Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

Recruiting so far...

What grade would you give Tucker and his staff for their recruiting efforts so far?

  • A

    Votes: 23 9.7%

  • A-

    Votes: 39 16.5%

  • B+

    Votes: 72 30.5%

  • B

    Votes: 60 25.4%

  • B-

    Votes: 19 8.1%

  • C+

    Votes: 9 3.8%

  • C

    Votes: 5 2.1%

  • C-

    Votes: 6 2.5%

  • D

    Votes: 2 0.8%

  • F

    Votes: 1 0.4%
  • Total voters
    236
J-R-K said:
I understand the difficulties in landing high-end players but it would help to make more of a concerted effort to do so. Stanford and UW offer very few players but the ones they do offer are almost exclusively blue-chip or upper-tier three star. And then they recruit the hell out of them. It’s unlikely that we would have quite the same level of success as those schools but nonetheless it would be nice to see this kind of emphasis put on landing these types of recruits.

Why even offer and subsequently devote time and resources to recruits unlikely to become difference makers? Especially when it’s only spring/summer. Go all-in on quality talent. If needed you can always put out more offers as you get close to signing day.
Click to expand...
You have to build relationships with the kids. They aren't just sitting around not being recruited by anyone. You striking out on all your top targets and then scrambling to pick up your next tier smells of desperation. The kids you are trying to recruit will see straight through it. They will be told "CU didn't really want you, they just need to fill their roster because they missed out on their top targets. You are our top priority, you are at best their second"
 
J-R-K said:
Agreed that being in the top-20 is unrealistic (at least as a norm). But we’re not even recruiting in the 20’s or 30’s or even lower 40’s. So why are so many people happy with this new staff’s recruiting?

I don’t expect elite classes but I do expect something better then 45-50 and anyone who doesn’t want more 5-7 seasons should expect that as well.
Click to expand...

https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/ - #41

https://n.rivals.com/team_rankings/2020/all-teams/Football - Tied for #36
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
You have to build relationships with the kids. They aren't just sitting around not being recruited by anyone. You striking out on all your top targets and then scrambling to pick up your next tier smells of desperation. The kids you are trying to recruit will see straight through it. They will be told "CU didn't really want you, they just need to fill their roster because they missed out on their top targets. You are our top priority, you are at best their second"
Click to expand...
Yep. It's all about building those relationships.

For the most part, people make buying decisions on emotion, not logic. (We justify with logic and tell ourselves that's what it was, but mostly it's because we liked the salesperson or we had a better feeling toward the company/product for whatever reason.) Recruiting is sales, so it's the same thing. Logic is all the features/benefits and how they stack up. Those things have to be there. They are the ticket into the game. Without them, you'll never have an opportunity to make a sale. For many recruits, CU doesn't have the juice to gain admittance into the game and try to sell. But once in the game, what's going to win it is the emotion of how the recruit feels about the coach, the vision and the school.

That's what made McCartney such a great recruiter. Whenever he had the juice to get in the game, no one was better than him on the emotional selling that almost always determines the buying decision. I hope that Tucker has that same sort of sales ability. As much as he talks about relationships in recruiting, I'm confident that he gets it. Just have to see if he can execute.
 
We're also talking about how things look right now. This is not a complete class and I think many people are expecting a generally better finish come signing day in December and February than where CU currently sits. The amount of legitimate interest and visits from big time prospects relative to even a year ago is staggering. Nobody is praising a team rankings in the 40s right now, but to this point, there has absolutely been a marked improvement in recruiting for almost every position.
 
TSchekler said:
We're also talking about where things look right now. This is not a completed class and I think many people are expecting a generally better finish come signing day in December and February than where CU currently sits. The amount of legitimate interest and visits from big time prospects relative to even a year ago is staggering. Nobody is praising a team rankings in the 40s right now, but to this point, there has absolutely been a marked improvement in recruiting for almost every position.
Click to expand...
The thing that gives me some confidence is that Mel Tucker has been able to achieve a class in the 40's, without ANY results. He has only been selling his vision and has been able to convince quite a few good players to commit to CU. If he has any tangible results on the field this season, I would bet the recruiting will follow.
 
Scotch said:
https://247sports.com/Season/2020-Football/CompositeTeamRankings/ - #41

https://n.rivals.com/team_rankings/2020/all-teams/Football - Tied for #36
Click to expand...

I already explained this earlier in the thread but I’ll do it again...Those rankings take into account the number of commits a team has. Which makes no sense. Based only on the quality of commits...CU’s average composite score right now is 85.24. That score currently ranks #46. Last year it would have been #53 and in 2018 it would have been #49.
 
