On Judd Anderson

[Cribby]

It's not a strawman, it's the root of the argument.

I said if we're going to spend big on QBs, we should get proven Portal kids. They're safer bets and other positions are harder to find in the Portal. Somebody disagreed and said that Top 100 QBs are a "good investment." @Cryptical Envelopment nuked that argument pretty quick, noting that 70% of those kids transfer and are often beaten out by lower-ranked players. I also noted that teams win championships without elite QB recruits (including the past four years) but never win without elite DLs.

As far as your list, it includes Mac Jones (a three star), Tua (who played two quarters) and Cam Newton (a transfer). But the rest of the post reveals another issue. You said:


Are you suggesting that Mahomes and Herbert weren't better players in college than, say, an AJ McCarron? They were a million times better. McCarron just played on a better team. QB is unique in that the truly elite players are almost all non-elite recruits. You don't see that at DL with guys like Jeffrey Simmons, Dexter Lawrence, Chris Jones, Myles Garrett and the Bosas (all five stars).

That doesn't mean a blue-chip QB isn't more likely to succeed than a non-blue chip-- of course they are. That's true at every position. But blue-chip QBs bust more than other positions, and the truly elite guys are usually the product of evals. That tells me the smart play is to pay big money for the proven commodities and chase cheap upside in high school kids.

I’m amazed at the amount of comments that are made and the point is skipped over and a monster debate then erupts lol. I fell victim to this yesterday lol.

 

[Cryptical Envelopment]

My issue is not with the kid himself. I'm leaning on Shannon's evaluation as he's offered and almost had two of the better low rated college QB's recently in Jones (Bama) and Bennett (UGA). He had Jones committed to Kentucky before he left. So it seems like he's a decent evaluator of talent. It's more the timing and the optics of the situation that puts a damper on the commitment. Recruiting is very much a sales pitch. Good players want to play with other good players and momentum is pretty key as well. To me to announce his commitment right before you lose out on Noland just seems like a move of desperation. In addition, trying to oversell and pass him off as a QB1 is a bad look. I'm not getting too bent out of shape right now because we're 8 months away before early signing day. The season and TVD is going to decide how to QB recruiting goes. The offense looks better we'll be in good shape for a transfer or another talented QB from HS.

All that said we have no momentum going in recruiting right now. Hopefully that changes soon. I'm all for building the trenches first as that's where the game is won and lost, but we need for someone to jump on board to get this year going.

The kid came down and visited last week and committed in the room. He went home and got an edit made and announced. It coincided with the Air stuff, but wasn't dependent on it. Also, the school not only didn't "announce" his commitment, they can't even comment on a recruit until he signs per the NCAA. The kid committed and announced it.

How and where are the staff trying to "oversell" and "pass him off" as anything? Again, they haven't commented, can't comment, let alone "oversell" or "pass him off" as anything. What are you talking about? but they saw a prospect they think can develop into a guy who can help them make money and they went after him. They are happy. I hope they made a good eval. We all most of us do.

I do agree with everything you wrote after the parts I bolded above though. Except the momentum thing. That is by design. This staff is doing their best to not get caught up in the decommitment part of it all. They want kids to be sure, and we've had exactly zero official visits so far, because you can't take them yet. Before a kid commits you get to play offense. Once they commit you have to play defense. We've had an absolutely incredible amount of top talent come through unofficially so far this spring. They will keep coming and so will these commits. Kids talk, they know a lot of talent is serious about UM. Mario showed you the blueprint for how he wants to do it last year, I'm not sure why anyone is concerned at this point. I will be VERY surprised if we don't stack another excellent class on top of the kids we just got.

 

[cway313]

It's not a strawman, it's the root of the argument.

I said if we're going to spend big on QBs, we should get proven Portal kids. They're safer bets and other positions are harder to find in the Portal. Somebody disagreed and said that Top 100 QBs are a "good investment." @Cryptical Envelopment nuked that argument pretty quick, noting that 70% of those kids transfer and are often beaten out by lower-ranked players. I also noted that teams win championships without elite QB recruits (including the past four years) but never win without elite DLs.

