Discussion in 'University of Colorado Recruiting Archive' started by DBT, Dec 8, 2014.
OK, smart ass, which comes first? I get that once we start winning, things will take care of themselves. But until we get this "winning" thing figured out, it might help to get the recruits we are after to come check us out. And, yeah, my point should've been how nice it is to hear how greatly we are perceived by the kids who visit and not what it will take to get them to visit.
I'm who believes CU is loaded with potential and will return to being a top 25 program. I also really appreciate the young men who are coming here to begin that turn around.
Don't worry DBT, we're going to get some of the guys that visited.
I should've stated all of this differently. What I should've said is. "Isn't it great to hear some really positive comments about our program coming from recruits who visited this weekend? I can't help but to believe that once we start getting recruits to visit, this thing is going to take off like a Saturn 5 rocket!"
Well stated DBT!
Recruiting blue chip players is completely different.
Didn't the Saturn 5 detonate on liftoff?
Sure, OK. We are about to explode. How's that?
Yeah. I understand that. It will be nice, at some point, to compete for them. We need to build momentum with the program. I guess that's where I'm coming from. I think we have enough to sell, as evidenced by comments we are getting from some of these young men, that when we get momentum, blue chip guys will visit. Once they visit, we will have a shot. You'll never go out with the prom queen if she won't even talk to you.
Yeah. Can be very fickle. Florida has had about half its verbals decommit, for example. Those kids have so many options and are very savvy about not taking big risks on the situation they put themselves in. In some cases, they can find a very nice deal for themselves and their family.
Recruiters with significant and credible NFL experience who can sell the message "I know what they're looking for at that level and will help you get there"
I think we have a few bonafide bluechips in this class (Fehoko, Lynott). They just don't act like typical ones.
AKA 2012 coaching staff.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So I looked at Duke because I am kinda amazed at how well they are doing and feel that Mac subscribes to the same philosophy of coaching as Cutcliffe. So here are Duke's results and the class that immediately followed that season (according to Rivals).
2007: 1-11 #65
***David Cutcliffe coaching start***
2008: 4-8 #51
2009: 4-8 #72
2010: 3-9 #77
2011: 3-9 #52
2012: 6-7 #68
2013: 10-4 #58
2014: 9-3 (versus ASU on 12/27) #37
What jumps out to me is that they haven't not improved recruiting as winning improved. I think sustained winning has led to a small increase in recruiting, but it really doesn't impress me. I'm wondering if Cutcliffe (and Mac) will continue to recruit the guys that they want in the program and ignore rankings and stars.
Looking at Duke's current class, they have 2 four star players (they do have 3 more 5.7 rated players), but they are beating a lot of P5 schools for a lot of the talent they have on the team. going back a few class they seem to be moving from 2 star players to 3 stars and are now starting to mix in four star players. They went from beating school like Purdue and UCF for players to Wisconsin and Stanford.
I don't really know what this means for CU, but at some point we are either going to need to start winning to bring in talent, or bring in talent to start winning. If a school like Duke can do it, then I have some faith for it getting done at CU, I just hope Mac is the right guy for the job.
that means we are still 2/3 seasons out? not sure if I have that much fuel in the tank still, uugghh
time to fill er up
Separate names with a comma.