Desmond Phillips

[Salt]

I knew that taking these commitments when there was no coach in place was a horrible idea

This.

I don't see it that way. True it sucks for the kid, but it is safer for coaches to try to at least lock some guys down. If the new coach decides to go in a different direction, those are the breaks. The kid also has to make the decision knowing the offer could be rescinded when the next coach comes. He also has a choice to take the offer in an uncertain situation or not. Can't fault the coaches trying to keep a class together while in HC limbo.

 

[Plzwork4]

**** we are gonna regret this...

He is gonna go to Toledo and kick our *** in a BCS bowl now.

SMH

 

[L A M P]

But let's get a little deeper with the analysis than "he doesn't have offers."

Naming a select few success stories doesn't prove your point. If he was as good as you make him out to be, he'd have a lot more offers.. especially playing at a school like Jackson with that schedule. Maybe one or two slip through the cracks each year but the odds of finding that one kid is < 1%. You don't have a better eye for talent then every SEC/Top 25 staff.

 

[demcanes26]

But let's get a little deeper with the analysis than "he doesn't have offers."

Naming a select few success stories doesn't prove your point. If he was as good as you make him out to be, he'd have a lot more offers.. especially playing at a school like Jackson with that schedule. Maybe one or two slip through the cracks each year but the odds of finding that one kid is < 1%. You don't have a better eye for talent then every SEC/Top 25 staff.

Did James Coley have a better eye for talent when he offered Brad Kaaya. Why didn't USC or UCLA offer first? It's amazing how we treat these coaches like they are Gods. Reggie Youngblood was a 5 star tackle from Texas when we sign him. Found out he couldn't play.

 

[DMoney]

If he was as good as you make him out to be, he'd have a lot more offers

How many times does this have to be proven wrong before you stop believing it?

Just look at any NFL roster. Half of the good players had big offers. Half of them didn't. Seven of the Top 10 passers in the NFL were three stars or lower. Five of the top ten running backs were three stars or lower. Five of the top ten wide receivers were three stars or lower. And those are just the high-profile positions.

Even with the advances in recruiting rankings, that's still the case. Half of the kids drafted in the 2015 draft were three-stars or lower. Over 56 percent of the first rounders were three stars or lower. It still happens all the time.

Are four and five star players more likely to succeed, on average? Of course. That's why schools with highly rated classes are more likely to succeed on the whole. But saying "if he was good, he'd have more offers" is just wrong. You need to look deeper than that.

 

[canesthing3]

Stings, need to see who we close with at WR before passing judgement though.

 

[TC7D]

i love how richt just started and everyone is already criticizing him.

This is Miami, remember. Honeymoon lasted a couple weeks, what did you expect. Couple that with how bad Al burned us and we are like long tail cats in room full of rocking chairs. He had a real good weekend, but it is Wednesday there is a hot chick working out in the yard next door and what have you done for me lately. Welcome to THE U again, Mark.

Wake me up when we actually lose someone that matters to this class. Richt has landed 2 huge recruits and is getting rid of 3 suspect offers. This guy is legit. Just wait til after the dead period. I'm stoked

I'm happy with Mark so far. Just making the point that complaints come quickly here and Mark will be no different.

I'm with you completely. I agree with your statement, was just putting a bit more emphasis on it. It's like people on this board NEED something to complain about. Richt is awesome. I like what he's doing already

 

[L A M P]

Are four and five star players more likely to succeed, on average? Of course. That's why schools with highly rated classes are more likely to succeed on the whole. But saying "if he was good, he'd have more offers" is just wrong. You need to look deeper than that.

This is exactly what we are saying. You could possibly find a diamond in the rough but the odds are you won't. Going after highly recruited players generally gives you a higher floor on a recruit. Not always obviously but just going off the numbers alone, it is generally the safer bet. Agree to disagree I guess.

 

[L A M P]

Did James Coley have a better eye for talent when he offered Brad Kaaya. Why didn't USC or UCLA offer first?

What does this have to do with anything? Yes we offered first. Then a ton of other D1 schools offered. It is mid December & HS football is over. If kids don't have the offers now, they usually aren't coming.

