Seriously. last I checked there are more kids competing to play football for these colleges than ever in the history. You've got to work your ass off to make it in at power five conference
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
What is an acceptable recruiting class rank?
- Thread starter pcbuff
- Start date
Seriously. last I checked there are more kids competing to play football for these colleges than ever in the history. You've got to work your ass off to make it in at power five conference
I don't see how facilities play a role in recruiting until they are actually done. How the hell is a recruit supposed to get stoked on a giant hole in the ground compared to some other school that has their facilities already built and that they can actually walk into and experience? Its great that CU finally decided to join the party and get them built however long it took, but I don't think facilities will do us much good until recruits can witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational battle station.
FLounder
Think Positive and life will be Positive.
White_Rabbit
Well-Known Member
The same way they recruit to this whole in the ground program. Assure them it'll be better in the future. Facilities will be awesome when they arrive on campus, show pictures, etc. Maybe they could ask Rick George. He got random people to write him large checks to build them. Maybe he's our best recruiter?
I think we all agree on a few things.
1. The more highly rated the class, the better.
2. When pitching a recruit, winning>improving>bottoming out.
3. When pitching a recruit, completed facilities>in-progress facilities>piss poor facilities.
Enlightening.
1. The more highly rated the class, the better.
2. When pitching a recruit, winning>improving>bottoming out.
3. When pitching a recruit, completed facilities>in-progress facilities>piss poor facilities.
Enlightening.
buffs04
Well-Known Member
Sometime in the past year or so I saw an article in the Atlantic or some similar outlet that documented that literally every generation in modern American history has effusively made this claim about its successors. So yeah. That's basically bull****. Like most (all?) other platitudes.
Edit: here: http://www.thewire.com/national/2013/05/me-generation-time/65054/
Last edited:
Further, if you listen to any current coach he will tell you that today's athletes put in so many more hours and so much more work than the athletes of the past. This may make athletes a little more insulated/isolated than in the past, but questioning their work ethic has no foundation.
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
The staff needs to take it up a notch and close on some of the kids caught up in these coaching changes. I think more Pac12 turmoil takes place as they fill these openings. For once we're stable.
Bufffan68
Club Member
Maybe we can poach a few players and coaches from OSU...
Hey, add a couple decent players to the class and we'll jump into the 40's. One thing I've noticed about these rankings is that the difference between a class ranked 48 and one ranked 60 is probably one or two players.
We are not in a place where a top 15 class is anywhere close to a realistic expectation. So yeah, I'm hoping for a top 50 class in the hopes that MM can get them to play like a top 30 class.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yup but that's the difference between getting a Prich type recruit (potential) and getting a shorter, slower WR.
In other words, that can be HUGE. If we had a WR that could stretch the field it would have opened things up for spruce and Sefo would have had a higher ypa. I bet we would have converted on more third and longs too.
It's based on potential. That one or two better players may never reach that either.
buffs04
Well-Known Member
For some reason, I think that our fanbase is prone to thinking that our coaches are particularly adept at spotting "diamonds in the rough". I think that you can look at the last 10 years of CU football and come to your own conclusions about how the diamonds in the rough have panned out.
Exactly. One or two players are a big deal. You mean to tell me that CU's future doesn't look just a tad brighter with Jomon Dotson, Elijah Rodriguez, and Chance Waz in the fold?
:nod:
Or if EB had been able to hold on to BJ Catalon.
That said, I do think there's a lot to what Embo used to say that the guys you don't land doesn't hurt you as much as the recruiting mistakes you do land. I think we're doing a better job with hitting a higher % of good locker room guys who will contribute on Saturdays. We're just super light on game changers.
Was going to mention catalon myself then saw this. Our running game would have been amazing this year had we had him on the team. He may have opened up some food zone reads for Sefo too.
I read a stat that most td drives have at least one play of 20+ yards. It's just very difficult to have long sustained drives that go 16 plays, 7 minutes (look at oregon).
You need those base of contributors, no doubt, but a guy like to break open a play once in a while matters just as much. But as we've seen with the buffs, having a prich and not having he other guys doesn't mean you are going to be good.
It just means you'll win at least one conference game.
I'm not a big "recruiting follower". But I'm am constantly perplexed by some of the teams that pull top 20 recruiting classes consistently - Virginia, North Carolina, NC State, Kentucky, Washington State. Blows my mind
Those programs don't consistently pull Top 20 recruiting classes. UNC, maybe.
SD Buff
Club Member
Those programs don't pull top 20 classes. Bit aside from Wazzu, what they do have is a ton of talent in their immediate footprint.
From phone
buffsyko
Club Member
Correct, would be nice to get a top twenty on occasion, would like to see a 5-6 ranking in conference each year in the future. Number one seems a stretch of course.
eddie's classes were in the top 20. he won.
mallory's classes were in the top 30. he won a bit less.
fairbank's classes were bad. he lost.
Mac's classes were in the top 20 and then better. he won big.
skippy's classes were in the top 20. he won.
gb's classes were in the top 30 and he won and then when they were bad, he lost.
hawk's classes were rarely in the top 30 and then bad. he lost.
embree's classes were bad. he lost.
mm's classes are generously in 60s range. there are roughly 60 power 5 teams. he will ________.
i am oversimplifying, but you see the point.
we are a proud storied program with more historical success than any other team in the p12 except for usc. we should be recruiting top 30 classes even when we suck. of course, we should make a bowl game every year, even when we suck. so, i guess my expectations are dated.
mallory's classes were in the top 30. he won a bit less.
fairbank's classes were bad. he lost.
Mac's classes were in the top 20 and then better. he won big.
skippy's classes were in the top 20. he won.
gb's classes were in the top 30 and he won and then when they were bad, he lost.
hawk's classes were rarely in the top 30 and then bad. he lost.
embree's classes were bad. he lost.
mm's classes are generously in 60s range. there are roughly 60 power 5 teams. he will ________.
i am oversimplifying, but you see the point.
we are a proud storied program with more historical success than any other team in the p12 except for usc. we should be recruiting top 30 classes even when we suck. of course, we should make a bowl game every year, even when we suck. so, i guess my expectations are dated.
/thread
Agreed. Winner of the thread. Tempted to lock it on a high note
Which ranking services existed back then? Or is that a bit of revisionist history after knowing the outcome...?
It was a million times less precise but there were a half dozen or so publishers that did recruiting. They were very good In general but it was all a lot more regional than now. That cut both ways because we could pull guys that wouldn't even be on the radar of an Alabama for example. Now every major school is national. Mac was actually on the cutting edge of national recruiting because he had to-- not enough elite guys in the Rockies.
Point remains however: recruit and win.
Top 60 this year.
Need to be pushing top 40 in 2016.
2017 is THE class imo. By the time that class is signed coaches will have had a full year to show off the brand new completed facilities to recruits. Top 30 or bust!!!! The 2016 season needs to be a good one to help this along.
Need to be pushing top 40 in 2016.
2017 is THE class imo. By the time that class is signed coaches will have had a full year to show off the brand new completed facilities to recruits. Top 30 or bust!!!! The 2016 season needs to be a good one to help this along.
CVilleBuff
Well-Known Member
Not top 20, but UVA has been in the 20s 3 of the last 4 years despite being crap except for an 8 win 2011 campaign. We'd all give our left nut for that. As alluded to, location matters. However, it doesn't excuse our current state of affairs. CU should be posting top 40 classes (and many years far higher) with consistency.