What Does A "Good" Recruiting Class Look Like?

Whilst I agree with some of this, the shots at Walford and Miller are misplaced.

There's a very good chance Miller turns out to be a better college player than Silvera. Those are the evaluations we have to nail right now to get back on top.

Also, it's college football. You don't need elite NFL players to win the ACC Coastal. If a guy is good enough to hang around in the NFL for 4+ years he's **** sure good enough to take us to Charlotte.

Baby steps.

I loved the Warlord take. Loved the Miller take, too. This class, I'm all for Restrepo and Chris Washington. But they should be the flyers/projects, not the headliners.

I'm not talking about beating Ga Tech or Pitt here. The OP asked what makes a class a bad vs. good vs. great one. At Miami, great means BCS title contender. For that to happen, the top of the class needs to be guys like Duke Johnson and Ereck Flowers, projected future NFL starters. And because we have the best recruiting grounds in the country, we better know that the 3-stars we're taking to fill the bottom half of the class are actually hidden gems who should turn into high-level guys with proper development.
 
Advertisement
At the University of Miami...if 50% of your class isn't filled with Blue Chip quality players...you're legitimately doing this wrong.

Miami is in the hottest hot bed of available talent in college football. 50% threshold of Blue Chippers should be the minimum requirement for having this job.

Right now, we're at about 35%.

Not sure much else needs to be said.

I've said it for years here...you can not have a majority of your class be 3* players no matter how good you think those 3* players are. Above, @grover touches upon it. It doesn't matter how many 3* you put into the league, you will never turn enough INTO blue chip players to make up the difference between you and the truly elite players in college football.

blah blah blah star whores blah blah...we're the University of Miami...we are a power five football program with five national titles.

We shouldn't be recruiting like we're just another regular ol ACC team. Clemson has a 94 average with their prospects. Miami has 88. That is the difference between us and a bottom of the barrell AAC team. The gap between Clemson and the rest of the ACC is growing at an alarming rate. You won't catch up with whatever the fvck we are doing right now. Sorry.

I'm sure you'll eventually realize one day that evaluations/assessments are a far greater predictor of future success than meaningless blue chip ratios & recruiting rankings that are taken out of proper context. Not only that but those 2 metrics are often times reflective of a coach's ability to maximize talent as evidenced by how their recruits are routinely given inflated ratings. Furthermore I know you're not trying to imply that Clemson's players had a 94 rating when they won their 1st NC are you?? Because that's beyond absurd.

The bottom line is MIA has to 1st prove it is able to maximize the talent it acquires, before it can even dream of comparing itself to Clemson. Therefore it is trivial to focus on where this yrs recruiting class finishes rankings wise, or the overall blue chip ratio of the entire class.
 
You do make me laugh. You’re whole high and mighty, don’t make me get mean thing you have going on. I bet you make a post, pet yourself in your back, then tell yourself how you just got someone.

Where you at muppet?

Running with the jackals, eh bro...bruh...douche...
 
Advertisement
Only a real douche would be beating his chest after tonight. Douche on **** boi.

miniGif_20191124002816.gif


M U P P E T.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Hahahah u think us losing has anything to do with u being a ghey boi?

actually two separate sets of facts...

much like you swallowing Manuela seed and cleaning him after he rails your "pick a family member"..

yum yum

miniGif_20191124005631.gif
 
Last edited:
Good = fill all the depth holes on your roster with kids you believe could start and win games in the ACC, plus get as close to 85 as allowable. Must include a trade-across or trade-up for the majority of spots when compared to how the current starters looked like when they were in HS.

Great = 1/3 or more of the class is considered elite as agreed upon by the some combination of the coaches (comparing the recruits stacked-ranked on their boards), trustworthy local guys in the know who watch multiple games (our CIS team and best posters like LCE, Geta, Macho, etc.), scouting agencies who watch multiple 7x7 and other camps.

The Top 5 programs (Bama, Clemson, OSU, UGA, LSU) have more than half their commits in that elite classification. So while you should always take projects, especially local flyers, they can't be too great a share of the class for the class to be great.

So for example, while it's great that Clive Walford, Thurston Armbrister or Olsen Pierre turned into pros eventually, those classes were not even good, they were mediocre. Because there were too many of those types, and for every Pierre, there was a Cory King. Besides which, even if Pierre is in the NFL, no one would call him elite. You need to be getting the Willis or Silvera guys, not the Pierre or Jordan Miller guys in your class, across multiple position groups, to be considered great.

There area a **** of a lot more than 5 programs that have more than half their guys considered "Elite". There are over 15 teams this year with more than 50% of their roster being blue chips.
 
What does a "good" recruiting class look like?

What does a "great" recruiting class look like?

What would make you think its a disaster?


I'll put it out there:

Not Going To Happen: Top 5
Miracle: Top 15
Hopeful: Top 20
Catastrophe: Top 30
Fire Diaz Instantly: 30+

Where are you all hiding, downvote muppets?

WE see you.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top