|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 6, 2012 13:59:03 GMT -8
Spgonzo, don't feel like the Lone Ranger. From what I've read of your posts, I agree with you. I graduated from SDSU and have always felt the way you're describing. I can't say what's in our current coach's mind, but my guess is that Hoke probably had a more agressive and higher-reaching attitude than does Long, which, I'm sure, is a big part of why he's now in Michigan and likely will have another stellar recruiting class. I also think that we will compete okay with the lower third of the BE, but will struggle greatly with the upper 2/3s. Sadly, I don't see our recruiting changing in the next few years however, from what it is this year. Not sure why you feel the need to support your points (some valid) with off the cuff data. Hoke's class was no better (stars wise) then Long's is shaping up to be. Tthe current coaching staff has targeted several 4* athletes (but haven’t landed any - same as Hoke). I liked the guy too, but your undying love for the guy who hit it and quit it is getting in the way of reality. I'm describing how I see things---and what I don't see. It would seem that you and I just look at the picture and come to different conclusions. My conclusion is that the coach who left (not at all in love with him and I'm still angry about the way he handled his departure) is more in the "mold" of a coach able to attract top recruits than our present one. And that issue won't go away even after we join the BE...in MY opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by spgonzo on Jul 6, 2012 14:07:25 GMT -8
Not sure why you feel the need to support your points (some valid) with off the cuff data. Hoke's class was no better (stars wise) then Long's is shaping up to be. Tthe current coaching staff has targeted several 4* athletes (but haven’t landed any - same as Hoke). I liked the guy too, but your undying love for the guy who hit it and quit it is getting in the way of reality. I'm describing how I see things---and what I don't see. It would seem that you and I just look at the picture and come to different conclusions. My conclusion is that the coach who left (not at all in love with him and I'm still angry about the way he handled his departure) is more in the "mold" of a coach able to attract top recruits than our present one. And that issue won't go away even after we joing the BE...in MY opinion. I agree. Just listen to the both of them talk. I like Rocky and all, but he comes off as not caring sometimes. Rarely do I hear Rocky speak and instantly feel confidence or excitment about the team. I don't see a ton of passion and enthusiasm with Long as there was with Hoke. $#!+, he took Michigan to a BCS win in his first year. I don't really see Rocky taking us to the next level. He will continue the foundation of toughness Hoke started and we will hire a bigger name with a better staff with the BE money. Rocky is a MWC coach, Hoke is a Big 12 coach. They are both where they should be. |
|
|
|
Post by 78aztec82 on Jul 7, 2012 4:28:34 GMT -8
Rocky is a MWC coach, Hoke is a Big 12 coach. They are both where they should be. Big 10, for clarification. Sent from my DROID RAZR using ProBoards |
|
|
|
Post by sdfootballfan on Jul 7, 2012 8:32:50 GMT -8
Some of you are ungrateful as hell. Can we just be happy that there are kids who wanna play for the Aztecs without whoring over some horse crap star rating?
|
|
|
|
Post by pdraztec on Jul 7, 2012 10:40:16 GMT -8
Big 10+2
|
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 7, 2012 11:24:24 GMT -8
Some of you are ungrateful as hell. Can we just be happy that there are kids who wanna play for the Aztecs without whoring over some horse crap star rating? I'm afraid that if we want a championship-caliber team---and I thought everyone on this board does---we need a little more than kids who "wanna play for the Aztecs", don't we? If that's the bar, then we'd be in the top 10 every year. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2012 12:23:02 GMT -8
Well there is little or no uniformity of opinion on who is what,three stars or four or two, except for a few guys. One guy is a two star on Scout is a three star on rivals and not rated on ESPN or vice versa. Last year ESPN had us with 11 three star players the others Rivals,Scout, only a couple.I think some guys with four stars and three are way overrated case in point Moala, and Lopez both are 40 pounds overweight. Also guys are recruited with a number of variables in mind,what kind of offense or defense the team plays, they play who they have now at various positions. Wells has excellent feet are you kidding he is not polished because like some kids he plays too many positions. Also he played basketball and so on.Rocky has been ahead coach or coordinator a lot longer than most of you guys have been alive. TCU and Boise for years followed the same formula Long is doing find fast, tough, agile athletes. How well we do in the future depends a good deal on whether we win right away in the Big east or flop. If we have a mediocre or crappy season(eight wins) this year It will hurt recruiting. If we go 5-7 or 6-6 or worse in the Big east then we are toast. Louisville and Rutgers and Cincinnati are most likely sure losses. This move reminds me of the move to the WAC years ago,and could end up even worse.
