|
Post by Fishn'Aztec on Feb 5, 2015 11:01:06 GMT -8
Grey shirts, red shirts, black shirts who cares! Just kick a$$ and take names, the rest takes care of itself and the recruiting experts look like fools!
GO AZTECS!
|
|
|
Post by gigglyforshrigley on Feb 5, 2015 11:21:31 GMT -8
I haven't been following football recruiting in the MW for all that many years, but it seems like the MW had pretty damn good recruiting classes at the top. Seems like most years this would have been enough to get us the top spot in the MW, anyone who knows more than I do care to comment?
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Feb 5, 2015 11:53:42 GMT -8
I do with these services would re-rank the classes come Sept 1st, once you know who actually makes it to campus. But they don't. I know we have some potential casualties (not currently qualified), and would expect to lose 2-3, as I'd expect BSU/SJSU/FSU to do the same. IMO the MW & like conference are more susceptible to academic casualties since in many cases in order to get the higher ranked kids, you have to take the riskier ones. The P12 can back off those & are more likely to find similar level replacements. That said, hopefully those who don't qualify bounce back to you. Even with a little expected attrition this is a solid class. We have depth, and some real scholars in this class, and return a lot of players from last year as well. Sets up very well. Well, Phil Steele's mag usually comes out just after Labor Day and is therefore a bit more contemporary. His rankings are also cumulative of half a dozen services. So although themselves imperfect, Steele's ratings are the ones to take stock in. That said, you're correct that this is another good class. From a relative standpoint, a VERY good class. In the same manner the P5s are further separating themselves from the G5s, SDSU, Boise and Fresno continue to gradually separate themselves from most of the rest of the MWC. Here's how I would lump the schools right now. P5 QualityBoise (sorry, fellow Aztecs, but they are simply still superior to us) Pretty GoodFresno SDSU USU (great young HC and trending up) ErraticCSU (one great season does not a top-notch program make) AFA UNR (lunatic young HC and will suck again in 2015) Bad (and going to stay that way; zero HS talent in their states) Wyoming UNM Would Finish .500 in FCSUNLV (actually hired a HS coach) Hawaii (closer than you think to dropping out of the MWC and going indy in football) I really don't now what to make of SJSU but it appears they are to MWC football what UNLV is to MWC hoops in being able to recruit very well but having a doofus HC who can't effectively utilize his talent.
|
|
|
Post by zurac315 on Feb 5, 2015 14:31:24 GMT -8
Wyoming won the WAC twice. We did it once. I'm not sure the amount of in-state talent makes much difference. Is Idaho a hotbed of football talent?
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Feb 5, 2015 14:53:06 GMT -8
How many G5 schools emphasize football to the extent Boise State does? I'll answer my own question. None.
Wyoming is at least just a 2-hour hour drive from Denver, weather permitting. The closest major city to Albuquerque is Phoenix, which is three times as far. Granted, ABQ is closer than that to El Paso but it's still farther than Laramie is to Denver and there is almost no HS football talent in El Paso.
So I honestly don't see UNM ever being good in football. The Rocky Long days were as good as it's ever going to get for the Lobos.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Feb 5, 2015 15:11:04 GMT -8
BSU has done it by winning football games , was the Cinderella team . Then came to MW . Had a dip . Then parlayed the almost move to the B E and then got the money from MW so they are making more then all the other teams in the MW and able to put it into their football program and recruit . They did sign the 4 star QB . bottom line for the Aztecs go out and win MW Championship and major bowl game . Winning is where it is all about
|
|
|
Post by MontezumaPhil on Feb 8, 2015 21:08:22 GMT -8
The consensus is that we just brought in roughly the 65th-best recruiting class in the country, and there seems to be a lot of pleasure here on the board about that. But if you performed the same feat four years in a row, wouldn't you end up with the 65th-best football team in America?
What do we aspire to?
|
|
|
Post by badfish on Feb 9, 2015 6:36:38 GMT -8
Not really. There is a huge disparity between the top 10 classes and the rest. I'd say 25-65 aren't that far off in terms of talent, and we all know recruiting isn't a science. Boise was great w/ poorly ranked classes while schools like Michigan and Texas struggle with some of the best classes in the country. UofA had pretty average classes and they were top10 for a lot of the year. If you recruit good athletes w/ THE RIGHT MINDSET, that's a lot better than great athletes without it.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Feb 9, 2015 8:47:25 GMT -8
The consensus is that we just brought in roughly the 65th-best recruiting class in the country, and there seems to be a lot of pleasure here on the board about that. But if you performed the same feat four years in a row, wouldn't you end up with the 65th-best football team in America? What do we aspire to? Welcome to today, and the world of college football where money = success. About 60 of those teams ahead of us are P5 who, luckily for them, have to play each other for conference championships. We're not at that level & won't be w/o an invite, so we don't have to compete against them for conference championships.
The "BEST" Non-P5 recruiting class is around 45-50 so put another way if they did that 4 years in a row they'd end up with the 45-50th best team in America. That's the BEST of whom we are competing with.