J-R-K said:
I already explained this earlier in the thread but I’ll do it again...Those rankings take into account the number of commits a team has. Which makes no sense. Based only on the quality of commits...CU’s average composite score right now is 85.24. That score currently ranks #46. Last year it would have been #53 and in 2018 it would have been #49.
Click to expand...
And I will reiterate, Mel Tucker has achieved those numbers with NO on field performance to point to. He has been selling just his vision, and still has a better class than 2/3 of the FBS.
 
J-R-K said:
I already explained this earlier in the thread but I’ll do it again...Those rankings take into account the number of commits a team has. Which makes no sense. Based only on the quality of commits...CU’s average composite score right now is 85.24. That score currently ranks #46. Last year it would have been #53 and in 2018 it would have been #49.
Click to expand...
That would be true if recruiting ended today. I do see an uptick in their overall average as a few higher rated players are very high on CU and have a great possibility of committing. It also seems like a few of the higher rated kids are wait and see mode as well.
 
J-R-K said:
I already explained this earlier in the thread but I’ll do it again...Those rankings take into account the number of commits a team has. Which makes no sense. Based only on the quality of commits...CU’s average composite score right now is 85.24. That score currently ranks #46. Last year it would have been #53 and in 2018 it would have been #49.
Click to expand...
Tell you what - if this class on signing day ends up in the 30s, will you STFU and admit that you were completely, and totally wrong?

And then, for good measure, how about not ****ting all over everyone's optimism that we actually, for the first time in years, appear to have a legitimate shot at ending up there?
 
J-R-K said:
I already explained this earlier in the thread but I’ll do it again...Those rankings take into account the number of commits a team has. Which makes no sense. Based only on the quality of commits...CU’s average composite score right now is 85.24. That score currently ranks #46. Last year it would have been #53 and in 2018 it would have been #49.
Click to expand...

If depth is something you value(hint: it absolutely should) then it does make sense to factor in the number of players.
 
I don't think you can judge Tucker completely in the first year. If he starts replicating MacIntyre too much I will be worried. I do not need to hear he is recruiting his type of guy, unless his type of guy is a P5 level recruit.
 
BlackNGold said:
I don't think you can judge Tucker completely in the first year. If he starts replicating MacIntyre too much I will be worried. I do not need to hear he is recruiting his type of guy, unless his type of guy is a P5 level recruit.
Click to expand...
From what I've heard, HCMT cares about offer lists more than we do. The standard by which he's judging CU recruiting is actually a higher one than we're holding him to at the moment.
 
Buffnik said:
From what I've heard, HCMT cares about offer lists more than we do. The standard by which he's judging CU recruiting is actually a higher one than we're holding him to at the moment.
Click to expand...
That’s been what he’s said publicly, but it honestly doesn’t jive with any of the DL recruiting, Perkins (both times) and Lichtenhaun. One or two high upside guys/year is one thing, but this is multiple guys with very few P5 offers to this point.
 
TSchekler said:
That’s been what he’s said publicly, but it honestly doesn’t jive with any of the DL recruiting, Perkins (both times) and Lichtenhaun. One or two high upside guys/year is one thing, but this is multiple guys with very few P5 offers to this point.
Click to expand...
I have no idea where his thinking on this is, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's doing something I've done before as a manager: giving your subordinates the power/ability to fail.

"I don't think these are necessarily the right guys to bring in, but if you really believe in them, go ahead. But you better be right."

If he's right and they kick ass, HCMT (and all most of us) will tip our hat, say "good job," and "you deserve this raise."

If he's wrong, then I expect/hope that there will be a change (at a minimum a change in approach by the current employee if not a change in employee).
 
skibum said:
I have no idea where his thinking on this is, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's doing something I've done before as a manager: giving your subordinates the power/ability to fail.

"I don't think these are necessarily the right guys to bring in, but if you really believe in them, go ahead. But you better be right."

If he's right and they kick ass, HCMT (and all most of us) will tip our hat, say "good job," and "you deserve this raise."

If he's wrong, then I expect/hope that there will be a change (at a minimum a change in approach by the current employee if not a change in employee).
Click to expand...
In the results oriented, win now business of P5 CFB, that’s a lot of leeway a first time HC is giving his assistants if so. A bad DL class this year will have a negative impact on the entire program for the next 3-4 years.

OL (and DL) recruiting was MM’s downfall here because he did not require his two OL coaches to recruit at a high level.
 
