You can't stop recruiting arguments, you can only hope to contain them

[SINKRATZ]

That is Stanford recruiting though. Those players didn't commit b/c Harbaugh did great things at USD, it wasn't seen as a big hire or anything. They committed to the education of Stanford. Hell, Walt Harris signed five 4* players in 2005- LINK. Better than Harbaugh's 1st class. Harbaugh was just a better coach than Teevens and Harris.

The point is that coming off 5 straight losing seasons, 2 fired coaches, and a 1 win season the year before they were a joke in the PAC 10, yet were beating other teams in their conference and the BCS for very good recruits right out the gate when Harbaugh took over.

 

[SD Buff]

Louisville is a good example. Tough comparison though considering how many serious academic risks they take. UCF and Louisville scoop up those kids and squeeze them through a spectacular "jock track".


Duff - Harbaugh has a big mouth and definitely made some noise his first year. His first couple classes were standard Stanford classes. Since 2009, Stanford has been recruiting on a totally different level.

CU needs to recruit better. No question about it. But think its a massive waste of time arguing or even worrying about whether Rivals or another site has the class ranked 8th or 12th in the PAC. Have to trust MacIntyre's staff to get us competitive with the kids they are bringing in - then expect them to recruit at a much higher level going forward.

 

[Quattro]

"Who knows only his own generation remains always a child".

Sometimes understanding others successes and failures can be helpful tini.

Luck - 6.0 4*
Owusu - 5.8 4*
DeCastro - 5.7 3*
Baldwin - 5.0 2*
Fleener - 5.5 3*
Marecic - 5.1 2*
Amajoyi - 5.4 2*
Howell - 5.7 3*

Other than Luck and Owusu, you listed a bunch of 2*'s and a couple 3*'s. Are you really saying players not named Luck and Owusu were sure fire hits out of high school? Seems to me that Harbaugh's success came from landing one of the smartest and best QBs in college football history, as well as the #1 pick two years running. It also appears outside of those two that excellent talent evaluation played a large part.

 

[SD Buff]

The point is that coming off 5 straight losing seasons, 2 fired coaches, and a 1 win season the year before they were a joke in the PAC 10, yet were beating other teams in their conference and the BCS for very good recruits right out the gate when Harbaugh took over.

I understand the point. And again, Walt freakn Harris did better in his first class in 2005. Coming off three losing seasons. Stanford is always going to get talented kids with an eye on education. Harbaugh didn't recruit above their average his first couple classes.

 

[Duff Man]

SD, I think we mostly agree. Better recruiting is pretty much a given using this year s a baseline though.

All I want is to see tangible signs of progress. Texas is a priority? Then signing two players (as it looks now) is not very good. Colorado is a priority? Get serious interest from a blue chip in-state prospect. Phoenix is a priority? Land a player from the area. You do any of those things and at least you can argue recruiting is changing in a meaningful way. We are not talking sky high expectations here.

 

[SD Buff]

Yep. Absolutely agree.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

 

[SINKRATZ]

Luck - 6.0 4*
Owusu - 5.8 4*
DeCastro - 5.7 3*
Baldwin - 5.0 2*
Fleener - 5.5 3*
Marecic - 5.1 2*
Amajoyi - 5.4 2*
Howell - 5.7 3*

Other than Luck and Owusu, you listed a bunch of 2*'s and a couple 3*'s. Are you really saying players not named Luck and Owusu were sure fire hits out of high school? Seems to me that Harbaugh's success came from landing one of the smartest and best QBs in college football history, as well as the #1 pick two years running. It also appears outside of those two that excellent talent evaluation played a large part.

Look at their offer lists Tini, other than Baldwin and Marecic they all had multiple BCS offers and most has PAC 10 offers. These guys committed before their senior seasons too, so who knows how many other offers would have come for these kids.

 

[Uncle Ken]

I feel like I've read that somewhere before...

That's the only thing you read there.

 

[Burrito]

That's the only thing you read there.

Great place to meet chicks!

 

[White_Rabbit]

I would not be complaining about recruiting if we were getting kids that had offer lists like those Stanford kids had. Dotson and Rodriguez are the only ones that even come close to those guys. Not all 2*s and 3*s are made equal boys.

 

[Yellow Shirt]

Minnesota in Jerry Kill's first year: #50 nationally (#9 in the Big 10) - 2.79 star avg.
-Current Win% at School: 0.447 (two bowl 12) - 2.53 star avg.

I was hoping MN would get brought up. I moved here in '06. The two programs have been interchangeable starting with the big talk of Hawkins and Brewster. You could take any press conference transcript, article, radio interview, fan message board quote, etc. and interchange "Colorado" with "Minnesota" and vice versa. The moment the trajectories separated (them up and us continuing to absolute bottom) was when MN hired a staff with a proven record from a level lower than the BCS, and we hired the unproven (yet angry) Embree and Biennemy. Kill's crew did not come in and land a chunk of blue chips. They coached. And now recruiting is improving, but only incrementally. And that's even with the brand new TCF.


HCMM and crew can coach their way to 6-6. That's step one. If a staff at CU, who is not actually Urban Meyer, recruited six 4 and 5 star kids, we would all be waiting for the espn ticker to break the bad news. There's only one way a brand new B-list staff pulls that kind of talent, and CU doesn't have sororities with that kind of mission(ary) statement.