The gap between 50 & 65 is minimal - it's more about development, and could be flattened even with a couple non-qualifiers and/or transfers (e.g. see Heywood, Rodriquez, etc.).
|
|
|
Post by aztecfan1 on Feb 9, 2015 8:48:03 GMT -8
Just a reminder of how silly recruiting rankings are. Amen to that. Can you name the Charger All-Pro who was Two Star coming out of high school?
|
|
|
Post by gigglyforshrigley on Feb 9, 2015 8:50:22 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by aztecfan1 on Feb 9, 2015 8:53:25 GMT -8
The consensus is that we just brought in roughly the 65th-best recruiting class in the country, and there seems to be a lot of pleasure here on the board about that. But if you performed the same feat four years in a row, wouldn't you end up with the 65th-best football team in America? What do we aspire to? I would not be fooled by all this nonsense run by people sitting at a computer who have NEVER coached a moment of football. There are five "self anointed" power conferences with about 12 teams in each = 60 teams. They will always get their recruits ranked higher than the MWC and others. So, to me, being in the -mid sixties is not surprising and means nothing. I liked what Rocky said last week about how he challenged his players to show the new recruits next summer what tough is all about. Then you begin to find out how good the newbies really are.
|
|
|
Post by aztecfan1 on Feb 9, 2015 8:55:33 GMT -8
You got it. Might surprise some here. He made himself into one of the best safeties in professional football after he made himself into an all Pac-12 at Utah.
|
|
|
Post by Sdsu4life on Feb 9, 2015 12:21:00 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Sdsu4life on Feb 9, 2015 12:21:31 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Feb 9, 2015 12:59:13 GMT -8
Just a reminder of how silly recruiting rankings are. If I heard it correctly, but it was said none of this year's Super Bowl players were 5 star athletes coming out of high school, or was it that none were #1 draft choices? One of the two anyway. In either case, many end up busts. So scouting at either level is a joke.
|
|
|
Post by Sdsu4life on Feb 9, 2015 13:00:04 GMT -8
Just a reminder of how silly recruiting rankings are. If I heard it correctly, but it was said none of this year's Super Bowl players were 5 star athletes coming out of high school, or was it that none were #1 draft choices? One of the two anyway. In either case, many end up busts. So scouting at either level is a joke. I heard it too and they said there there wasn't a single 5 star recruit in the superbowl. But you also got to understand that these ratings are measures and projection of how they will do in COLLEGE. It is not in any way a measure of who they will become in the NFL, or if they will make it. It is a completely different game
|
|
|
Post by aztech on Feb 9, 2015 13:20:13 GMT -8
If I heard it correctly, but it was said none of this year's Super Bowl players were 5 star athletes coming out of high school, or was it that none were #1 draft choices? One of the two anyway. In either case, many end up busts. So scouting at either level is a joke. I heard it too and they said there there wasn't a single 5 star recruit in the superbowl. But you also got to understand that these ratings are measures and projection of how they will do in COLLEGE. It is not in any way a measure of who they will become in the NFL, or if they will make it. It is a completely different game There was a post on the MWC board a while back, just to prove what a farce these scouting services really are. One of these services found a "source" who described a HS player's stats and his commit to the U of Buffalo. No it wasn't Kalil Mack. Anyway they gave him a 5 star rating, only to find out later that the source made it all up.
|
|
|
Post by Sdsu4life on Feb 9, 2015 13:25:27 GMT -8
I heard it too and they said there there wasn't a single 5 star recruit in the superbowl. But you also got to understand that these ratings are measures and projection of how they will do in COLLEGE. It is not in any way a measure of who they will become in the NFL, or if they will make it. It is a completely different game There was a post on the MWC board a while back, just to prove what a farce these scouting services really are. One of these services found a "source" who described a HS player's stats and his commit to the U of Buffalo. No it wasn't Kalil Mack. Anyway they gave him a 5 star rating, only to find out later that the source made it all up. I'd believe it. Plus, Khalil Mack was 2 star. Look on the side of the page where it shows similar players lol sports.yahoo.com/footballrecruiting/football/recruiting/player-Khalil-Mack-93151
|
|
|
Post by AccessBowlTime on Feb 9, 2015 14:03:18 GMT -8
Rivals isn't exactly the end all and be all of recruiting services. See Russell Wilson for example: ncstate.247sports.com/Season/2007-Football/Commits247 wasn't even in existence then so didn't give him a grade but a cumulative score rounded to 80 suggests Rivals just whiffed on the guy. And BTW, Rivals might be good at paying guys like Augustin Gonzalez and Ruben Vasquez to write stories about SDSU but it still doesn't exactly have a crack grading department. They've got us at #73 nationally whereas 247 and Scout have us at #65 and #66. Not a huge difference but as with prior years it shows Rivals continues to give us short shrift. Examples: Rivals still has Nick Gerhard at 5.2, which is as low as it gets for a graded FBS signee, whereas 247 now gives the kid a grade of 74, or four points above it's lowest. And Rivals hasn't even graded Savea, a kid who received a couple P5 offers. Incompetence? Laziness? Lack of funds? Take your pick.
|
|