Thoughts on the 2018 Class So Far

[jizzrag85]

SIX Top 1000 players is incredible.

The star system is not gospel, but should not automatically be dismissed either. There are highly rated guys in this class the coaches have missed on who would be instant upgrades.

As far as the excuse that players need to see more than one year of winning, how many years of winning does it take for that recruiting uptick? 4-5? 7-8?

True, we have missed. I say 2-3 winning seasons max and if you can't turn that into better recruiting, it's on the coaches. No excuses from me, the class isn't "great" but it isn't inexcusable either.

 

[H.E. Pennypacker]

The star debate has been had over and over, no reason to re-litigate it. I'll just say though the the data on it's correlation to performance is pretty significant.

I agree people get to hung up on blue chip players. There aren't that many "true" blue chippers and they're very hard to get (although getting two or so a year is not unrealistic). I wouldn't mind if our classes were primarily made up of three stars so long as those players are mid-upper tier three stars with a handful of power conf offers (Deion Smith or Dmitri Stanley for example). The problem primarily in years past but also to a certain extent this year is that most of the three star quys we are getting are lower level three stars who have one offer and its from Oregon State.

What about arias? What about Thomas? And more.
You are minimizing what we have to pRove your point

 

[Duff Man]

Not true. 12 are 83 or higher and 80 is a 3 star. 7 of them are 84 or up and 3 are 85 or higher. They aren't barely 3 star kids.

I think there a lot of solid 3* players in this class. The "floor" of this class is significantly raised from past classes, but I do not think acknowledging the ceiling may not be all that high without some higher profile wins. No one is talking about needing a dozen 4* players in a class to be successful, but 5-6 is not or should not be totally out of reach. Relying on big bumps is not really going to work either.

You are basically saying getting players like Caleb Tremblay or Jeremiah Martin or Aashari Crosswell would make no difference.

 

[MtnBuff]

SIX Top 1000 players is incredible.

The star system is not gospel, but should not automatically be dismissed either. There are highly rated guys in this class the coaches have missed on who would be instant upgrades.

As far as the excuse that players need to see more than one year of winning, how many years of winning does it take for that recruiting uptick? 4-5? 7-8?

The star system is a very inexact measure but it does give a general idea.

If you don't like the star system then simply look at offer list. The best programs know talent, that is how they stay on top. Rarely a guy slips through the cracks (Chido, Oliver) but these guys aren't dumb. Their jobs depend on winning and winning depends on talent.

Bottom line is that if you want to consistently beat the best teams in your league on the field you have to beat them consistently on signing day. Right now we aren't

 

[Jeric]

The star debate has been had over and over, no reason to re-litigate it. I'll just say though the the data on it's correlation to performance is pretty significant.

I agree people get to hung up on blue chip players. There aren't that many "true" blue chippers and they're very hard to get (although getting two or so a year is not unrealistic). I wouldn't mind if our classes were primarily made up of three stars so long as those players are mid-upper tier three stars with a handful of power conf offers (Deion Smith or Dmitri Stanley for example). The problem primarily in years past but also to a certain extent this year is that most of the three star quys we are getting are lower level three stars who have one offer and its from Oregon State.

Okay, let's have a look:
Thomas - Numerous offers, high 3-star.
Stenstrom - high 3-star.
Smith - Numerous offers, high 3-star.
Culver - pretty much a national recruit at this point, confusing rating.
Arias - Michigan State, Utah, Oregon State, mid 3-star.
Ray Robinson - No P5 offers, mid 3-star. Wouldn't be surprised if some teams try to jump in late here, he gets a lot of looks.
Joshka Gustav - Oregon State
Jarek Broussard - Illinois, TCU
Delrick Abrams - Arkansas, Miss State, Oklahoma State, UCLA, West Virginia
Kahlef Hailassie - No P5 offers
Clyde Moore - Arizona State, Oregon State.
Frank Fillip - Baylor, Oregon State.
Josh Jynes - West Virginia.
Lavon Wallace - Cal, Oregon State.
Davion Taylor - Mississippi

Doesn't seem like a fair statement to me.

 

[jizzrag85]

I think there a lot of solid 3* players in this class. The "floor" of this class is significantly raised from past classes, but I do not think acknowledging the ceiling may not be all that high without some higher profile wins. No one is talking about needing a dozen 4* players in a class to be successful, but 5-6 is not or should not be totally out of reach. Relying on big bumps is not really going to work either.

