Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2010 13:58:55 GMT -8
How much do they mean?
Here are the number of verbals obtained by MWC schools to this point per Rivals:
Utah - 17
TCU - 14
BYU - 11
SDSU - 10
(Boise St. - 6)
CSU - 2
Wyoming - 2
UNLV - 0
UNM - 0
Maybe it's completely a coincidence, but it sure looks like there's a pattern there to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jul 11, 2010 16:37:41 GMT -8
I don't know how much they mean as young men can always change their mind as we have found out a couple times when it comes to high value recruits, but looking at the list, the thing that comes to mind is a little tune that I think was from Sesame Street "one of these things is not like the other...."
Considering our woeful record in this century, I find it very encouraging that this staff seems to be able to sell the fact that things are changing at SDSU. This is happening even coming off a 4-8 year; what happens when we are coming off an 8-4 year?
I like the direction the program is taking. Hope we make the most of this staff and its talents.
|
|
|
|
Post by ron on Jul 11, 2010 16:46:54 GMT -8
I don't know how much they mean as young men can always change their mind as we have found out a couple times when it comes to high value recruits, but looking at the list, the thing that comes to mind is a little tune that I think was from Sesame Street "one of these things is not like the other...." Considering our woeful record in this century, I find it very encouraging that this staff seems to be able to sell the fact that things are changing at SDSU. This is happening even coming off a 4-8 year; what happens when we are coming off an 8-4 year? I like the direction the program is taking. Hope we make the most of this staff and its talents. If we manage a bowl this year I think we retain most or all of those verbals, and gain even more high caliber kids. If we don't then I'm not nearly as optimistic. This year is HUGE! The staff obviously connects with recruits, but in the end they want to play for a winner. |
|
|
|
Post by texasaztec on Jul 11, 2010 17:25:05 GMT -8
I think we become bowl eligible this year, but whether or not we actually go to a bowl is another matter.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecTom on Jul 11, 2010 17:28:20 GMT -8
I think we become bowl eligible this year, but whether or not we actually go to a bowl is another matter. If we are bowl eligible like I think we will be, we will for sure be bowling. |
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jul 11, 2010 17:34:12 GMT -8
These are real football coaches, when they walk into the coaches office and into the recruit's living room it is hard to imagine they don't command some respect. It has been very positive this year that a) they are getting a lot of early commits, b) they are getting them in the same areas they have been recruiting heavily.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jul 11, 2010 18:00:23 GMT -8
These are real football coaches, when they walk into the coaches office and into the recruit's living room it is hard to imagine they don't command some respect. It has been very positive this year that a) they are getting a lot of early commits, b) they are getting them in the same areas they have been recruiting heavily. +1 |
|
|
|
Post by SD Johnny on Jul 11, 2010 18:55:08 GMT -8
The better schools are desired destinations rather than the last option. Thats why the better ones are able to fill up earlier as most recruits that sign at the lower rung will wait to see if they get better offers first. Even though our football has sucked for a decade we have location in our favor and Hoke and Co. must be selling the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jul 11, 2010 19:07:15 GMT -8
The better schools are desired destinations rather than the last option. Thats why the better ones are able to fill up earlier as most recruits that sign at the lower rung will wait to see if they get better offers first. Even though our football has sucked for a decade we have location in our favor and Hoke and Co. must be selling the future. I really give the credit to our coaches right now over location. Don't get me wrong I would much rather recruit to SD than say Laramie, Lincoln, etc., but I think it is the staff selling the program right now that is putting the numbers in right now. |
|
|
|
Post by azteccannon on Jul 11, 2010 20:25:13 GMT -8
I've come to the conclusion that location is only a secondary or, more likely, lower consideration. It does become more valuable when you have the right staff in place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2010 7:46:58 GMT -8
My point was the vast disparity in our number of verbals compared to the other four dregs of the conference and that we even have more verbals than Boise, though they're still stuck in a miserable conference which I suspect has something to do with that. Anyway, I was wondering whether anybody thought that perhaps the other dregs haven't been offering many kids for some reason.
