(02-09-2016 03:39 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:04 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 02:00 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 01:33 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 09:53 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  As I posted, ESPN seemed to prefer AppSt and GaSo by the number of players they rated, I have no problem with the ratings.

As I have also stated I'm biased toward who offers, and GaSo has a very good class by that standard, so I have no issues with them being considered the best class in the SBC.

Again read. MOST IF NOT ALL OF GS PLAYERS THAT WERE RATED, WERE RATED BY ESPN BEFORE THEY COMMITTED. Saying ESPN care more than one Sun Belt team over another is asinine at best. ArkSt could have recruited those same players and they would have been rated before committing. Take the tin foil hat off and a couple of offers from FBS teams with almost as many FCS does not mean a player is underrated. Throwing out 248 offers does not mean the coaches really had them high on the list.

No problem.

My only question is what the effect of ESPN not rating many SBC signees has on 247's composite, and am waiting for a reply to my 2nd email. The 1st guy directed me to his boss.

The other major sites they use in their composite ratings rate almost all the players, ESPN rates just a few.

Will not change the fact that I, or anyone that has been involved in recruiting recruiting goes more by a players offer sheet than there rating. Most coaches could not began to tell you a players rating, but they damn well know who else is recruiting them. Offers, especially later in the recruiting cycle, are a good way of separating the rising stars from the falling ones. Problem is getting an accurate offer sheet, when coaches can't talk about it before players sign..

I like GaSo's class because most of their players have impressive offer sheets, (according to the GaSo posters here,even better than shown) not their ratings, but have no problem with those that prefer to go by ratings. I just don't understand ratings but I do understand getting a player a lot of other teams wanted. I like simple.

Its one out of four rankings. Whatever effect is not going to make a huge difference with three others maybe a few spots in the national rankings but you are not going to move up 10 spots if ESPN ranked every single player as probably every team in our area has probably more than a handful of NR players. ESPN top 75 probably looks similar to the others. Obviously to make ESPN's ranking radar it take more than a few FBS offers mixed in with just as many FCS. Also throwing out 248 offers does not mean you are actively recruiting the kid. Probably just fishing for interest early on or setting up your plan B's. Coaches do not have the time or resources to actually recruit 248 kids.

I don't really care about the rankings because they are more often a result of quantity, not quality.

Hell most of the signees that will help make A-State by far the best team in the SBC again next year, are not even a part of this class, and don't effect rankings anyway.

I am interested in players ratings, because I don't understand the composite ratings.

(02-09-2016 03:39 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:04 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 02:00 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 01:33 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 09:53 AM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  As I posted, ESPN seemed to prefer AppSt and GaSo by the number of players they rated, I have no problem with the ratings.

As I have also stated I'm biased toward who offers, and GaSo has a very good class by that standard, so I have no issues with them being considered the best class in the SBC.

Again read. MOST IF NOT ALL OF GS PLAYERS THAT WERE RATED, WERE RATED BY ESPN BEFORE THEY COMMITTED. Saying ESPN care more than one Sun Belt team over another is asinine at best. ArkSt could have recruited those same players and they would have been rated before committing. Take the tin foil hat off and a couple of offers from FBS teams with almost as many FCS does not mean a player is underrated. Throwing out 248 offers does not mean the coaches really had them high on the list.

No problem.

My only question is what the effect of ESPN not rating many SBC signees has on 247's composite, and am waiting for a reply to my 2nd email. The 1st guy directed me to his boss.

The other major sites they use in their composite ratings rate almost all the players, ESPN rates just a few.

Will not change the fact that I, or anyone that has been involved in recruiting recruiting goes more by a players offer sheet than there rating. Most coaches could not began to tell you a players rating, but they damn well know who else is recruiting them. Offers, especially later in the recruiting cycle, are a good way of separating the rising stars from the falling ones. Problem is getting an accurate offer sheet, when coaches can't talk about it before players sign..

I like GaSo's class because most of their players have impressive offer sheets, (according to the GaSo posters here,even better than shown) not their ratings, but have no problem with those that prefer to go by ratings. I just don't understand ratings but I do understand getting a player a lot of other teams wanted. I like simple.