As far as your list, it includes Mac Jones (a three star), Tua (who played two quarters) and Cam Newton (a transfer). But the rest of the post reveals another issue. You said:


Are you suggesting that Mahomes and Herbert weren't better players in college than, say, an AJ McCarron? They were a million times better. McCarron just played on a better team. QB is unique in that the truly elite players are almost all non-elite recruits. You don't see that at DL with guys like Jeffrey Simmons, Dexter Lawrence, Chris Jones, Myles Garrett and the Bosas (all five stars).

That doesn't mean a blue-chip QB isn't more likely to succeed than a non-blue chip-- of course they are. That's true at every position. But blue-chip QBs bust more than other positions, and the truly elite guys are usually the product of evals. That tells me the smart play is to pay big money for the proven commodities and chase cheap upside in high school kids.

What about the recruits that sign on just to play with the top 100 QB?

 

[Cryptical Envelopment]

How many 3* compete for title yearly Ill

None of that matters @Cryptical Envelopment is gonna convince us that because Quinn never started a game that OSU wasted money and he was a failed investment. Collateral benefits aren't important. Think of the 5* beating down the door to play with Judd in college because no QB is a sure thing.

I'm happy to let the stupidity of your post (whatever you're trying to say lol) speak for itself without further comment.

 

[Brains]

We air balled. Judd it is. Go canes

With a 6'7" QB we can avoid airballs by going hard in the paint.

 

[DMoney]

What about the recruits that sign on just to play with the top 100 QB?

It's a factor. But the biggest reason Ohio State is signing top WRs is because they are scoring points and producing first round WRs.

That's our biggest problem right now. Our best bet is to stay in the game with these WRs and then come with the money at the end. Same thing we tried with Innis, but supported with a season of good offense.

 

[Tonio]

It's not a strawman, it's the root of the argument.

I said if we're going to spend big on QBs, we should get proven Portal kids. They're safer bets and other positions are harder to find in the Portal. Somebody disagreed and said that Top 100 QBs are a "good investment." @Cryptical Envelopment nuked that argument pretty quick, noting that 70% of those kids transfer and are often beaten out by lower-ranked players. I also noted that teams win championships without elite QB recruits (including the past four years) but never win without elite DLs.


That doesn't mean a blue-chip QB isn't more likely to succeed than a non-blue chip-- of course they are. That's true at every position. But blue-chip QBs bust more than other positions, and the truly elite guys are usually the product of evals. That tells me the smart play is to pay big money for the proven commodities and chase cheap upside in high school kids.

Okay I’m starting to see the angle you’re coming from, but correct me if I’m wrong.

Basically in this day and age unless you’re a top 3 QB in the class, the 4 star QB is commanding too much NIL money for it to be worth the risk every year. You can sign a top 6-15 QB each year and the likelihood of them busting is reasonably high. Add that you’re paying above market value for a player to their caliber and that’s why you’re saying to find high upside/QBs that fit the system rather than continually paying 6-7 figures for a similarly unknown guarantee.

 

[DTP]

Stop it;

1. His composite rating was Top247; that’s what we go by.
2. A “lower” 4 star is any player who is a fringe 3-star which is the .8900 clip.

The 4 star range is from .8900 to .9800 Tyler was .9173 which puts him a lot closer to a 3 star than a 5 star. It's at the "lower" end of the 4 star spectrum.

 

[IndayArtHauz]

We ain’t having a 35 page conversation about “what the data really says” on QB quality if there was any reason to be confident about this take — as the only QB in the class. Nobody had to defend Emory Williams (who looked a lot better as a 3* than this cat) when the class also had Rashada.

If your QB classes over 3 years are Jacurri Brown, Emory Williams, and Judd Anderson, you would not seem to be serious about winning football in the modern era, no matter how good your DL recruiting is. Especially with one freaking class. Plus, if “winning in the trenches” is essentially all that matters, why didn’t he go nuts on DL last year too? Once again, the current state of the program is cast as “all according to plan”, even if it’s unrecognizable from the previous plan.