He's a Plan B type recruit. Not according to me, according to the entire Power 5 conferences.

 

[BALLHAWKU]

4 star or a above nothing less

 

[The Franchise]

I know a lot of guys go under the radar every year, but we can't afford to take risks like Toledo can. If he goes there and balls out, good for him, but with FSU OSU and BAMA winning 5 out of the last 6 championships it tells me that stars do matter. I consistently see FSU OSU and Bama having top 5 classes, and if we want to win championships we need the studs not projects like Phillips.

Phillips isn't a "risk" for Toledo. He's a home run for them. But if UM wants to run with the big dogs again we won't do it by stealing too many recruits from Toledo and Syracuse.

Again, grab a few of those low tier offer guys if you have a great feeling they will develop and that they're vastly underrated. But consistently battling teams like Toledo and Syracuse and Pitt for recruits will usually put you where they're at as programs, which is pretty much where we are now.

 

[DMoney]

Are four and five star players more likely to succeed, on average? Of course. That's why schools with highly rated classes are more likely to succeed on the whole. But saying "if he was good, he'd have more offers" is just wrong. You need to look deeper than that.

This is exactly what we are saying. You could possibly find a diamond in the rough but the odds are you won't. Going after highly recruited players generally gives you a higher floor on a recruit. Not always obviously but just going off the numbers alone, it is generally the safer bet. Agree to disagree I guess.

But that's not what you said. You said "if he was good, he'd have better offers." That has been proven wrong repeatedly.

Nobody disputes that the odds are better with the higher-ranked kids. The only thing I will add is that the odds shift when it comes to South Florida kids. They are much more likely to succeed than other lower-ranked prospects.

 

[nbrewer22]

I know a lot of guys go under the radar every year, but we can't afford to take risks like Toledo can. If he goes there and balls out, good for him, but with FSU OSU and BAMA winning 5 out of the last 6 championships it tells me that stars do matter. I consistently see FSU OSU and Bama having top 5 classes, and if we want to win championships we need the studs not projects like Phillips.

Phillips isn't a "risk" for Toledo. He's a home run for them. But if UM wants to run with the big dogs again we won't do it by stealing too many recruits from Toledo and Syracuse.

Again, grab a few of those low tier offer guys if you have a great feeling they will develop and that they're vastly underrated. But consistently battling teams like Toledo and Syracuse and Pitt for recruits will usually put you where they're at as programs, which is pretty much where we are now.

I didn't mean it was a risk for Toledo, I meant that we can't afford to take risks on guys like this where as he is an automatic take for Toledo.

Bottom line though, if we want to compete with the big boys, we have to get the big boy recruits.

 

[nbrewer22]

If he was as good as you make him out to be, he'd have a lot more offers

How many times does this have to be proven wrong before you stop believing it?

Just look at any NFL roster. Half of the good players had big offers. Half of them didn't. Seven of the Top 10 passers in the NFL were three stars or lower. Five of the top ten running backs were three stars or lower. Five of the top ten wide receivers were three stars or lower. And those are just the high-profile positions.

Even with the advances in recruiting rankings, that's still the case. Half of the kids drafted in the 2015 draft were three-stars or lower. Over 56 percent of the first rounders were three stars or lower. It still happens all the time.

Are four and five star players more likely to succeed, on average? Of course. That's why schools with highly rated classes are more likely to succeed on the whole. But saying "if he was good, he'd have more offers" is just wrong. You need to look deeper than that.

I think that success at college and success in the NFL are mutually exclusive. It's nice to see our boys rep us in the NFL, but it still hasn't gotten us more than 9 wins in the past decade.

Saying that X player is tearing up the NFL so and he was a 2* recruit, doesn't pertain too much to his college success. A lot of guys continue to get better after college which was the case with Antonio Brown. I mean how many of those guys were 1st round picks? That is a better indicator of college success.

I guess what I'm trying to prove here is that I would take Tim Tebow, who had no success in the nfl, yet was a monster in college, over Aaron Rodgers any day of the week. Once you get to the NFL and you are 3-5 years older than you were when being recruited, you are an entirely different person and player.

