The unofficial online home for fans of the Western Michigan University Broncos. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

http://247sports.com/Season/2017-Footbal...erence=MAC



AND the current National rankings


http://247sports.com/Season/2017-Footbal...amRankings

I love seeing that we are on top, yet again. #31 nationally.

What is impressive is CMU's recruiting. A few more years like that and they will be able to undo the Enos fiasco and get back to being one of the top programs again.........just permanently behind Western.

(06-22-2016 09:52 AM)broncojohnny Wrote:  http://247sports.com/Season/2017-Footbal...erence=MAC



AND the current National rankings


http://247sports.com/Season/2017-Footbal...amRankings

So WMU is ranked ahead of Michigan State, Wisconsin, Texas, Penn State, Florida and Arkansas?!

While it is nice to be listed in such company, and I appreciate you posting it, I don't give this rating much credibility.

(06-22-2016 10:02 AM)GullLake Wrote:  

(06-22-2016 09:52 AM)broncojohnny Wrote:  http://247sports.com/Season/2017-Footbal...erence=MAC



AND the current National rankings


http://247sports.com/Season/2017-Footbal...amRankings

So WMU is ranked ahead of Michigan State, Wisconsin, Texas, Penn State, Florida and Arkansas?!

While it is nice to be listed in such company, and I appreciate you posting it, I don't give this rating much credibility.

Don't let Persrod hear you say that.

If a moment warrants enjoyment in this Bronco life, let yourself enjoy it.

Time to win a championship on the field, not just in the "star" rankings.

^ Exactly. Recruiting ranking's don't mean crap if you don't get that championship! Ask U of M.

(06-24-2016 10:50 AM)Nacho Wrote:  ^ Exactly. Recruiting ranking's don't mean crap if you don't get that championship! Ask U of M.

I think they mean slightly more than crap. Coaches like Harbaugh and Fleck get loads of exposure for the program. Exposure is GOOD. For the ultimate goal though, you need exposure to be a small part of the greater synergy. Keep roWINg.

And the "End Game" is?

Win the MACC.

And be in contention for it every year (Win MAC-West).

I not only want lots of 3 star players, I'm hoping after a top tier year, including a MAC championship and a significant bowl win, we can pick up a 4 star player or two.

Trust me, having on going high ranked recruiting classes is a good thing.

While it is true some 3 stars flop, and some 2 stars over achieve, on the whole more stars is better than not.

And yeah, we want wins too. Go Broncos.

Only 7 1/2 months to Signing Day!

(06-25-2016 05:50 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  I not only want lots of 3 star players, I'm hoping after a top tier year, including a MAC championship and a significant bowl win, we can pick up a 4 star player or two.

Trust me, having on going high ranked recruiting classes is a good thing.

While it is true some 3 stars flop, and some 2 stars over achieve, on the whole more stars is better than not.

And yeah, we want wins too. Go Broncos.

Isn't flopping and overachieving relative? Aren't they based on expectations and who has unbiased expectations?

Stars are irrelevant to coaches. They have eyes and a plan to fill needs as they see them. Why would a recruiter be influenced by somebody else's evaluation that doesn't have skin in that coaches game?

Stars, bricks or bats are for fans. They need something to latch onto because .... it's the offseason. Games and results determine the constellations.

(06-25-2016 11:13 AM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(06-25-2016 05:50 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  I not only want lots of 3 star players, I'm hoping after a top tier year, including a MAC championship and a significant bowl win, we can pick up a 4 star player or two.

Trust me, having on going high ranked recruiting classes is a good thing.

While it is true some 3 stars flop, and some 2 stars over achieve, on the whole more stars is better than not.

And yeah, we want wins too. Go Broncos.

Isn't flopping and overachieving relative? Aren't they based on expectations and who has unbiased expectations?

Stars are irrelevant to coaches. They have eyes and a plan to fill needs as they see them. Why would a recruiter be influenced by somebody else's evaluation that doesn't have skin in that coaches game?

