less alarming: The six year average is 6.71. This year we lost six. Last year we lost seven. So we're basically right in line with the sample.
@FremontTroll's poont is spot on - the Pac loosing these kids almost never helps UW. Stanford, SC and Oregon bringing in kids from outside the footprint almost always helps UW. Kids leaving is an issue.
I'm just not convinced it's a bigger issue than it's ever been.
I looked at the data from my '08-'16 data set and there does appear to be a trend towards a larger percentage of the "Blue Chip" recruits from the Pac-12 recruiting footprint heading East to school.
This includes recruits from AZ, CO, HI, UT, CA, OR, WA, ID, and NV. Four and five star recruits only. I rated them as "poached" if they went to a school from outside the region.
That is 99 "Blue Chip" recruits over nine recruiting cycles, or 11 per cycle.
Notre Dame has accounted for a quarter of those:
Your data is far more comprehensive and alarming. -
In addition to Twitter, I think that schools have just gotten a lot more efficient in their recruiting. Everyone has their shit together, everyone is organized, and they all realize that they need to exhaust as many resources as possible. Even just a decade ago, it would've been harder to keep track of every kid in the country, get his film, and try and get a hold of him. Now if you're Oklahoma, you can spend one afternoon DM'ing all the elite kids on the west coast, and gauge their interest. Most kids don't give a fuck about Oklahoma, but some might, and then you can start spending time/money going after them. In the past you would've just been shooting in the dark trying to recruit the west coast, now these schools can go after a few California kids every year without feeling like they are just throwing away their resources.
-
Neighbor2972 said:
In addition to Twitter, I think that schools have just gotten a lot more efficient in their recruiting. Everyone has their shit together, everyone is organized, and they all realize that they need to exhaust as many resources as possible. Even just a decade ago, it would've been harder to keep track of every kid in the country, get his film, and try and get a hold of him. Now if you're Oklahoma, you can spend one afternoon DM'ing all the elite kids on the west coast, and gauge their interest. Most kids don't give a fuck about Oklahoma, but some might, and then you can start spending time/money going after them. In the past you would've just been shooting in the dark trying to recruit the west coast, now these schools can go after a few California kids every year without feeling like they are just throwing away their resources.
See also, UW in TexasNeighbor2972 said:In addition to Twitter, I think that schools have just gotten a lot more efficient in their recruiting. Everyone has their shit together, everyone is organized, and they all realize that they need to exhaust as many resources as possible. Even just a decade ago, it would've been harder to keep track of every kid in the country, get his film, and try and get a hold of him. Now if you're Oklahoma, you can spend one afternoon DM'ing all the elite kids on the west coast, and gauge their interest. Most kids don't give a fuck about Oklahoma, but some might, and then you can start spending time/money going after them. In the past you would've just been shooting in the dark trying to recruit the west coast, now these schools can go after a few California kids every year without feeling like they are just throwing away their resources.
-
I had a big post about trends on west coast recruiting, but I'm kinda drunk and will resume it:AIRWOLF said:
That's a nice narrative, but I do think it is a bigger issue than it used to be.dnc said:I think this article is a little misleading. It starts with 2011 (which I'm assuming is the furthest back the composite rankings go) so it makes the trend look alarming - from one lost kid to six in only six years! But I think 2011 is the outlier. We?ve lost kids to the Miamis and Oklahomas as long as I've followed recruiting. Hell we? lost Luke Huard to UNC and Jared Jones to FSU and Carlos Pierre Antoine to ND the very first year I bought a recruiting publication, and that was just from in the state of Washington.
If you take the average of this sample it's less alarming: The six year average is 6.71. This year we lost six. Last year we lost seven. So we're basically right in line with the sample.
@FremontTroll's poont is spot on - the Pac loosing these kids almost never helps UW. Stanford, SC and Oregon bringing in kids from outside the footprint almost always helps UW. Kids leaving is an issue.
I'm just not convinced it's a bigger issue than it's ever been.
I looked at the data from my '08-'16 data set and there does appear to be a trend towards a larger percentage of the "Blue Chip" recruits from the Pac-12 recruiting footprint heading East to school.
This includes recruits from AZ, CO, HI, UT, CA, OR, WA, ID, and NV. Four and five star recruits only. I rated them as "poached" if they went to a school from outside the region.
That is 99 "Blue Chip" recruits over nine recruiting cycles, or 11 per cycle.