 

[ChrisLamar757]

Antonio Brown was great in college, though.

 

[kryptonite]

Ok, stop pretending like taking a bunch of 3* projects was al's plan. The guy is an idiot, but not in recruiting. He WANTED top talent, he just wasn't able to land enough of it. He may not have offered every kid you would have liked, but he offered enough top kids to get a great class every year. He just wasn't able to land enough of them. When 32% of your class is blue chip you can't afford NOT to start taking 2* and 3* kids for depth. Sure, there were kids that never amounted to anything, but al's inability to land enough top talent is what led them to be here not some "plan" of al's involving winning with all 3* kids. Some of the stupid stuff people say harshes my ability to just hat al, I have to defend the a-hole because people aren't smart enough to see what the guy actually did wrong. ****.

 

[kryptonite]

If he was as good as you make him out to be, he'd have a lot more offers

How many times does this have to be proven wrong before you stop believing it?

Just look at any NFL roster. Half of the good players had big offers. Half of them didn't. Seven of the Top 10 passers in the NFL were three stars or lower. Five of the top ten running backs were three stars or lower. Five of the top ten wide receivers were three stars or lower. And those are just the high-profile positions.

Even with the advances in recruiting rankings, that's still the case. Half of the kids drafted in the 2015 draft were three-stars or lower. Over 56 percent of the first rounders were three stars or lower. It still happens all the time.

Are four and five star players more likely to succeed, on average? Of course. That's why schools with highly rated classes are more likely to succeed on the whole. But saying "if he was good, he'd have more offers" is just wrong. You need to look deeper than that.

I think that success at college and success in the NFL are mutually exclusive. It's nice to see our boys rep us in the NFL, but it still hasn't gotten us more than 9 wins in the past decade.

Saying that X player is tearing up the NFL so and he was a 2* recruit, doesn't pertain too much to his college success. A lot of guys continue to get better after college which was the case with Antonio Brown. I mean how many of those guys were 1st round picks? That is a better indicator of college success.

I guess what I'm trying to prove here is that I would take Tim Tebow, who had no success in the nfl, yet was a monster in college, over Aaron Rodgers any day of the week. Once you get to the NFL and you are 3-5 years older than you were when being recruited, you are an entirely different person and player.

The NFL is littered with great college players who don't make it there and average college players who do. Pro football isn't a completely different sport nut it's close.

 

[TemplarCane]

I know a lot of guys go under the radar every year, but we can't afford to take risks like Toledo can. If he goes there and balls out, good for him, but with FSU OSU and BAMA winning 5 out of the last 6 championships it tells me that stars do matter. I consistently see FSU OSU and Bama having top 5 classes, and if we want to win championships we need the studs not projects like Phillips.

Phillips isn't a "risk" for Toledo. He's a home run for them. But if UM wants to run with the big dogs again we won't do it by stealing too many recruits from Toledo and Syracuse.

Again, grab a few of those low tier offer guys if you have a great feeling they will develop and that they're vastly underrated. But consistently battling teams like Toledo and Syracuse and Pitt for recruits will usually put you where they're at as programs, which is pretty much where we are now.

Exactly. I've always believed one of Golden's many problems was he wasn't used to recruiting elite talent at Temple. He couldn't have gotten them, so why waste time on them. The "Recruiting Safeties" video proves this. SMH.

 

[L A M P]

But that's not what you said. You said "if he was good, he'd have better offers." That has been proven wrong repeatedly.

I said with the exposure he gets at Jackson, if he was as good as you said he is, he'd have better offers. I stand by that and the statistics stand with me. Odds are there is a better chance I'm right than you. Once again, could be wrong.. but I'm going on numbers alone. There are always exceptions to the rule.

 

[LuCane]

I can understand preferring another WR to Phillips.

But, people are saying:

- He's not fast. Meanwhile, the guy absolutely destroys angles from legitimate athletes.
- Implying Richt basically knows all (here we go again). What's Richt's history on player projections? Does he bring a lot of guys in who project to a different position? This is important because, in SoFla, we have a unique opportunity to take advantage of this exact type of athlete.