teachercd
Active member
Things that are sort of lame.
1. Ranking could be about "Same as it ever was"
2. SIGN MORE PLAYERS
*** 2017 Recruiting ***
- Thread starter Mavric
- Start date
1. Ranking could be about "Same as it ever was"
2. SIGN MORE PLAYERS
ScottyIce
Banned
Yeah, I think Riley was dead set on the low 20's though. I think that is the reasonable conclusion someone can come to when wondering why we didn't get any commitments for 5 months.... or whatever it was.
spurs1990
New member
I think you have to look at the pieces as opposed to just the ratings. I can see where it'd be frustrating from that standpoint though.
The pieces though are exactly what we needed.
DrunkOffPunch
New member
Pretty much this. Even if you want to look at ratings we have some guys that are really underrated.
In the Deed the Glory
New member
and the rich get richer
You can't finish seasons like
and expect recruiting momentum. I'll cite USC and LSU as examples of finishing strong and/or smart hires.
I'm pleased. We held onto Guy and got Daniels.
We will have to improve on the recruiting trail but you can't sell the direction of the program based off the way we end these seasons.
I'm pleased. We held onto Guy and got Daniels.
We will have to improve on the recruiting trail but you can't sell the direction of the program based off the way we end these seasons.
Scott Tenorman
New member
I think you have to look at the rankings a little harder. Tennessee is at 16th, but they have 28 commits. On average, we have better players than they do. Just a smaller class. If we were sitting at 16th would people be upset?
Clemson is sitting at 15th because they only have 14 commits, but when you look at their class it's pretty great imo. Two 5 stars and nine four stars. Same with Stanford, I think their class is much better than where 24/7 currently has them ranked.
Not saying this class is great, but I think it's good. Just fairly small (so far at least). I think it's much more telling to look at the average rating, as opposed to overall.
Red Five
New member
I don't want to be labeled a Debbie Downer (looking at you, Matty), but here are our recruiting rankings the last 10 years (247C): 20, 25, 42, 27, 16, 31, 22, 36, 31, 24. Unless we pull something out of our hat at the end, we will be smack dab in the middle of that.
And every year we hear the same things to explain our 20+ ranked class: look at the average player rankings, look at the individual pieces, we have some guys who are very underrated.
I guess I was just expecting more from this class since I have heard a lot of "wait until the 2017 class" from many people since Riley was hired. I do think that we reeled in a lot of good talent on paper. Hopefully there is a true difference maker or 2 (or 3 or 4 or...) in this class like a Suh, David, or Abdullah.
OK, rant over. Flame away at me
And every year we hear the same things to explain our 20+ ranked class: look at the average player rankings, look at the individual pieces, we have some guys who are very underrated.
I guess I was just expecting more from this class since I have heard a lot of "wait until the 2017 class" from many people since Riley was hired. I do think that we reeled in a lot of good talent on paper. Hopefully there is a true difference maker or 2 (or 3 or 4 or...) in this class like a Suh, David, or Abdullah.
OK, rant over. Flame away at me
Redux
Donor
Rankings aren't even official yet, lol.
I'm more worried about production anyway, but yes a shiny top 15 would look nice.