|
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 7, 2012 13:06:38 GMT -8
Well there is little or no uniformity of opinion on who is what,three stars or four or two, except for a few guys. One guy is a two star on Scout is a three star on rivals and not rated on ESPN or vice versa. Last year ESPN had us with 11 three star players the others Rivals,Scout, only a couple.I think some guys with four stars and three are way overrated case in point Moala, and Lopez both are 40 pounds overweight. Also guys are recruited with a number of variables in mind,what kind of offense or defense the team plays, they play who they have now at various positions. Wells has excellent feet are you kidding he is not polished because like some kids he plays too many positions. Also he played basketball and so on.Rocky has been ahead coach or coordinator a lot longer than most of you guys have been alive. TCU and Boise for years followed the same formula Long is doing find fast, tough, agile athletes. How well we do in the future depends a good deal on whether we win right away in the Big east or flop. If we have a mediocre or crappy season(eight wins) this year It will hurt recruiting. If we go 5-7 or 6-6 or worse in the Big east then we are toast. Louisville and Rutgers and Cincinnati are most likely sure losses. This move reminds me of the move to the WAC years ago,and could end up even worse. But Steveem, do you feel that Rocky is in the same coaching "league" as Patterson or Petersen? |
|
|
|
Post by bill456 on Jul 7, 2012 17:38:45 GMT -8
Well there is little or no uniformity of opinion on who is what,three stars or four or two, except for a few guys. One guy is a two star on Scout is a three star on rivals and not rated on ESPN or vice versa. Last year ESPN had us with 11 three star players the others Rivals,Scout, only a couple.I think some guys with four stars and three are way overrated case in point Moala, and Lopez both are 40 pounds overweight. Also guys are recruited with a number of variables in mind,what kind of offense or defense the team plays, they play who they have now at various positions. Wells has excellent feet are you kidding he is not polished because like some kids he plays too many positions. Also he played basketball and so on.Rocky has been ahead coach or coordinator a lot longer than most of you guys have been alive. TCU and Boise for years followed the same formula Long is doing find fast, tough, agile athletes. How well we do in the future depends a good deal on whether we win right away in the Big east or flop. If we have a mediocre or crappy season(eight wins) this year It will hurt recruiting. If we go 5-7 or 6-6 or worse in the Big east then we are toast. Louisville and Rutgers and Cincinnati are most likely sure losses. This move reminds me of the move to the WAC years ago,and could end up even worse. But Steveem, do you feel that Rocky is in the same coaching "league" as Patterson or Petersen? We've had 2 winning seasons that was preceded by some lean years. Rocky, although not best rah rah guy, had a good winning percentage in the conference that they're leaving, a Mid Major. Let's be realistic, the Aztecs must string together more winning seasons before the 5 star types start really considering SDSU. The proof is what we'll see on the field this year. I know alot of you don't like "wait and see" approach, but that's the fair thing to do for the staff and the players. I can't condemn Rocky for weakness on this years team with no proof. |
|
|
|
Post by AztecTom on Jul 7, 2012 17:48:43 GMT -8
But Steveem, do you feel that Rocky is in the same coaching "league" as Patterson or Petersen? We've had 2 winning seasons that was preceded by some lean years. Rocky, although not best rah rah guy, had a good winning percentage in the conference that they're leaving, a Mid Major. Let's be realistic, the Aztecs must string together more winning seasons before the 5 star types start really considering SDSU. The proof is what we'll see on the field this year. I know alot of you don't like "wait and see" approach, but that's the fair thing to do for the staff and the players. I can't condemn Rocky for weakness on this years team with no proof. Good approach Bill and very fair. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2012 22:24:53 GMT -8
To think we're going to get any 5-star players in the near future is just silly. Rutgers has had exactly two in its history and Rutgers has been in the BE since its inception. More typically, Rutgers gets 2-4 4-star players in each class. So the main difference between them and us is they haven't been having to settle for hardly any 2-star guys. So if we're going to set a realistic goal, it should be to reduce 2-star recruits to the point that the only ones we get are special teams guys, in other words, long snapper, kick returners and place kickers, none of whom are ever rated above three stars.
