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!

#49 Recruiting class in the country

Unleash Hell said:
I think he might have had a couple top 25's and a couple top 40's before the scandel and restrictions hit. It wasn't bad until then.
Click to expand...

A lot of that was Embree and Bieniemy. Gary loved to coach, but thought recruiting was overrated. In so many ways, he kept his high school attitude of "give me what I've got for that year and I'll coach them into winners". That approach is only going to get you so far.
 
There's approximately 60 BCS teams. The 40s puts us in the bottom third. Not acceptable.
 
DBT said:
Aren't we going to sign around 30 kids? If so, then, hell yes we should expect low thirties or better.
Click to expand...

It certainly helps.

When rating a class, Rivals only awards points for your 25 highest-ranked signees. If we have 27 or 28, then the average rating for the class goes up quite a bit.
 
There are definitely both advantages and disadvantages for coaching staffs attempting to put together highly rated recruiting classes when they've just taken over programs that have previously fallen on hard times. On one hand, recruits not having seen any definitive results is a disadvantage because obviously nothing has been proven yet. On the other hand, you can make your vision for the program sound as rosy and idealistic as possible, without having any failures tarnish the product (or if you do, it can still be blamed on the previous regime). Half the puzzle is bringing in highly ranked recruiting classes and thus starting to win games and gain momentum. The more difficult part will be keeping the momentum going once that actually happens
 
Buffnik said:
A lot of that was Embree and Bieniemy. Gary loved to coach, but thought recruiting was overrated. In so many ways, he kept his high school attitude of "give me what I've got for that year and I'll coach them into winners". That approach is only going to get you so far.
Click to expand...

Was that not in the Barnett era though? I think the question was how was our recruiting during the Barnett era, not how good of a recruiter was Barnett.
 
DallasBuff said:
2002 was a Top 20, if memory serves....as it should have been. Things were looking up at that point. Can we rewind to then?
Click to expand...

I'd rather not. It would mean that we'd have to go through all of this **** with our football program again.

Of course, I'd have more hair on my head, and have a number of years still ahead of me in the cockpit, so it wouldn't be all bad. But mostly, no.
 
Unleash Hell said:
Was that not in the Barnett era though? I think the question was how was our recruiting during the Barnett era, not how good of a recruiter was Barnett.
Click to expand...

In that case, it was good for a couple years under Barnett.
 
Somewhere in the 40's would be an improvement over what we've been doing the last several years. Consistent classes in the 40's will help win a lot of football games, but won't put us at the top of the college football landscape. While I'd be pleased with a class in the 40's this year, I don't think that should be the expectation going forward.
 
Boulder Buff said:
Simply improving over the last few classes means nothing.
Click to expand...

Really? So getting worse wouldn't mean anything either, by that logic.

Of course it means something. It's not where we ultimately want to be, but it's a step in the right direction. If we're still pulling in classes in the 40's 2-3 years down the road, I'll be upset. I'm a believer in realistic expectations. I don't think it's realistic to expect classes in the 20's with a brand new, unproven head coach at a school that hasn't had a winning record since 2005. I do think it's realistic to expect a better job of in-state recruiting, particularly with the o-linemen, but that's a different subject.
 
It really does not mean a whole lot. It is such a low standard to meet, it would take the coaching staff really dropping the ball to not meet those expectations.

You also are contradicting yourself a bit too. You can't be satisfied with a class in the 40s and at the same time be unhappy we are not landing the elite in-staters. Not getting those types of players would be the main reason we would end up in the 40s.
 
Boulder Buff said:
It really does not mean a whole lot. It is such a low standard to meet, it would take the coaching staff really dropping the ball to not meet those expectations.

You also are contradicting yourself a bit too. You can't be satisfied with a class in the 40s and at the same time be unhappy we are not landing the elite in-staters. Not getting those types of players would be the main reason we would end up in the 40s.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that getting Callahan and Thurston would immediately put this class into the 20's? If that's the sole difference between a class in the 40's and a class in the 20's, then we're really not that far off, IMO.
 
sackman said:
So you're saying that getting Callahan and Thurston would immediately put this class into the 20's? If that's the sole difference between a class in the 40's and a class in the 20's, then we're really not that far off, IMO.
Click to expand...

Not just those two guys alone, but they would certainly help. The stats have been posted. We need about 4-5 4* players to end up in the 20s.
 
We open 4-1 I would expect recruiting to explode. I think there are quite a few high caliber kids out there keeping an eye on this program this year.
 
I do agree the 40's range shouldnt and cant be the standard. I dont think improvement over the last few classes means nothing but I also dont think we should put huge stock into minimal improvement. I do think how we play in games this year is big, winning more than our share would do good things for us. Twenties to high teens should be the standard, imho at this time. We still need improve facilities as it's part of the recruiting game and we gotta start winning every year again.
 
Boulder Buff said:
Why? We have a stronger recruiting staff than we ever had under Hawkins. So why is simply being better than Hawkins in anything something to be happy about?
Click to expand...
umm because you want to improve in everything you do. You want to improve in wins, you want to improve in recruiting, you want to improve on road wins, I want to improve on my masturbation skills without severe chaffing etc. It's just a way of life. You just want to improve.
 
Boulder Buff said:
Why? We have a stronger recruiting staff than we ever had under Hawkins. So why is simply being better than Hawkins in anything something to be happy about?
Click to expand...

Zactlly! The problem is that Hawkins left us with a bad rep, and because of that I think Sacky's right - we'll improve over time but more slowly than any of us would like.
 
Boulder Buff said:
Why? We have a stronger recruiting staff than we ever had under Hawkins. So why is simply being better than Hawkins in anything something to be happy about?
Click to expand...
Need to show improvement on the field first and then thus staff will really be able to work their magic.
 
zbuff said:
Zactlly! The problem is that Hawkins left us with a bad rep, and because of that I think Sacky's right - we'll improve over time but more slowly than any of us would like.
Click to expand...

this. Expecting a top 20 class this year is like expecting a 10 win season this year. Actually if we pull of a 10 win season, I do expect a top 20 class
 
No one is talking about expecting a top 20 class in this thread.

I just hope we can get a top 40 class by 2014.
 
I don't understand you guys. CU needs, as a bottom baseline, to be in the mid to low 30's. I'm pretty sure our modern historical average is FAR above that. We need to be in the mid 20's on average if we want to compete. And BB is being sarcastic on that last post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top