Its one out of four rankings. Whatever effect is not going to make a huge difference with three others maybe a few spots in the national rankings but you are not going to move up 10 spots if ESPN ranked every single player as probably every team in our area has probably more than a handful of NR players. ESPN top 75 probably looks similar to the others. Obviously to make ESPN's ranking radar it take more than a few FBS offers mixed in with just as many FCS. Also throwing out 248 offers does not mean you are actively recruiting the kid. Probably just fishing for interest early on or setting up your plan B's. Coaches do not have the time or resources to actually recruit 248 kids.

I don't really care about the rankings because they are more often a result of quantity, not quality.

Hell most of the signees that will help make A-State by far the best team in the SBC again next year, are not even a part of this class, and don't effect rankings anyway.

I am interested in players ratings, because I don't understand the composite ratings.

Didn't you say earlier in this thread that you base your ranking of recruits on how many scholarship offers they have? Is that not quantity over quality?

I have to admit, you take trolling to a new level. You are a pro.

(02-09-2016 04:03 PM)APPrising Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:39 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:04 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 02:00 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 01:33 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  Again read. MOST IF NOT ALL OF GS PLAYERS THAT WERE RATED, WERE RATED BY ESPN BEFORE THEY COMMITTED. Saying ESPN care more than one Sun Belt team over another is asinine at best. ArkSt could have recruited those same players and they would have been rated before committing. Take the tin foil hat off and a couple of offers from FBS teams with almost as many FCS does not mean a player is underrated. Throwing out 248 offers does not mean the coaches really had them high on the list.

No problem.

My only question is what the effect of ESPN not rating many SBC signees has on 247's composite, and am waiting for a reply to my 2nd email. The 1st guy directed me to his boss.

The other major sites they use in their composite ratings rate almost all the players, ESPN rates just a few.

Will not change the fact that I, or anyone that has been involved in recruiting recruiting goes more by a players offer sheet than there rating. Most coaches could not began to tell you a players rating, but they damn well know who else is recruiting them. Offers, especially later in the recruiting cycle, are a good way of separating the rising stars from the falling ones. Problem is getting an accurate offer sheet, when coaches can't talk about it before players sign..

I like GaSo's class because most of their players have impressive offer sheets, (according to the GaSo posters here,even better than shown) not their ratings, but have no problem with those that prefer to go by ratings. I just don't understand ratings but I do understand getting a player a lot of other teams wanted. I like simple.

Its one out of four rankings. Whatever effect is not going to make a huge difference with three others maybe a few spots in the national rankings but you are not going to move up 10 spots if ESPN ranked every single player as probably every team in our area has probably more than a handful of NR players. ESPN top 75 probably looks similar to the others. Obviously to make ESPN's ranking radar it take more than a few FBS offers mixed in with just as many FCS. Also throwing out 248 offers does not mean you are actively recruiting the kid. Probably just fishing for interest early on or setting up your plan B's. Coaches do not have the time or resources to actually recruit 248 kids.

I don't really care about the rankings because they are more often a result of quantity, not quality.

Hell most of the signees that will help make A-State by far the best team in the SBC again next year, are not even a part of this class, and don't effect rankings anyway.

I am interested in players ratings, because I don't understand the composite ratings.

(02-09-2016 04:36 PM)USAJag2011 Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:39 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:04 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 02:00 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 01:33 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  Again read. MOST IF NOT ALL OF GS PLAYERS THAT WERE RATED, WERE RATED BY ESPN BEFORE THEY COMMITTED. Saying ESPN care more than one Sun Belt team over another is asinine at best. ArkSt could have recruited those same players and they would have been rated before committing. Take the tin foil hat off and a couple of offers from FBS teams with almost as many FCS does not mean a player is underrated. Throwing out 248 offers does not mean the coaches really had them high on the list.

No problem.

My only question is what the effect of ESPN not rating many SBC signees has on 247's composite, and am waiting for a reply to my 2nd email. The 1st guy directed me to his boss.

The other major sites they use in their composite ratings rate almost all the players, ESPN rates just a few.