|
|
|
|
Post by RockNFish on Jul 7, 2012 23:45:26 GMT -8
I'm still not sure why we settle for someone like rocky - with our pedigree and resources, we should just hire bill cower and start winning national championships now.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecTom on Jul 7, 2012 23:47:36 GMT -8
I'm still not sure why we settle for someone like rocky - with our pedigree and resources, we should just hire bill cower and start winning national championships now. LOL, your funny Rock! |
|
|
|
Post by AztecTom on Jul 7, 2012 23:48:02 GMT -8
To think we're going to get any 5-star players in the near future is just silly. Rutgers has had exactly two in its history and Rutgers has been in the BE since its inception. More typically, Rutgers gets 2-4 4-star players in each class. So the main difference between them and us is they haven't been having to settle for hardly any 2-star guys. So if we're going to set a realistic goal, it should be to reduce 2-star recruits to the point that the only ones we get are special teams guys, in other words, long snapper, kick returners and place kickers, none of whom are ever rated above three stars. Good stuff SGF and I agree with you on what you said. |
|
|
|
Post by jdgaucho on Jul 7, 2012 23:56:38 GMT -8
To think we're going to get any 5-star players in the near future is just silly. Rutgers has had exactly two in its history and Rutgers has been in the BE since its inception. More typically, Rutgers gets 2-4 4-star players in each class. So the main difference between them and us is they haven't been having to settle for hardly any 2-star guys. So if we're going to set a realistic goal, it should be to reduce 2-star recruits to the point that the only ones we get are special teams guys, in other words, long snapper, kick returners and place kickers, none of whom are ever rated above three stars. place kickers - don't mention that position to any Boise fans ;D Just by being in a "bigger name" conference and the increased tv coverage because of it, combine that with the great location and SDSU should start to attract the higher rated players. FWIW - According to Scout, Utah had two 4-star players in their recruiting class after leaving the MWC last year (#40 overall) and this year they picked up three 4-star players (#32 overall). As for Rutgers? they had two 4-star players in their class and were ranked #37 overall by Scout. Rivals said #24 overall and gave them one 5-star recruit. |
|
|
|
Post by jdgaucho on Jul 7, 2012 23:59:10 GMT -8
Just win on the field and the rest will take care of itself. Only exception to this rule apparently is UCLA. How Rick Neuheisel could boast bringing in a top 5 class, three top 10 classes and four top 15 classes in the last five years - yet still be a joke - is beyond me  You think Rocky Long would do well with that type of talent? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2012 9:43:05 GMT -8
To think we're going to get any 5-star players in the near future is just silly. Rutgers has had exactly two in its history and Rutgers has been in the BE since its inception. More typically, Rutgers gets 2-4 4-star players in each class. So the main difference between them and us is they haven't been having to settle for hardly any 2-star guys. So if we're going to set a realistic goal, it should be to reduce 2-star recruits to the point that the only ones we get are special teams guys, in other words, long snapper, kick returners and place kickers, none of whom are ever rated above three stars. place kickers - don't mention that position to any Boise fans ;D Just by being in a "bigger name" conference and the increased tv coverage because of it, combine that with the great location and SDSU should start to attract the higher rated players. FWIW - According to Scout, Utah had two 4-star players in their recruiting class after leaving the MWC last year (#40 overall) and this year they picked up three 4-star players (#32 overall). As for Rutgers? they had two 4-star players in their class and were ranked #37 overall by Scout. Rivals said #24 overall and gave them one 5-star recruit. Rutgers is a special situation. Although it's called Rutgers for some reason, it's New Jersey's flagship university so why it isn't called the University of New Jersey is beyond me. The two 5-star players Rutgers has got to commit are both from in state. But for being its state's flagship school, you can bet those kids would have gone elsewhere. In other words, if it was California we're talking about and they wanted to remain in state, they would have gone to USC, Cal, Stanford or UCLA. To put it another way, that kind of kid simply is not going to attend SDSU unless SDSU gains admission to the Pac. 4-star kids with SDSU as a member of the Big East, sure. 5-star kids, no, that just isn't going to happen so to expect it is to set yourself up for annual disappointment. BTW, JD, kudos for your continuing interest in SDSU football. The program was a steaming pile as recently as four years ago but it's now very much headed back in the right direction. |
|
|
|
Post by kozy on Jul 8, 2012 9:54:20 GMT -8
It's called Rutgers as a shorthand. Official name is Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey.
Penn State owned New Jersey for recruiting the past 40 years. With the sex scandal and passing of Paterno, that iron grip will lessen and look to Rutgers to continue to recruit well.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdfootballfan on Jul 8, 2012 9:57:10 GMT -8
Some of you are ungrateful as hell. Can we just be happy that there are kids who wanna play for the Aztecs without whoring over some horse crap star rating? I'm afraid that if we want a championship-caliber team---and I thought everyone on this board does---we need a little more than kids who "wanna play for the Aztecs", don't we? If that's the bar, then we'd be in the top 10 every year. Championships are won on the football field. Stars are the opinion of rivals and scout. Proud member of both sites but I'll be damned if I let them determine what type of player a kid is before he even straps on a helmet for us. |
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 8, 2012 10:21:02 GMT -8
I'm afraid that if we want a championship-caliber team---and I thought everyone on this board does---we need a little more than kids who "wanna play for the Aztecs", don't we? If that's the bar, then we'd be in the top 10 every year. Championships are won on the football field. Stars are the opinion of rivals and scout. Proud member of both sites but I'll be damned if I let them determine what type of player a kid is before he even straps on a helmet for us. Not sure anyone is suggesting that the scouting/reporting services determine who fills our roster. However, there is an undeniably high correlation between highly ranked teams in recruiting (stars, etc.) and teams ranked high in the polls at the end of the season. We ignore that at our own peril. |
|