We are not UGA, nor are we close to UGA. They’ve also recruited QB at an elite level, they just happened to have a walk on who broke every mould known to man when he was surrounded by the best talent in the country. UGA is evidence of nothing.

It’s amazing to me that Mario still has defenders on this. His offensive recruiting is abysmal outside of OL and RB, he seems to think QB is less than the most important position in the sport, and some of y’all are so invested in him being successful here you’re calling his absurd approach to talent acquisition “reasonable according to the data”.

Devaluing the QB by saying “you can win without an elite player there” is quintessential Miami over the last 20 years: making winning harder instead of easier. Can you win a ship without a stud QB? Yes, but why on earth would you try? It makes it exponentially harder to win without one and exponentially easier to win with one. Miss me with the “it can be done” line, instead explain to me why any HC in his right mind would intentionally make his path to success more difficult by not getting a proven baller at the most important position on the field? Literally should be job 1 of every class. Instead Mario whiffed 2 years straight. Guy can’t even take credit for Brown, kid was already committed.

But again, Miami makes winning harder, not easier. Mario called TVD the best QB in the country in his introductory presser, then proceeded to shackle him with an OC and scheme that turned his brain inside out. Freaking one year later and we’re still hearing “he's a great fit for the style of offense Mario wants to run.” What the heck does that mean? I’d like a kid who’s a terrible fit for Mario’s O, because thus far that kid would be TVD. I mean is MC an OC or an HC? When did he last call plays? Is someone else in the country imitating the vaunted “Mario Cristobal O”. The man got a tree? We have local high school coaches on here, has the Mario Cristobal offensive coaching clinic sold out? Y’all dying for his insight on how to score 10 more ppg, can’t leave without picking the schematic mind that brought you the lowest point totals in Miami history?

If we’re covering his back on QB crooting, shouldn’t we have, I dunno, a playoff or something appearance on his resume to refer to? Or any evidence at all that his offensive philosophy is something other than a net negative?

The truth is that having a mediocre QB makes winning harder, not easier. Just like having a mediocre HC does. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

 

[Bender]

The same reason why QB value is lower in College compared to NFL is the same reason why RB value is higher in College compared to the NFL: Its a different game. Tons of QBs who aren't as good play well because passing windows are wide as **** and accuracy is not that much of an issue. Thats why the value of the position is overrated in College.

I've fallen for this mistake myself, so...

 

[Rickd]

Get commits from highly ranked DT's and OL right now for 2024. Grab a pair of DT's in the portal, along with a RB and QB. Win games in 2023 and then sign WR's the first week in December. Have to demonstrate that the horrific offense of 2022 is not the norm.

 

[L A M P]

That's name of the game. Hence why you see Alabama OSU Clemson not skipping out on signing a premire guy year after year. Once a guy like Bryce Young or CJ Stroud goes to draft its on full on battle amongst blue chip guys. Whoever isn't good enough hits the road and they recycle the process.

You obviously go for the better projected talent.. it’s just not foolproof. Some things can’t be measured.

 

[joseermonfils]

Speaking of Harrison/Egbuka, those 2 along with TreVeyon Henderson were the skill positions recruits that “expensive” 5 star QB “bust” Quinn Ewers along with 5 Star QB Kyle McCord attracted to their class.

Meanwhile, here are the skill position players that inexpensive potential “diamond in the rough” Emory Williams
attracted to his class……

idk about this because even when Rashada was committed 5 star WRs weren't lining up to play here either...I think this had more to do with Mario and Gattis combo than Emory Williams impact just like Ohio State's resume with WRs was more of the impact than the 5 start QBs

 

[OrangeBowlMagic]

QB is the hardest position to evaluate and project, we all know that. But at least all the big, winning programs are signing elite ones. If they bust, if they get beat out by lower ranked kids, if they get beat out by transfers, so be it. But they're getting the highly ranked kids, who attract other highly ranked kids on the offensive side of the ball.