Stars, bricks or bats are for fans. They need something to latch onto because .... it's the offseason. Games and results determine the constellations.

Oh please. Stars are irrelevant. And when that 5 star defensive tackle signs on at Alabama, we all go, that's just for the fan's off season interest. Doesn't really mean anything in the real world. Yeah except when he shuts down the left side of your O-line single handed, then you go, wow, that young man is really a player.

So obviously your recruiting coaches are going to be looking for traits and talents and temperament to fit their particular needs. And hopefully they will find a hidden gem that somebody else overlooked. And of course ultimately it comes down to performance on the field in your own setting.

But I'm am not going to just poo-poo these high rated classes. I'd rather have them than not have them.

(06-25-2016 12:03 PM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  

(06-25-2016 11:13 AM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(06-25-2016 05:50 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  I not only want lots of 3 star players, I'm hoping after a top tier year, including a MAC championship and a significant bowl win, we can pick up a 4 star player or two.

Trust me, having on going high ranked recruiting classes is a good thing.

While it is true some 3 stars flop, and some 2 stars over achieve, on the whole more stars is better than not.

And yeah, we want wins too. Go Broncos.

Isn't flopping and overachieving relative? Aren't they based on expectations and who has unbiased expectations?

Stars are irrelevant to coaches. They have eyes and a plan to fill needs as they see them. Why would a recruiter be influenced by somebody else's evaluation that doesn't have skin in that coaches game?

Stars, bricks or bats are for fans. They need something to latch onto because .... it's the offseason. Games and results determine the constellations.

Oh please. Stars are irrelevant. And when that 5 star defensive tackle signs on at Alabama, we all go, that's just for the fan's off season interest. Doesn't really mean anything in the real world. Yeah except when he shuts down the left side of your O-line single handed, then you go, wow, that young man is really a player.

So obviously your recruiting coaches are going to be looking for traits and talents and temperament to fit their particular needs. And hopefully they will find a hidden gem that somebody else overlooked. And of course ultimately it comes down to performance on the field in your own setting.

But I'm am not going to just poo-poo these high rated classes. I'd rather have them than not have them.

Your 2nd paragraph makes and concludes my case.

When you see a star rating elevate or drop based on a kids commit to a given program that would be further evidence of the irrelevancy.

Coaching staffs don't depend on these services, the services depend on the staffs. The Coaches could care less if a kid is rated one way or the other. They make the judgment based on their own observation and acumen.

(06-25-2016 04:32 PM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(06-25-2016 12:03 PM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  

(06-25-2016 11:13 AM)gobaseline Wrote:  

(06-25-2016 05:50 AM)Dirty Ernie Wrote:  I not only want lots of 3 star players, I'm hoping after a top tier year, including a MAC championship and a significant bowl win, we can pick up a 4 star player or two.

Trust me, having on going high ranked recruiting classes is a good thing.

While it is true some 3 stars flop, and some 2 stars over achieve, on the whole more stars is better than not.

And yeah, we want wins too. Go Broncos.

Isn't flopping and overachieving relative? Aren't they based on expectations and who has unbiased expectations?

Stars are irrelevant to coaches. They have eyes and a plan to fill needs as they see them. Why would a recruiter be influenced by somebody else's evaluation that doesn't have skin in that coaches game?

Stars, bricks or bats are for fans. They need something to latch onto because .... it's the offseason. Games and results determine the constellations.

Oh please. Stars are irrelevant. And when that 5 star defensive tackle signs on at Alabama, we all go, that's just for the fan's off season interest. Doesn't really mean anything in the real world. Yeah except when he shuts down the left side of your O-line single handed, then you go, wow, that young man is really a player.

So obviously your recruiting coaches are going to be looking for traits and talents and temperament to fit their particular needs. And hopefully they will find a hidden gem that somebody else overlooked. And of course ultimately it comes down to performance on the field in your own setting.