DrunkPanda said:
So what exactly are your expectations for the football program? A bowl game every year? Will perennial 6-7 records make you happy? Or do you expect to compete for Pac 12 titles? If so, you are the one that's delusional if you think we're going to do that with consistently bottom half of the Pac 12 recruiting classes...
Click to expand...
Without a substantial increase in donor $ flowing regularly into the program, I expect us to at best punch only slightly above our weight class in the PAC12 which means we may compete for conference titles perhaps once or twice a decade, and average 7 wins a season. Competing at elite levels requires $. Period.
 
There’s always a turd in the punch bowl, sometimes a few it seems.

Optimism is all we have. Until Tucker fails I feel opportunistic about the players we’re recruiting, some of the ones we’ve landed and some of the ones we’re still very much in on. This class has the ability to finish very strong, what happens between now and then will be telling.

Can this staff coach?
Can this team show promise?
Can this staff close the deal and sell their vision on some of these higher rated kids?

If so, we look as good as we have in years.
 
I think it is worth noting just how one or two changes can really be dramatic in the end.

Chev was hired in December 2015 with CU coming off a 4-9 season. There was zero momentum in Texas. All he managed to do is land Viska, Nixon, Sherman, and was a heavy influence in landing Miller as well. That is four potential starters on this year's team.
 
TSchekler said:
That’s been what he’s said publicly, but it honestly doesn’t jive with any of the DL recruiting, Perkins (both times) and Lichtenhaun. One or two high upside guys/year is one thing, but this is multiple guys with very few P5 offers to this point.
Click to expand...
I have no theory on the Perkins and Lichtenhaun offers/takes but my guess is he is ok with just getting some actual depth on the DL but this is not something he will put up with after year 1 and he’s shown recruits what his vision/philosophy looks like on the field. Jmo
 
Duff Man said:
I think it is worth noting just how one or two changes can really be dramatic in the end.

Chev was hired in December 2015 with CU coming off a 4-9 season. There was zero momentum in Texas. All he managed to do is land Viska, Nixon, Sherman, and was a heavy influence in landing Miller as well. That is four potential starters on this year's team.
Click to expand...
Who?

:ROFLMAO: But exactly. When Tucker decides to move on from Brumbaugh, it only takes one cycle to start making a difference. I’d love for him to prove us wrong but I currently have no faith in him
 
I feel okay/pretty good about our last 3 classes. If these coaches can coach 6-8 win seasons the next 2 years out of these guys I think we’ll all be viewing our recruiting more favorably in 3 years. If we have losing seasons...yikes the merry-go-round comes back again.
 
Duff Man said:
I think it is worth noting just how one or two changes can really be dramatic in the end.

Chev was hired in December 2015 with CU coming off a 4-9 season. There was zero momentum in Texas. All he managed to do is land Viska, Nixon, Sherman, and was a heavy influence in landing Miller as well. That is four potential starters on this year's team.
Click to expand...
Can add Brown.
 
Duff Man said:
I think it is worth noting just how one or two changes can really be dramatic in the end.

Chev was hired in December 2015 with CU coming off a 4-9 season. There was zero momentum in Texas. All he managed to do is land Viska, Nixon, Sherman, and was a heavy influence in landing Miller as well. That is four potential starters on this year's team.
Click to expand...
Grant Polley too (although I understand you were listing impact players). Really sad that it didn’t work out because that dude looked like a sure fire all-conference caliber player.

Also played a huge role in landing Lytle (since we know it wasn’t a whole lot of Lindgren lol). It’s exhausting thinking about how much he carried our recruiting.
 
I was specifically focusing on Texas because you always get the "it takes a few classes to get traction" argument. It took like two months for Chev to get CU into DFW. Hell, Jaylon Jackson is the forgotten player in that 2017 class and may still make an impact.

But yeah... Brown, Lytle, Perry, Vontae, and others are here in large part due to Chev.
 
Duff Man said:
I was specifically focusing on Texas because you always get the "it takes a few classes to get traction" argument. It took like two months for Chev to get CU into DFW. Hell, Jaylon Jackson is the forgotten player in that 2017 class and may still make an impact.

But yeah... Brown, Lytle, Perry, Vontae, and others are here in large part due to Chev.
Click to expand...
If Troy Walters would not have left, I can't even imagine how bad recruiting would have got under MM.
 
TSchekler said:
In the results oriented, win now business of P5 CFB, that’s a lot of leeway a first time HC is giving his assistants if so. A bad DL class this year will have a negative impact on the entire program for the next 3-4 years.

OL (and DL) recruiting was MM’s downfall here because he did not require his two OL coaches to recruit at a high level.
Click to expand...
MM didnt even require his last OL coach to coach the OL.... wasnt that guy busy not-coaching the tightends or something before he got promoted to OL coach and offensive coordinator?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top