BTW, I can somewhat understand why UNM has no verbals yet. One, they're coming off their worst season in a quarter century. Two, UNM's 2010 class was terrible until the eleventh hour, when Locksley brought in several high-quality recruits from around D.C. and a transfer or two. However, if I were a UNLV fan, I would be getting a bit concerned that Hauck's guys haven't gotten a commitment from anyone. I mean, my biggest concern about SDSU hiring Hauck was that his young staff might not have contacts in California high schools, which is of course where UNLV gets half of its players.
|
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jul 12, 2010 8:04:33 GMT -8
My point was the vast disparity in our number of verbals compared to the other four dregs of the conference and that we even have more verbals than Boise, though they're still stuck in a miserable conference which I suspect has something to do with that. Anyway, I was wondering whether anybody thought that perhaps the other dregs haven't been offering many kids for some reason. BTW, I can somewhat understand why UNM has no verbals yet. One, they're coming off their worst season in a quarter century. Two, UNM's 2010 class was terrible until the eleventh hour, when Locksley brought in several high-quality recruits from around D.C. and a transfer or two. However, if I were a UNLV fan, I would be getting a bit concerned that Hauck's guys haven't gotten a commitment from anyone. I mean, my biggest concern about SDSU hiring Hauck was that his young staff might not have contacts in California high schools, which is of course where UNLV gets half of its players. It would be interesting to see what these numbers were at this time last year. |
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jul 12, 2010 8:23:36 GMT -8
My point was the vast disparity in our number of verbals compared to the other four dregs of the conference and that we even have more verbals than Boise, though they're still stuck in a miserable conference which I suspect has something to do with that. Anyway, I was wondering whether anybody thought that perhaps the other dregs haven't been offering many kids for some reason. BTW, I can somewhat understand why UNM has no verbals yet. One, they're coming off their worst season in a quarter century. Two, UNM's 2010 class was terrible until the eleventh hour, when Locksley brought in several high-quality recruits from around D.C. and a transfer or two. However, if I were a UNLV fan, I would be getting a bit concerned that Hauck's guys haven't gotten a commitment from anyone. I mean, my biggest concern about SDSU hiring Hauck was that his young staff might not have contacts in California high schools, which is of course where UNLV gets half of its players. It would be interesting to see what these numbers were at this time last year. At this time last year we had 6. The 4 O'side kids along with Waddel and Quigley. (Edit: make that 5 as we got 3 O'side kids early not 4.) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2010 8:31:34 GMT -8
FullMonty, here are the commitment dates for the 2010 class:
Beed - 12/20/09
Bolanos - 12/7/09
Corbett - 12/24/09
Dilley - 12/6/09
Dingwell - 10/2/09
Fely - 6/28/09
Galea - 12/10/09
Galea'i - 11/10/09
Garrett - 2/3/10
Gauld - 12/7/09
Gavert - 8/4/09
Ghandour - 8/6/09
Jackson - 9/28/09
Keels - 11/9/09
Lamar - 9/21/09
Muema - 1/10/10
Onuahu - 12/20/09
Perez - 11/30/09
Quigley - 6/24/09
Ruffin - 1/20/10
Siluano - 6/28/09
Thomas - 11/16/09
Unga - 2/3/10
Waddell - 6/22/09
Whitaker - 1/11/10
Williams - 12/6/09
June: 4
July: 0
August: 1
September: 2
October: 1
November: 4
December: 8
January: 3
February: 2
It should be kept in mind that everybody is doing this stuff earlier each year. Texas, for example, obtained 17 verbals for 2011 within three weeks of the LOI signing date for 2010! The NCAA is going to put a stop to it, however. Rumor I've heard is the NCAA is considering imposing a rule which would prohibit scholarship offers until the August 1 preceding a kid's senior season.