Will not change the fact that I, or anyone that has been involved in recruiting recruiting goes more by a players offer sheet than there rating. Most coaches could not began to tell you a players rating, but they damn well know who else is recruiting them. Offers, especially later in the recruiting cycle, are a good way of separating the rising stars from the falling ones. Problem is getting an accurate offer sheet, when coaches can't talk about it before players sign..

I like GaSo's class because most of their players have impressive offer sheets, (according to the GaSo posters here,even better than shown) not their ratings, but have no problem with those that prefer to go by ratings. I just don't understand ratings but I do understand getting a player a lot of other teams wanted. I like simple.

Its one out of four rankings. Whatever effect is not going to make a huge difference with three others maybe a few spots in the national rankings but you are not going to move up 10 spots if ESPN ranked every single player as probably every team in our area has probably more than a handful of NR players. ESPN top 75 probably looks similar to the others. Obviously to make ESPN's ranking radar it take more than a few FBS offers mixed in with just as many FCS. Also throwing out 248 offers does not mean you are actively recruiting the kid. Probably just fishing for interest early on or setting up your plan B's. Coaches do not have the time or resources to actually recruit 248 kids.

I don't really care about the rankings because they are more often a result of quantity, not quality.

Hell most of the signees that will help make A-State by far the best team in the SBC again next year, are not even a part of this class, and don't effect rankings anyway.

I am interested in players ratings, because I don't understand the composite ratings.

Didn't you say earlier in this thread that you base your ranking of recruits on how many scholarship offers they have? Is that not quantity over quality?

I have to admit, you take trolling to a new level. You are a pro.

I said this: "I've never evaluated talent, and a client provide evaluations for a spreadsheet I did,and really go exclusively by who offered, but hopefully will have a better grasp of what I'm looking at as I do my homework.", so I'm much more into the "who" than "how many".

As I posted above A-States lowest rated signee had the base ratting of 70.00 but because he had offers from GaSo, USM and Idaho, IMO he was a good prospect.

They had a couple rated higher that IMO were still questionable, based on then having no other offers.

II have no problem with those that go by ratings, and I'm trying to understand them.

The number of signees, however, does effect rankings.

Central Michigan has a solid player ranking of 80.00 higher than ever SBC team but GaSo, but with only 13 signees are ranked #119, so numbers matter.

(02-09-2016 04:03 PM)APPrising Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:39 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:04 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 02:00 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 01:33 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  Again read. MOST IF NOT ALL OF GS PLAYERS THAT WERE RATED, WERE RATED BY ESPN BEFORE THEY COMMITTED. Saying ESPN care more than one Sun Belt team over another is asinine at best. ArkSt could have recruited those same players and they would have been rated before committing. Take the tin foil hat off and a couple of offers from FBS teams with almost as many FCS does not mean a player is underrated. Throwing out 248 offers does not mean the coaches really had them high on the list.

No problem.

My only question is what the effect of ESPN not rating many SBC signees has on 247's composite, and am waiting for a reply to my 2nd email. The 1st guy directed me to his boss.

The other major sites they use in their composite ratings rate almost all the players, ESPN rates just a few.

Will not change the fact that I, or anyone that has been involved in recruiting recruiting goes more by a players offer sheet than there rating. Most coaches could not began to tell you a players rating, but they damn well know who else is recruiting them. Offers, especially later in the recruiting cycle, are a good way of separating the rising stars from the falling ones. Problem is getting an accurate offer sheet, when coaches can't talk about it before players sign..

I like GaSo's class because most of their players have impressive offer sheets, (according to the GaSo posters here,even better than shown) not their ratings, but have no problem with those that prefer to go by ratings. I just don't understand ratings but I do understand getting a player a lot of other teams wanted. I like simple.

Its one out of four rankings. Whatever effect is not going to make a huge difference with three others maybe a few spots in the national rankings but you are not going to move up 10 spots if ESPN ranked every single player as probably every team in our area has probably more than a handful of NR players. ESPN top 75 probably looks similar to the others. Obviously to make ESPN's ranking radar it take more than a few FBS offers mixed in with just as many FCS. Also throwing out 248 offers does not mean you are actively recruiting the kid. Probably just fishing for interest early on or setting up your plan B's. Coaches do not have the time or resources to actually recruit 248 kids.

I don't really care about the rankings because they are more often a result of quantity, not quality.