Notre Dame has accounted for a quarter of those:
Nebraska won't get anyone good now without Donte Williams, Michigan sucks and got fucked this year on the west coast, Notre Dame got fucked this year outside of Jack Lamb and they can't compete with UW, so fuck them, Texas is happy recruiting at Texas, Miami is happy recruiting at Florida, and Tennessee is not a threat at all.
I'm only cocnerned about Oklahoma, who has serious momentum, Taggart at FSU, Bama and their poly kids, and if Clemson decides to make a serious run out west. Maybe Texas A&M and the barbers?
who gives a fuck if Virginia has half their class from Hawaii if they can't get anyone good at all -
Whatever recruiting migrations ensure that OSU, Wazzu, Utah, and Colorado fight over the mountain west scrap heap until their eventual bannination...
-
I didn’t mean that as snarky as it sounded. I actually agreed with what you wrote when I read it. Then I realized I had the data open on my desktop to confirm or challenge your hypothesis. I wasn’t thrilled about what I discovered.dnc said:
It wasn’t a narrative, it was pointing out that his data didn’t fit his conclusion.AIRWOLF said:
That's a nice narrative, but I do think it is a bigger issue than it used to be.dnc said:I think this article is a little misleading. It starts with 2011 (which I'm assuming is the furthest back the composite rankings go) so it makes the trend look alarming - from one lost kid to six in only six years! But I think 2011 is the outlier. We?ve lost kids to the Miamis and Oklahomas as long as I've followed recruiting. Hell we? lost Luke Huard to UNC and Jared Jones to FSU and Carlos Pierre Antoine to ND the very first year I bought a recruiting publication, and that was just from in the state of Washington.
If you take the average of this sample it's less alarming: The six year average is 6.71. This year we lost six. Last year we lost seven. So we're basically right in line with the sample.
@FremontTroll's poont is spot on - the Pac loosing these kids almost never helps UW. Stanford, SC and Oregon bringing in kids from outside the footprint almost always helps UW. Kids leaving is an issue.
I'm just not convinced it's a bigger issue than it's ever been.
I looked at the data from my '08-'16 data set and there does appear to be a trend towards a larger percentage of the "Blue Chip" recruits from the Pac-12 recruiting footprint heading East to school.
This includes recruits from AZ, CO, HI, UT, CA, OR, WA, ID, and NV. Four and five star recruits only. I rated them as "poached" if they went to a school from outside the region.
That is 99 "Blue Chip" recruits over nine recruiting cycles, or 11 per cycle.
Notre Dame has accounted for a quarter of those:
Your data is far more comprehensive and alarming. -
The fence matters in the sense that it's much more LIKELY that that recruit is tuned into your message.dnc said:
I know this is sort of the CW (the DM guys said five years ago the notion of "the fence" was obsolete because Twitter), I'm just not sure there's any hard evidence to back it up.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Kids are traveling between regions more than ever before as are families. They are less tied to the "hometown" than ever before. Recruiting reflects this. Either become a national brand or watch as your geographic footprint gets picked apart by those who are.FremontTroll said:He didn't list who the 8 players deciding on signing day were but Penis Swell chose Oregon and nearly all the rest chose USC. So the article is slightly melodramatic.
That being said I've been sounding the alarm bells on this for years. We should never cheer when some CA kid chooses Oklahoma or Notre Dame over USC or UCLA.
California, and the West in general, has greater competition for fewer elite recruits than the Southeast or Texas. Then if the outflows are greater than the inflows from outside the region it makes the conference even weaker.
Also every kid USC misses out on means more competition for the next kid down the line since we almost never go outside the region.
To some extent this is all mitigated by USC, Stanford, and even Oregon going national but ultimately if UW is going to win a National Championship we don't just need our own program to recruit at an elite level- we need the conference as a whole to be strong as well.
I'm with Coker and DDY that the fence is always priority one.
That being said, I do agree with the idea that the fence isn't quite as important as it used to be. But getting kids out of your region will always require more investment and be a greater challenge.
IMO, we're in a unique position that we're not completely screwed if we miss out in places in-state like we may have been 20 years ago when our recruiting base was largely the West Coast + Hawaii. The work/relocation component that @UW_Doog_Bot noted is definitely true. -
Here are the high schools that have produced multiple (>1) Power 5 recruits (not just Blue Chips) that have gone to school outside of the Pac-12. For the purposes of this, Notre Dame is considered a "Power 5" independent, but BYU is not. Again, this covers 2008-2016.
Notre Dame (Sherman Oaks), Rancho Verde (Moreno Valley), and Bishop Gorman (Las Vegas) are the biggest offenders.