|
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jul 12, 2010 8:32:45 GMT -8
My point was the vast disparity in our number of verbals compared to the other four dregs of the conference and that we even have more verbals than Boise, though they're still stuck in a miserable conference which I suspect has something to do with that. Anyway, I was wondering whether anybody thought that perhaps the other dregs haven't been offering many kids for some reason. BTW, I can somewhat understand why UNM has no verbals yet. One, they're coming off their worst season in a quarter century. Two, UNM's 2010 class was terrible until the eleventh hour, when Locksley brought in several high-quality recruits from around D.C. and a transfer or two. However, if I were a UNLV fan, I would be getting a bit concerned that Hauck's guys haven't gotten a commitment from anyone. I mean, my biggest concern about SDSU hiring Hauck was that his young staff might not have contacts in California high schools, which is of course where UNLV gets half of its players. I can't imagine they are not making offers. I really think the credit goes to our staff and their hard work in changing the perception of the program. |
|
|
|
Post by FULL_MONTY on Jul 12, 2010 8:41:06 GMT -8
So if I read this correctly, we are at 10 commits and it took till November to reach that level previously. Which means that we will be close to done around November.
You have to draw your own conclusions, but it seems positive.
|
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jul 12, 2010 11:47:57 GMT -8
Getting people to verbal early makes the schollys more scarce and puts some pressure on other kids to $#!+ or get off the pot - if they really have no intention it hopefully fleshes that out sooner and so we're not wasting time on recruiting them or with meaningless visits. If you got say 3 guys equal enough for one spot, give 'em all a deadline see who is most interested and use resources retaining that kid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Jul 12, 2010 12:29:28 GMT -8
I've come to the conclusion that location is only a secondary or, more likely, lower consideration. It does become more valuable when you have the right staff in place. Also more valuable when there is a comparison between SDSU and this or that school. We've been so bad that there hasn't been that comparison, but getting better will allow it to come into play more than it has over the past 10 years. =Bob |
|
|
|
Post by dshawfan on Jul 15, 2010 8:39:57 GMT -8
Reading an article today on ASR regarding the recruitment of Jordan Smith (OL) this year, and the coach they are speaking to mentions 2 things:
1) Kids and coaches love Hoke and his style. He's very easy to talk to and enthusiastic about the direction of the program.
2) The Aztecs were on him (Smith) early because of the recruiting of Jordan Thomas from last season, and they were consistently around and stayed on top of Smith.
I'll agree on both of these points as I have had the opportunity to talk with Coach Hoke on one of his visits to our campus, and he is just really easy to talk to, and yes, he is very enthusiastic about the program. As for an Aztec presence on campus, as I have said elsewhere, Sipe has been to our campus multiple times since being on the job and we had 1 borderline prospect IMO. The previous staff did not visit us once during their time on the Mesa.
|
|
|
|
Post by monty on Jul 15, 2010 10:10:58 GMT -8
Reading an article today on ASR regarding the recruitment of Jordan Smith (OL) this year, and the coach they are speaking to mentions 2 things: 1) Kids and coaches love Hoke and his style. He's very easy to talk to and enthusiastic about the direction of the program. 2) The Aztecs were on him (Smith) early because of the recruiting of Jordan Thomas from last season, and they were consistently around and stayed on top of Smith. I'll agree on both of these points as I have had the opportunity to talk with Coach Hoke on one of his visits to our campus, and he is just really easy to talk to, and yes, he is very enthusiastic about the program. As for an Aztec presence on campus, as I have said elsewhere, Sipe has been to our campus multiple times since being on the job and we had 1 borderline prospect IMO. The previous staff did not visit us once during their time on the Mesa. if i remember you are out in el centro? So it takes a bit of commitment to drive out there for a visit. I think Yuma playsin the same division as the scottsdale schools we get some recruits from and is often in the semis/finals - do you know if we recruit there as it isn't much further from el centro to yuma |
|