So if we recruit a 5-star or high 4-star QB and pair him with Judd, and Judd beats him out, awesome. But this kid can't be the only QB you sign. Literally no other elite programs are doing it this way, what makes us think we can?

 

[SCarolina Ibis]

We ain’t having a 35 page conversation about “what the data really says” on QB quality if there was any reason to be confident about this take — as the only QB in the class. Nobody had to defend Emory Williams (who looked a lot better as a 3* than this cat) when the class also had Rashada.

If your QB classes over 3 years are Jacurri Brown, Emory Williams, and Judd Anderson, you would not seem to be serious about winning football in the modern era, no matter how good your DL recruiting is. Especially with one freaking class. Plus, if “winning in the trenches” is essentially all that matters, why didn’t he go nuts on DL last year too? Once again, the current state of the program is cast as “all according to plan”, even if it’s unrecognizable from the previous plan.

We are not UGA, nor are we close to UGA. They’ve also recruited QB at an elite level, they just happened to have a walk on who broke every mould known to man when he was surrounded by the best talent in the country. UGA is evidence of nothing.

It’s amazing to me that Mario still has defenders on this. His offensive recruiting is abysmal outside of OL and RB, he seems to think QB is less than the most important position in the sport, and some of y’all are so invested in him being successful here you’re calling his absurd approach to talent acquisition “reasonable according to the data”.

Devaluing the QB by saying “you can win without an elite player there” is quintessential Miami over the last 20 years: making winning harder instead of easier. Can you win a ship without a stud QB? Yes, but why on earth would you try? It makes it exponentially harder to win without one and exponentially easier to win with one. Miss me with the “it can be done” line, instead explain to me why any HC in his right mind would intentionally make his path to success more difficult by not getting a proven baller at the most important position on the field? Literally should be job 1 of every class. Instead Mario whiffed 2 years straight. Guy can’t even take credit for Brown, kid was already committed.

But again, Miami makes winning harder, not easier. Mario called TVD the best QB in the country in his introductory presser, then proceeded to shackle him with an OC and scheme that turned his brain inside out. Freaking one year later and we’re still hearing “he's a great fit for the style of offense Mario wants to run.” What the heck does that mean? I’d like a kid who’s a terrible fit for Mario’s O, because thus far that kid would be TVD. I mean is MC an OC or an HC? When did he last call plays? Is someone else in the country imitating the vaunted “Mario Cristobal O”. We have local high school coaches on here, has the Mario Cristobal offensive coaching clinic sold out? Y’all dying for his insight on how to score 10 more ppg, can’t leave without picking the schematic mind that brought you the lowest point totals in Miami history?

If we’re covering his back on QB crooting, shouldn’t we have, I dunno, a playoff or something appearance on his resume to refer to? Or any evidence at all that his offensive philosophy is something other than a net negative?

The truth is that having a mediocre QB makes winning harder, not easier. Just like having a mediocre HC does. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

This is probably the best point made in this entire thread:

"Devaluing the QB by saying “you can win without an elite player there” is quintessential Miami over the last 20 years: making winning harder instead of easier. Can you win a ship without a stud QB? Yes, but why on earth would you try? It makes it exponentially harder to win without one and exponentially easier to win with one."

 

[joseermonfils]

We ain’t having a 35 page conversation about “what the data really says” on QB quality if there was any reason to be confident about this take — as the only QB in the class. Nobody had to defend Emory Williams (who looked a lot better as a 3* than this cat) when the class also had Rashada.

If your QB classes over 3 years are Jacurri Brown, Emory Williams, and Judd Anderson, you would not seem to be serious about winning football in the modern era, no matter how good your DL recruiting is. Especially with one freaking class. Plus, if “winning in the trenches” is essentially all that matters, why didn’t he go nuts on DL last year too? Once again, the current state of the program is cast as “all according to plan”, even if it’s unrecognizable from the previous plan.

