The idea that a class was ‘well received on signing day’ is evidence that it was good or didn’t contain the seeds of failure is bizarre. I thought this board had moved past thinking recruiting rankings tell you whether you’re evaluating well.
Coker was a disaster, he evaluated poorly, recruited off lists, amd botched position groups including OL and Wr badly. Those are known facts. So looking back to see the signs, it’s not hard to do. You’d have to be wilfully obtuse to deny that the signs were there early.
And the idea that it was about kids who ‘e\were never developed’ is insane, imo. You seem to miss the point of evaluating and recruiting entirely.
Disaster in terms of sheer quantity:
2002: (2) Ryan Moore (5 star), Akieem Jolla (4 star), Sinorice Moss (3 star)
2003: (1) Darnell Jenkins (3 star)
2004: (2) Lance Leggett (5 star), (1) Khalil Jones (3 star)
2005: None
2006: (2) Sam Shields (4 star), George Robinson (2 star)
Just seven wide receivers over five years. Only four blue chip wide receivers over five years. And that's coming off of a national championship.
Compare that to wide receiver recruiting in just the last two cycles:
2020: Michael Redding (4 star), Dazalin Worsham (3 stars), Keyshawn Smith (3 stars), Xavier Restrepo (3 stars)
2021: Romello Brinson (4 star), Jacolby George (4 star), Brashard Smith (4 star), Malik Curtis (3 stars)
That's eight wide receivers in two years. Four blue chip receivers in two years.
How did we play for national championships under Coker yet fail to recruit that position? How could we have only three wide receivers healthy (out of just 6 total) in 2006? How could we have lost out on recruits to Syracuse? Syracuse?!