But I'm am not going to just poo-poo these high rated classes. I'd rather have them than not have them.

Your 2nd paragraph makes and concludes my case.

When you see a star rating elevate or drop based on a kids commit to a given program that would be further evidence of the irrelevancy.

Coaching staffs don't depend on these services, the services depend on the staffs. The Coaches could care less if a kid is rated one way or the other. They make the judgment based on their own observation and acumen.

Well you and Major are probably right.
Even so, there does seem to be some real world correlation between our better rated recruits and on the field results. And as Major says, that is the measure. So if we do well again this year, and have improved, and finish at or near the top of the conference, I'd have to say the correlation between recruit ratings and real world results would be statistically significant. The other possibility would be the coaching staff is selecting, recruiting, and molding the players (forget ratings) at an elite level?
Lastly one could propose the coaching is average, but the players are very very good regardless or in spite of their rating. Based on statistical performance, we've had players leading the country in measureables, where you might say they were underrated by the services. Maybe the service says 3 and the coaching staff in some depraved way says, no, they are a 4+. Heresy.

I think WMU is doing fine. It is evident in their playing tough competition generally well.

That can be attributable to recruiting, coaching and scheming.

My point is that I get a chuckle out of all the attributing of greatness or suckiness to ratings provided by recruiting services for the varying fan bases.

When a more highly rated kid doesn't pan out I never read about how the expectation may have been way off. That would point a finger at the great Oracles of evaluation of 18 year old athletes and those that crave to hear that their team draws them in like moths to a light.

The recruiting roadside is piled high with the remains of those who some how veered off crashing and burning and not fulfilling their constellational destiny. What is hilarious is those who once claimed affiliation with those shooting stars before the career flamed out now oblivious even deriding them as they now lock in on the next Johnny Football.

I guess that's why they are called fanatics.

The final measurement is the season record. Who cares or remembers if the hero or goat was Orion's Belt or dirty socks? At the moment they are the hero or goat. No more, no less.

(06-25-2016 09:24 PM)gobaseline Wrote:  I think WMU is doing fine. It is evident in their playing tough competition generally well.

That can be attributable to recruiting, coaching and scheming.

My point is that I get a chuckle out of all the attributing of greatness or suckiness to ratings provided by recruiting services for the varying fan bases.

When a more highly rated kid doesn't pan out I never read about how the expectation may have been way off. That would point a finger at the great Oracles of evaluation of 18 year old athletes and those that crave to hear that their team draws them in like moths to a light.

The recruiting roadside is piled high with the remains of those who some how veered off crashing and burning and not fulfilling their constellational destiny. What is hilarious is those who once claimed affiliation with those shooting stars before the career flamed out now oblivious even deriding them as they now lock in on the next Johnny Football.

I guess that's why they are called fanatics.

The final measurement is the season record. Who cares or remembers if the hero or goat was Orion's Belt or dirty socks? At the moment they are the hero or goat. No more, no less.

I think we are on the same page.

That thing about high rated players not working out, I'd propose it is harder to keep the entire team (with football that is a large group) happy when they are all better players overall. It is harder for the "star" player to feel good about stuff when they become just one of many good players, they were a hero in HS and now they are number 4 or 5 on the chart. Seems natural to me that some don't react well to that. The staff has been upfront that the goal of recruiting is to upgrade every year. I'm not sure I like that message; I'd be more, there will be more experienced players in front of you, your job is to work hard and compete and be ready to step up when your chance comes.

Seems to me that PJ refers to the number of three star recruits he gets each year at the post signing news conference. So they mean something to him.

I believe WMU was 9-4 in 2008 with a minimal amount of 3 Stars players.
The biggest difference I see in the program is depth has improved and there is more consistency in the recruiting classes.

(06-26-2016 07:11 AM)uclabruin Wrote:  Seems to me that PJ refers to the number of three star recruits he gets each year at the post signing news conference. So they mean something to him.

So what do you think it means to him?