We are not UGA, nor are we close to UGA. They’ve also recruited QB at an elite level, they just happened to have a walk on who broke every mould known to man when he was surrounded by the best talent in the country. UGA is evidence of nothing.

It’s amazing to me that Mario still has defenders on this. His offensive recruiting is abysmal outside of OL and RB, he seems to think QB is less than the most important position in the sport, and some of y’all are so invested in him being successful here you’re calling his absurd approach to talent acquisition “reasonable according to the data”.

Devaluing the QB by saying “you can win without an elite player there” is quintessential Miami over the last 20 years: making winning harder instead of easier. Can you win a ship without a stud QB? Yes, but why on earth would you try? It makes it exponentially harder to win without one and exponentially easier to win with one. Miss me with the “it can be done” line, instead explain to me why any HC in his right mind would intentionally make his path to success more difficult by not getting a proven baller at the most important position on the field? Literally should be job 1 of every class. Instead Mario whiffed 2 years straight. Guy can’t even take credit for Brown, kid was already committed.

But again, Miami makes winning harder, not easier. Mario called TVD the best QB in the country in his introductory presser, then proceeded to shackle him with an OC and scheme that turned his brain inside out. Freaking one year later and we’re still hearing “he's a great fit for the style of offense Mario wants to run.” What the heck does that mean? I’d like a kid who’s a terrible fit for Mario’s O, because thus far that kid would be TVD. I mean is MC an OC or an HC? When did he last call plays? Is someone else in the country imitating the vaunted “Mario Cristobal O”. The man got a tree? We have local high school coaches on here, has the Mario Cristobal offensive coaching clinic sold out? Y’all dying for his insight on how to score 10 more ppg, can’t leave without picking the schematic mind that brought you the lowest point totals in Miami history?

If we’re covering his back on QB crooting, shouldn’t we have, I dunno, a playoff or something appearance on his resume to refer to? Or any evidence at all that his offensive philosophy is something other than a net negative?

The truth is that having a mediocre QB makes winning harder, not easier. Just like having a mediocre HC does. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

But my bottom line question here is how do we know who the mediocre QB is? Is just having the 4 or 5 stars next to his name the end all be all...at the end of the day I think Mario sees this kid as the other 1st round QB he coached...idk if he's right or wrong...but I also know we have had plenty of 247 star QBs from Kyle Wright to Jarren Williams who never did anything or help the program in any way

 

[AndreiVasy88]

Forgive me if someone has mentioned this but could he run? I know he's a multi sport athlete so he has to be pretty athletic.

 

[IndayArtHauz]

This is probably the best point made in this entire thread:

"Devaluing the QB by saying “you can win without an elite player there” is quintessential Miami over the last 20 years: making winning harder instead of easier. Can you win a ship without a stud QB? Yes, but why on earth would you try? It makes it exponentially harder to win without one and exponentially easier to win with one."

It’s my biggest criticism of the program since the natty. We make winning harder instead of easier, at every turn. Now he’s doing it with QBs. Why?

 

[NorthEastCane]

Maybe you should reread because naw.

Maybe you should reread because he was responding not my post about where he got the reputation about not developing QBs.

 

[SCarolina Ibis]

QB is the hardest position to evaluate and project, we all know that. But at least all the big, winning programs are signing elite ones. If they bust, if they get beat out by lower ranked kids, if they get beat out by transfers, so be it. But they're getting the highly ranked kids, who attract other highly ranked kids on the offensive side of the ball.

So if we recruit a 5-star or high 4-star QB and pair him with Judd, and Judd beats him out, awesome. But this kid can't be the only QB you sign. Literally no other elite programs are doing it this way, what makes us think we can?

I've made it quite clear throughout this thread that I'm not the biggest fan of the commitment, but I understood why they accepted it. They like his arm and measurables.

But then the coaches/staff started tweeting out that "QB1" nonsense. I mean.. really? This is their QB1? **** outta here..