Hell most of the signees that will help make A-State by far the best team in the SBC again next year, are not even a part of this class, and don't effect rankings anyway.

I am interested in players ratings, because I don't understand the composite ratings.

(02-09-2016 04:36 PM)USAJag2011 Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:39 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:04 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 02:00 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 01:33 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  Again read. MOST IF NOT ALL OF GS PLAYERS THAT WERE RATED, WERE RATED BY ESPN BEFORE THEY COMMITTED. Saying ESPN care more than one Sun Belt team over another is asinine at best. ArkSt could have recruited those same players and they would have been rated before committing. Take the tin foil hat off and a couple of offers from FBS teams with almost as many FCS does not mean a player is underrated. Throwing out 248 offers does not mean the coaches really had them high on the list.

No problem.

My only question is what the effect of ESPN not rating many SBC signees has on 247's composite, and am waiting for a reply to my 2nd email. The 1st guy directed me to his boss.

The other major sites they use in their composite ratings rate almost all the players, ESPN rates just a few.

Will not change the fact that I, or anyone that has been involved in recruiting recruiting goes more by a players offer sheet than there rating. Most coaches could not began to tell you a players rating, but they damn well know who else is recruiting them. Offers, especially later in the recruiting cycle, are a good way of separating the rising stars from the falling ones. Problem is getting an accurate offer sheet, when coaches can't talk about it before players sign..

I like GaSo's class because most of their players have impressive offer sheets, (according to the GaSo posters here,even better than shown) not their ratings, but have no problem with those that prefer to go by ratings. I just don't understand ratings but I do understand getting a player a lot of other teams wanted. I like simple.

Its one out of four rankings. Whatever effect is not going to make a huge difference with three others maybe a few spots in the national rankings but you are not going to move up 10 spots if ESPN ranked every single player as probably every team in our area has probably more than a handful of NR players. ESPN top 75 probably looks similar to the others. Obviously to make ESPN's ranking radar it take more than a few FBS offers mixed in with just as many FCS. Also throwing out 248 offers does not mean you are actively recruiting the kid. Probably just fishing for interest early on or setting up your plan B's. Coaches do not have the time or resources to actually recruit 248 kids.

I don't really care about the rankings because they are more often a result of quantity, not quality.

Hell most of the signees that will help make A-State by far the best team in the SBC again next year, are not even a part of this class, and don't effect rankings anyway.

I am interested in players ratings, because I don't understand the composite ratings.

Didn't you say earlier in this thread that you base your ranking of recruits on how many scholarship offers they have? Is that not quantity over quality?

I have to admit, you take trolling to a new level. You are a pro.

I said this: "I've never evaluated talent, and a client provide evaluations for a spreadsheet I did,and really go exclusively by who offered, but hopefully will have a better grasp of what I'm looking at as I do my homework.", so I'm much more into the "who" than "how many", but so is anyone that knows anything about recruiting..

As I posted above A-States lowest rated signee had the base ratting of 70.00 but because he had offers from GaSo, USM and Idaho, IMO he was a good prospect.

They had a player rated higher that IMO were still questionable, based on then having no other offers.

II have no problem with those that go by ratings, and I'm trying to understand them, but they look like BS.

The number of signees, however, does effect rankings.

Central Michigan has a solid avg. player rating of 80.00, higher than ever SBC team but GaSo, but with only 13 signees are ranked #119, so numbers can trump quality in rankings.

Folks don't chase this guy in circles anymore... Should be pretty obvious at the point

(02-09-2016 04:03 PM)APPrising Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:39 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 03:04 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 02:00 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 01:33 PM)JCGSU Wrote:  Again read. MOST IF NOT ALL OF GS PLAYERS THAT WERE RATED, WERE RATED BY ESPN BEFORE THEY COMMITTED. Saying ESPN care more than one Sun Belt team over another is asinine at best. ArkSt could have recruited those same players and they would have been rated before committing. Take the tin foil hat off and a couple of offers from FBS teams with almost as many FCS does not mean a player is underrated. Throwing out 248 offers does not mean the coaches really had them high on the list.

No problem.

My only question is what the effect of ESPN not rating many SBC signees has on 247's composite, and am waiting for a reply to my 2nd email. The 1st guy directed me to his boss.

The other major sites they use in their composite ratings rate almost all the players, ESPN rates just a few.

Will not change the fact that I, or anyone that has been involved in recruiting recruiting goes more by a players offer sheet than there rating. Most coaches could not began to tell you a players rating, but they damn well know who else is recruiting them. Offers, especially later in the recruiting cycle, are a good way of separating the rising stars from the falling ones. Problem is getting an accurate offer sheet, when coaches can't talk about it before players sign..

I like GaSo's class because most of their players have impressive offer sheets, (according to the GaSo posters here,even better than shown) not their ratings, but have no problem with those that prefer to go by ratings. I just don't understand ratings but I do understand getting a player a lot of other teams wanted. I like simple.

Its one out of four rankings. Whatever effect is not going to make a huge difference with three others maybe a few spots in the national rankings but you are not going to move up 10 spots if ESPN ranked every single player as probably every team in our area has probably more than a handful of NR players. ESPN top 75 probably looks similar to the others. Obviously to make ESPN's ranking radar it take more than a few FBS offers mixed in with just as many FCS. Also throwing out 248 offers does not mean you are actively recruiting the kid. Probably just fishing for interest early on or setting up your plan B's. Coaches do not have the time or resources to actually recruit 248 kids.

I don't really care about the rankings because they are more often a result of quantity, not quality.

Hell most of the signees that will help make A-State by far the best team in the SBC again next year, are not even a part of this class, and don't effect rankings anyway.

I am interested in players ratings, because I don't understand the composite ratings.

Make no doubt that IMO A-State is bringing the best new talent into the SBC again this year and they are joining what is already the best roster of talent in the SBC.

Had they only added the players that were on campus, and they held out this year (transfers, red-shirts) they would still be the most talented team in the SBC next year, and it is not as close as many here think.

I'll not chime in as you guys create your normal 'fantasy league' in the summer, but don't be too shocked if A-State has not won or shared their 5th Title in the last 6 years, and I don't expect it to be a close as this year, and i was not really close this year.

(02-09-2016 05:35 PM)tapate50 Wrote:  Folks don't chase this guy in circles anymore... Should be pretty obvious at the point

They are the ones going in circles, I'm just responding to their post. If the answer is the same, it is the same.

Last thoughts related to this class:

GaSo fans....... your class looks real to me.

A-State fans, the best is yet to come, and the talent gap is not closing at all because of the "unique" recruiting methods used of your coaches.

Everyone else........I really have run out of time so I really cannot comment about your classes.

Enjoy the off season, but remember fall will return again this year.

Now their techniques are so unique! That gets the 4th ranked class in the belt! Well thar!


See ? It never ends with this guy.

(just have fun with it)

(02-09-2016 05:59 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  Last thoughts related to this class:

GaSo fans....... your class looks real to me.

A-State fans, the best is yet to come, and the talent gap is not closing at all because of the "unique" recruiting methods used of your coaches.

Everyone else........I really have run out of time so I really cannot comment about your classes.

Enjoy the off season, but remember fall will return again this year.

Come back the week of the "Battle of the Boros". That'll be a good one.

Watching people fight with that bafoon really takes me back to the good ole days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(02-09-2016 06:38 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 05:59 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  Last thoughts related to this class:

GaSo fans....... your class looks real to me.

A-State fans, the best is yet to come, and the talent gap is not closing at all because of the "unique" recruiting methods used of your coaches.

Everyone else........I really have run out of time so I really cannot comment about your classes.

Enjoy the off season, but remember fall will return again this year.

Come back the week of the "Battle of the Boros". That'll be a good one.

Is that what we are calling it? I thought we were just going to call it the Sun Belt Conference Championship game, just to get the inevitability out of the way...

(02-09-2016 05:46 PM)Seminole Indian Wrote:  don't be too shocked if A-State has not won or shared their 5th Title in the last 6 years, and I don't expect it to be a close as this year, and i was not really close this year.

You're right.

Just like you have been most every time.

And, deep down inside, everybody reading this thread knows you're right, as well.

