2019 Recruiting Bored (Updated 9/27/18)
Comments
-
I hit flag and didn't even realize it wouldn't go through.Neighbor2972 said:"You can't flag a moderator's post"
Such flag, DDY. -
PLAYING 4D CHESS!!!dnc said:
I hit flag and didn't even realize it wouldn't go through.Neighbor2972 said:"You can't flag a moderator's post"
Such flag, DDY. -
And I just self-chinned. 5-D!Dennis_DeYoung said:
PLAYING 4D CHESS!!!dnc said:
I hit flag and didn't even realize it wouldn't go through.Neighbor2972 said:"You can't flag a moderator's post"
Such flag, DDY. -
The top 1% or so of players are so easy to identify even Eklund could do it. I do give Petersen some real credit for being able to identify and project long term potential a lot better than most coaches.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Pete is full of shit on recruiting rankings. He had to be at Boise state and when you form an attitude that hard and publicly mock the obvious truth, it's hard to turn that shit around even when it is clear that you are wrong. You won't have to crane your neck in our society to see examples of this everywhere.AIRWOLF said:
It almost certainly has to do with evaluation timetables. And UW does have to get in the game earlier with out of state kids, particularly those outside of California and the PNW.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Pete really does hate WAAIRWOLF said:I have created a table in Tableau with all known offers outstanding, per Rivals and 24/7. I grouped them by projected position for the Huskies, based on common sense. I included the three verbal commitments as well. There was one QB/Athlete that I removed from the list since he seems intent on playing QB and UW is done at that position.
2019 Offers and Verbals by Projected Position (Sorted by 247 Composite Grade
But one does see how it could create the perception of a bias against locals.
The other thing that I find amusing is the fact Petersen likes to make those snarky comments about recruiting star rankings being garbage, yet at least 42 of his 56 early offers are guys that carry 4- or 5-star early rankings. And most of the remainder are high 3-stars.
If every college coach could have their first choice there would only be like 100 players selected total.
There's a difference between there being a strong correlation between rankings and performance and a PERFECT correlation and Pete is as guilty as anyone at trying to poison our society with the notion than a non-perfect correlation is basically the same thing as no correlation.
But the narrative that recruiting rankings are meaningless is reflexive BS.
-
There's definitely plenty of "noise" in the data and unseen variables but the correlation is there.AIRWOLF said:
The top 1% or so of players are so easy to identify even Eklund could do it. I do give Petersen some real credit for being able to identify and project long term potential a lot better than most coaches.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Pete is full of shit on recruiting rankings. He had to be at Boise state and when you form an attitude that hard and publicly mock the obvious truth, it's hard to turn that shit around even when it is clear that you are wrong. You won't have to crane your neck in our society to see examples of this everywhere.AIRWOLF said:
It almost certainly has to do with evaluation timetables. And UW does have to get in the game earlier with out of state kids, particularly those outside of California and the PNW.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Pete really does hate WAAIRWOLF said:I have created a table in Tableau with all known offers outstanding, per Rivals and 24/7. I grouped them by projected position for the Huskies, based on common sense. I included the three verbal commitments as well. There was one QB/Athlete that I removed from the list since he seems intent on playing QB and UW is done at that position.
2019 Offers and Verbals by Projected Position (Sorted by 247 Composite Grade
But one does see how it could create the perception of a bias against locals.
The other thing that I find amusing is the fact Petersen likes to make those snarky comments about recruiting star rankings being garbage, yet at least 42 of his 56 early offers are guys that carry 4- or 5-star early rankings. And most of the remainder are high 3-stars.
If every college coach could have their first choice there would only be like 100 players selected total.
There's a difference between there being a strong correlation between rankings and performance and a PERFECT correlation and Pete is as guilty as anyone at trying to poison our society with the notion than a non-perfect correlation is basically the same thing as no correlation.
But the narrative that recruiting rankings are meaningless is reflexive BS.
Heh, this stuff is way more reliable than economic data I do work with and we make way more important decisions based on that.
Recruiting rankings >>> The dismal science -
Totally.FremontTroll said:
It is hard with multiple posters gender identifying as attack helicopters.AIRWOLF said:
You might be mixing me up with somebody else. I haven't flown much since Archangel retired after Iran-Contra.WeakarmCobra said:
I though u were still flying shit around. Make more dawg sense now that u in ur basement nowAIRWOLF said:
A significant amount. It is good to be comfortably retired.WeakarmCobra said:
How much free time do you have on hand?AIRWOLF said:I have created a table in Tableau with all known offers outstanding, per Rivals and 24/7. I grouped them by projected position for the Huskies, based on common sense. I included the three verbal commitments as well. There was one QB/Athlete that I removed from the list since he seems intent on playing QB and UW is done at that position.
2019 Offers and Verbals by Projected Position (Sorted by 247 Composite Grade
-
I'd like to see this get more use around here.dnc said: -
GrundleStiltzkin said:
Pete really does hate WASHINGTON, dammitAIRWOLF said:I have created a table in Tableau with all known offers outstanding, per Rivals and 24/7. I grouped them by projected position for the Huskies, based on common sense. I included the three verbal commitments as well. There was one QB/Athlete that I removed from the list since he seems intent on playing QB and UW is done at that position.
2019 Offers and Verbals by Projected Position (Sorted by 247 Composite Grade -
I'll take recruiting rankings over the official index of leading economic indicators all day, every day.UW_Doog_Bot said:
There's definitely plenty of "noise" in the data and unseen variables but the correlation is there.AIRWOLF said:
The top 1% or so of players are so easy to identify even Eklund could do it. I do give Petersen some real credit for being able to identify and project long term potential a lot better than most coaches.Dennis_DeYoung said:
Pete is full of shit on recruiting rankings. He had to be at Boise state and when you form an attitude that hard and publicly mock the obvious truth, it's hard to turn that shit around even when it is clear that you are wrong. You won't have to crane your neck in our society to see examples of this everywhere.AIRWOLF said:
It almost certainly has to do with evaluation timetables. And UW does have to get in the game earlier with out of state kids, particularly those outside of California and the PNW.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Pete really does hate WAAIRWOLF said:I have created a table in Tableau with all known offers outstanding, per Rivals and 24/7. I grouped them by projected position for the Huskies, based on common sense. I included the three verbal commitments as well. There was one QB/Athlete that I removed from the list since he seems intent on playing QB and UW is done at that position.
2019 Offers and Verbals by Projected Position (Sorted by 247 Composite Grade
But one does see how it could create the perception of a bias against locals.
The other thing that I find amusing is the fact Petersen likes to make those snarky comments about recruiting star rankings being garbage, yet at least 42 of his 56 early offers are guys that carry 4- or 5-star early rankings. And most of the remainder are high 3-stars.
If every college coach could have their first choice there would only be like 100 players selected total.
There's a difference between there being a strong correlation between rankings and performance and a PERFECT correlation and Pete is as guilty as anyone at trying to poison our society with the notion than a non-perfect correlation is basically the same thing as no correlation.
But the narrative that recruiting rankings are meaningless is reflexive BS.
Heh, this stuff is way more reliable than economic data I do work with and we make way more important decisions based on that.
Recruiting rankings >>> The dismal science -
Offers & Verbals by HS and Location:
