The Guest
Guest
Excellent observation.
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!
New Rivals rankings out
- Thread starter Quattro
- Start date
Excellent observation.
somebody
Well-Known Member
I agree, and other than some personal pride on Dillon's part, why does it matter? Get him in here, coach him up, and win championships!
moett88
Well-Known Member
EXACTLY! Which just really makes me wanna dig deeper to get more information....
It's a trap!
moett88
Well-Known Member
Great stuff! Thanks for sharing. But in this one, HS coaches need to make up their mind which role they wanna take on and stop sitting on the fence (another rant for me). We are told as parents to NOT look for them to get our kid a scholarship but then get offended if college coaches pass them by on their opinions and guidance. I truly believe there should be a balance using online resources to spark interest then contact HS coaches for more depth on a player.........but I can say I had spent HOURS reviewing game film to make highlight tapes so that all the coaches have to do is send when a college coach called. And there's no recognition from them on that other than they don't have time to do anyone elses. So HS coaches are gonna have to make a decision and possibly set up a section in their coaching staff for recruiting to help the process and help themselves not get lost in the shuffle. My 2 cents.......i have stepped down from my soap box........LOL!
moett88
Well-Known Member
Yup!
moett88
Well-Known Member
comedy!
I agree with the drop out of the top 250 but what about the 4th star drop? They had a much better case for JCF to have his 4th star than Dillon's case.
JCF:
Dillon:
http://footballrecruiting.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1246635
If they have a legit reason, I could care less but their reasoning sounds a bit weak.
Cope-Fitzpatrick probably dropped because of questions about whether he has a position. Talk out of USC is that they may not use him as a TE. There has been speculation of him playing DE or OT. Importantly, the conversation hasn't seemed to be "you're so great you can choose to play wherever you want" but "we see you here instead of there". That's often the difference between a blue chip prospect and a really, really good prospect.
The recruiting ratings are what they are, a guide to provide an idea on the huge number of kids out there that no one person could ever have the ability to see and evaluate each season.
Are they biased? No question, the schools that have more subscribers are going to have more influence on the overall umbrella organizations (Scout, Rivals, etc.) and the players those schools are looking at will get more attention. Does this mean that the recruiting sites are wrong? No, in general if you look at the players who go to the traditional top 20-25 schools they will generally be more successful, those schools are good because they get more talent and they get more talent because they are good. If a kid has serious offers from Florida, Texas, U$C, Ohio State, and LSU you can be pretty sure that he at least has a lot of potential, those coaching staffs don't offer a lot of marginal talents.
At the same time the services miss a lot as well. They can't and don't see every kid and the can't know how a specific kid, even the ones they do see is going to develop. There are always kids who were highly ranked who don't turn out and kids who get overlooked by the services and large schools who end up as All-Americans and draft choices. That said, statistically a kid who has offers from 4 schools in the top 10 is much more likely to become an impact player than a guy with two offers from the WAC and a Sun Belt school.
The ratings are not the end all be all but can give a good idea. At the same time I would rather have a coach who decides for himself who to go after instead of relying on rating services. What is important about Dillon is that he is the right QB for the Buffs, not that he is the right guy for the ratings system. If the ratings like him great but it's much more important that Embree and Bienemy like him. A kid may be a 5* with offers from every major school but if he isn't right for CU then I don't want him.
Over time I would expect that the recruiting ratings for CU's classes will go up, that will mean that we are getting kids that we want and others want as well. If the classes include a few guys who didn't get noticed but turn into great players I will be just as happy.
Are they biased? No question, the schools that have more subscribers are going to have more influence on the overall umbrella organizations (Scout, Rivals, etc.) and the players those schools are looking at will get more attention. Does this mean that the recruiting sites are wrong? No, in general if you look at the players who go to the traditional top 20-25 schools they will generally be more successful, those schools are good because they get more talent and they get more talent because they are good. If a kid has serious offers from Florida, Texas, U$C, Ohio State, and LSU you can be pretty sure that he at least has a lot of potential, those coaching staffs don't offer a lot of marginal talents.
At the same time the services miss a lot as well. They can't and don't see every kid and the can't know how a specific kid, even the ones they do see is going to develop. There are always kids who were highly ranked who don't turn out and kids who get overlooked by the services and large schools who end up as All-Americans and draft choices. That said, statistically a kid who has offers from 4 schools in the top 10 is much more likely to become an impact player than a guy with two offers from the WAC and a Sun Belt school.