(02-09-2016 06:47 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  Watching people fight with that bafoon really takes me back to the good ole days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He'll disappear for 7 months and pop back in right when we play Georgia Southern, and this whole thing will start again.

(02-09-2016 08:05 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(02-09-2016 06:47 PM)WolfBird Wrote:  Watching people fight with that bafoon really takes me back to the good ole days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He'll disappear for 7 months and pop back in right when we play Georgia Southern, and this whole thing will start again.

Hopefully longer but after touting offers vs ratings I forgot to link to a source I use.

2016 SBC Rankings by Offers :
#71 GaSo
#81 USA
#84 ULL
#87 Troy
#91 A-State
#100 AppSt
#101 NMSU
#106 TxSt
#115 GaSt
#122 ULM
#128 Idaho

If your schools players list is not right, are their offers not right that's to bad and to sad, tell Rivals and ESPN to get it right. Don't waste your time with Scout.


http://www.rankbyoffers.com/2016fbteams/

Just a different way looking at your classes, now get back to what you do best, what ever that is.

(02-03-2016 08:24 PM)AppManDG Wrote:  Their conclusions are based on 24-7 ratings, so I put no faith in it.

Why not? They take an average of the three major services rankings. Im pretty sure if App had been at the top of this thing you wouldn't necessarily being saying this.

I am one who doesn't like the ratings much because they cant account for how a kid will physically mature, and mentally over the next couple years. So many times a 2 or 3 star guy after a couple more years of growing and college weight room become 4 star quality players. Many of the 4 and 5 star guys are peeking faster physically. I see many times where a 2 star is as good a player as a 4 star but just 2 inches shorter, 20 lbs lighter. The 4 star guy stops growing and the 2 star guy keeps on growing after high school becoming the same size and now is the same kind of player. Happens all the time.

(02-05-2016 09:12 AM)moehler Wrote:  

(02-05-2016 06:22 AM)ButlerGSU Wrote:  

(02-04-2016 08:54 PM)TheMackAttack Wrote:  I'm not worried about where App finishes in the rankings. This class is smart, athletic, and full of difference makers. I wish we could have kept Kendall Brown and landed another DL, but the talent level is very high in this group.

How do you measure difference makers?

I'm not being sarcastic here, I really am asking.

I think the more accurate way to put it is, based on physical attributes, and productivity in high school, we have kids in this class with the potential to become difference makers, ie: one of wr is listed at 6'2 190 and its been reported he runs a 4.28, for a team that last year lacked speed at the receiver position, having a kid who can stretch the field, and open up the middle, has the potential to make a big difference.

Every guy just about that is good enough to go to college and play is a potential difference maker. Its boils down to what they are willing to do as an individual to make that happen.

to me it comes down to whether a kid wants to really compete for his position and playing time. We all lose a lot of kids because when they get to collage and compete against guys just as good, and it doesn't go their way, or they have to work harder than they ever had in high school, they don't have the maturity or heart to stick it out, work harder, and earn their position, so they pack up and leave. When these kids are recruited, there is no way to accurately judge their maturity. work ethic, and heart, and desire to be the best they can at the collage level. Lets be honest, in 2 years we all are going to be talking about kids from this class who are no longer on the team because, even though they had the talent, they didn't have the competitive drive to succeed.

(02-10-2016 05:53 PM)moehler Wrote:  to me it comes down to whether a kid wants to really compete for his position and playing time. We all lose a lot of kids because when they get to collage and compete against guys just as good, and it doesn't go their way, or they have to work harder than they ever had in high school, they don't have the maturity or heart to stick it out, work harder, and earn their position, so they pack up and leave. When these kids are recruited, there is no way to accurately judge their maturity. work ethic, and heart, and desire to be the best they can at the collage level. Lets be honest, in 2 years we all are going to be talking about kids from this class who are no longer on the team because, even though they had the talent, they didn't have the competitive drive to succeed.

yup. On my facebook memories thing I posted an article 4 years ago about a high 3 star dual threat qb, another 3 star dual threat qb, and a 3 star RB that committed to southern. Neither the RB or the high star qb got 1 start.

The other dual threat QB went on to be one of our best defensive players who went on to make the game winning play against ULM last year, and returned a blocked PAT for a TD in our bowl game.