You are basically saying getting players like Caleb Tremblay or Jeremiah Martin or Aashari Crosswell would make no difference.

We're on the same page. I'm in the camp of wanting to see more 4 stars and I don't disagree that 5-6, 4 stars is something that's out of reach. The bigger impact kids you can get absolutely can be game changers. We agree the class is solid but want to see next level recruiting, I think it's coming soon. Im getting antsy too but I'm happy our class is better than it's been.

 

[H.E. Pennypacker]

Okay, let's have a look:
Thomas - Numerous offers, high 3-star.
Stenstrom - high 3-star.
Smith - Numerous offers, high 3-star.
Culver - pretty much a national recruit at this point, confusing rating.
Arias - Michigan State, Utah, Oregon State, mid 3-star.
Ray Robinson - No P5 offers, mid 3-star. Wouldn't be surprised if some teams try to jump in late here, he gets a lot of looks.
Joshka Gustav - Oregon State
Jarek Broussard - Illinois, TCU
Delrick Abrams - Arkansas, Miss State, Oklahoma State, UCLA, West Virginia
Kahlef Hailassie - No P5 offers
Clyde Moore - Arizona State, Oregon State.
Frank Fillip - Baylor, Oregon State.
Josh Jynes - West Virginia.
Lavon Wallace - Cal, Oregon State.
Davion Taylor - Mississippi

Doesn't seem like a fair statement to me.

Not bad offer sheets for most of those recruits.

 

[Duff Man]

We're on the same page. I'm in the camp of wanting to see more 4 stars and I don't disagree that 5-6, 4 stars is something that's out of reach. The bigger impact kids you can get absolutely can be game changers. We agree the class is solid but want to see next level recruiting, I think it's coming soon. Im getting antsy too but I'm happy our class is better than it's been.

Well, if you look at the poll at the top of the page, no one seems to think it sucks.

 

[J-R-K]

Okay, let's have a look:
Thomas - Numerous offers, high 3-star.
Stenstrom - high 3-star.
Smith - Numerous offers, high 3-star.
Culver - pretty much a national recruit at this point, confusing rating.
Arias - Michigan State, Utah, Oregon State, mid 3-star.
Ray Robinson - No P5 offers, mid 3-star. Wouldn't be surprised if some teams try to jump in late here, he gets a lot of looks.
Joshka Gustav - Oregon State
Jarek Broussard - Illinois, TCU
Delrick Abrams - Arkansas, Miss State, Oklahoma State, UCLA, West Virginia
Kahlef Hailassie - No P5 offers
Clyde Moore - Arizona State, Oregon State.
Frank Fillip - Baylor, Oregon State.
Josh Jynes - West Virginia.
Lavon Wallace - Cal, Oregon State.
Davion Taylor - Mississippi

Doesn't seem like a fair statement to me.

Again i said this was primarily an issue in years past and not so much this season. However even this year...10 of 16 commits with two or fewer power conference offers, with most of those offers coming from lower level power conf programs. So I would say it's generally a fair statement. The floor is definitely higher with this class (not so many Big Sky/Mountain West type recruits) but not very many guys to be excited about either. Basically just seems like we have a bunch of ok but not great players.

What about arias? What about Thomas? And more.
You are minimizing what we have to pRove your point

See above...

 

[J-R-K]

Last year we pulled in a class ranked 35 on 247 sports. This year we're 45 and 5th in the PAC.

Numerically not a huge difference but if you actually examine the specific classes last years was much better. Generally most years there seems to be a pretty big drop off in terms of quality after around the 35-40 range. Our current ranking is also a bit inflated simply because we have more commits then many of the schools behind us.

Not true. 12 are 83 or higher and 80 is a 3 star. 7 of them are 84 or up and 3 are 85 or higher. They aren't barely 3 star kids.

I know. What I'm saying is I'd like to see it where most of the class is 85 or higher, not just a few guys. Again numerically it's not a huge difference but when you actually look at the specifics in terms of highlight tapes or offer lists between say an 83 and an 86 it's often pretty significant. Getting a composite ranking in the 80-84 range is really not much of an accomplishment. These sites give out very few two star rankings meanwhile they hand out low tier 3 star rankings like its candy....