|
Post by podpeople on Apr 27, 2012 16:09:37 GMT -8
ahem, ok... If guys would choose BSU over SDSU, I think that says it all. BSU took advantage of the past twenty years of States horrible program, that said, Public perception does not change over night. States years of ineptitude will work against us in many ways. Recruiting is as cut-throat as it gets in Calirfornia, and you can bet that Lame Kiffen and the like are going to lay in on thick for years to come. this isnt just a "why cant State do as well as Boise State in recruiting?" question. Its, "how can we recruit as good as them?" IMO, we had our chance. I hope I'm wrong. now, let me ask you. How can we? Dude, BSU hasn't even been an FBS school for 20 years. They just started their run of national respect around 2004. They had a ranked team around 2001 or 2002. So how does one go to a new FBS school over SDSU? That's not public perception because we actually got better classes back then. Only the last couple of years, BSU recruting has gone above embarassing. So why can't we win with the same type of players? Coaching, right? Yes, Coaching does help.
|
|
|
Post by ron on Apr 27, 2012 17:25:32 GMT -8
ahem, ok... If guys would choose BSU over SDSU, I think that says it all. BSU took advantage of the past twenty years of States horrible program, that said, Public perception does not change over night. States years of ineptitude will work against us in many ways. Recruiting is as cut-throat as it gets in Calirfornia, and you can bet that Lame Kiffen and the like are going to lay in on thick for years to come. this isnt just a "why cant State do as well as Boise State in recruiting?" question. Its, "how can we recruit as good as them?" IMO, we had our chance. I hope I'm wrong. now, let me ask you. How can we? Dude, BSU hasn't even been an FBS school for 20 years. They just started their run of national respect around 2004. They had a ranked team around 2001 or 2002. So how does one go to a new FBS school over SDSU? That's not public perception because we actually got better classes back then. Only the last couple of years, BSU recruting has gone above embarassing. So why can't we win with the same type of players? Coaching, right? It's not that simple. Attrition has been a huge problem with this program too. As far as classes, why do you say ours were better. Based on what?
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Apr 27, 2012 17:37:00 GMT -8
Dude, BSU hasn't even been an FBS school for 20 years. They just started their run of national respect around 2004. They had a ranked team around 2001 or 2002. So how does one go to a new FBS school over SDSU? That's not public perception because we actually got better classes back then. Only the last couple of years, BSU recruting has gone above embarassing. So why can't we win with the same type of players? Coaching, right? It's not that simple. Attrition has been a huge problem with this program too. As far as classes, why do you say ours were better. Based on what? Better as in higher rated recruits. Like how Oklahoma kicks our rear end in recruiting results every year.
|
|
|
Post by ron on Apr 27, 2012 18:08:47 GMT -8
It's not that simple. Attrition has been a huge problem with this program too. As far as classes, why do you say ours were better. Based on what? Better as in higher rated recruits. Like how Oklahoma kicks our rear end in recruiting results every year. That's comparing 4 and 5 stars to 2 and 3. Almost apples and oranges. If you think recruiting rankings, outside of the top programs, mean much then we'll disagree. We have not out recruited them, if you look at the class talent from top to bottom.
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Apr 27, 2012 18:11:51 GMT -8
Better as in higher rated recruits. Like how Oklahoma kicks our rear end in recruiting results every year. That's comparing 4 and 5 stars to 2 and 3. Almost apples and oranges. If you think recruiting rankings, outside of the top programs, mean much then we'll disagree. We have not out recruited them, if you look at the class talent from top to bottom. When you add up those classes from top to bottom, you get a recruiting class ranking. BSU just broke the top 70 a few years ago. After a BCS bowl win. We've been in the top 70 several times before that Fiesta Bowl.
|
|
|
Post by podpeople on Apr 27, 2012 22:05:34 GMT -8
That's comparing 4 and 5 stars to 2 and 3. Almost apples and oranges. If you think recruiting rankings, outside of the top programs, mean much then we'll disagree. We have not out recruited them, if you look at the class talent from top to bottom. When you add up those classes from top to bottom, you get a recruiting class ranking. BSU just broke the top 70 a few years ago. After a BCS bowl win. We've been in the top 70 several times before that Fiesta Bowl. I think its fair to say that there is a bias in regards to who gets what recruit, and what they are rated. lets say that a guy SDSU recruited is a 3 star dude, and then suddenly a pac 12 school gets their hooks into him, and he cahnges his commitment to them, more than likely his grade will go up only because he's being recruited by a pac 12 school. its the lay of the land, my friend. hence, public perception.
|
|
|
Post by ron on Apr 28, 2012 3:16:30 GMT -8
The recruiting rank of 70 means absolutely nothing. If you want to believe otherwise then go right ahead.
|
|