The ratings are not the end all be all but can give a good idea. At the same time I would rather have a coach who decides for himself who to go after instead of relying on rating services. What is important about Dillon is that he is the right QB for the Buffs, not that he is the right guy for the ratings system. If the ratings like him great but it's much more important that Embree and Bienemy like him. A kid may be a 5* with offers from every major school but if he isn't right for CU then I don't want him.
Over time I would expect that the recruiting ratings for CU's classes will go up, that will mean that we are getting kids that we want and others want as well. If the classes include a few guys who didn't get noticed but turn into great players I will be just as happy.
Deleted member 807
Guest
One way to test this. Dillon (or any other CU commit) could open up their recruitment to other schools.
The drama of being put back on the market might create more volatility in star rankings as more schools and more recruiting analysts re-open the file.
If Dillon draws attention from a list big name schools and his stock goes up, or if only smaller schools come calling and the rankings go down, then we could point to this experiment as more proof of the politics in the very human process of evaluating teenagers. It's prone to errors and is likely driven more than we'd like by economic forces.
It was interesting watching the Tate Forcier saga unfold, where parent driven promotion and media manipulation was at an extreme. If Dillon's media machine were as enthusiastic as Forcier's would Dillon's stock be higher?
At the end of the day, the ability to earn a starting position, stay healthy, and generate stats that contribute to victory is how these highschool ballers will ultimately be judged. Maybe 1 in 5,000 will become a household name and play on Sunday.
The drama of being put back on the market might create more volatility in star rankings as more schools and more recruiting analysts re-open the file.
If Dillon draws attention from a list big name schools and his stock goes up, or if only smaller schools come calling and the rankings go down, then we could point to this experiment as more proof of the politics in the very human process of evaluating teenagers. It's prone to errors and is likely driven more than we'd like by economic forces.
It was interesting watching the Tate Forcier saga unfold, where parent driven promotion and media manipulation was at an extreme. If Dillon's media machine were as enthusiastic as Forcier's would Dillon's stock be higher?
At the end of the day, the ability to earn a starting position, stay healthy, and generate stats that contribute to victory is how these highschool ballers will ultimately be judged. Maybe 1 in 5,000 will become a household name and play on Sunday.
heh. GL with objectivity. We don't have much of that around here :smile2:.This one is a tough one for me........because I have to be careful what I say.........will have to get back to you when I can put my example in good terms to where it is viewed objectively.
Also, anyone see Gunner Kiel's sterling debut? #1QB FTW!
moett88
Well-Known Member
LMBO! I'm sorry. When I said objectively I know information travels. So when I say what I'm gonna say just want the content looked at instead of where it came from.
Agreed. A HUGE reason this staff was hired was because of their ability to recruit top talent. So far I'm liking what I am seeing, but I am expecting them to get a few additional big fish recruits to really get the talent moving in the right direction.
DrunkPanda
Well-Known Member
Am I missing something? Looking at our list of recruits, I don't see much recruiting success, besides Dillon. Only like 3 of our recruits have an offer from a major bcs program and we missed out on pretty much all of the top prospects from Colorado. I thought we were supposed to have superstar recruiters on this staff
ATL
New Member
According to rivals...in sarks first full year at UW he signed 5 four stars and 23 three stars. They signed 31 that year so that was a larger than normal class.
In order for us to compare to that...we will have to sign a couple of: Wes brown, adams, hooker, kozan, yuri wright, etc...its possible.
Just because they don't have offers listed doesn't mean that they don't have any BCS offers. Norgard is a great example of this and parents of recruits (moet88, DoWork, etc.) also explained this. Once players commit they usually stop going to camps to pick up offers from various schools.
moett88
Well-Known Member
A few things to add to this one too. If I remember in one of Clay's interviews he said schools were still coming after him, he just respectfully didn't entertain them. Also, this is the next round of "circling the wagons" where recruits that schools may have been looking at but wanted to see more of is coming pretty soon. What I hear is after the first 3 games of the senior year recruits on the "wait list" for schools may get bumped up and offers may start to fly. So like it was said before, just because they are not posted doesn't mean the offers aren't there......the kids that are committed may just be committed.
Did also learn yesterday that scholarship monies aren't actually designated until after Jan 1. So i'm sure that opens up another round of recruiting. It is a funny business........truly funny and confusing as hell! So I give much credit to those kids that commit early and hold their committment.....cause the rollercoaster is not pretty. SMDH!
Smash Dan Hawkins?
:thumbsup: