|
Post by backwhenaztec on Jul 12, 2012 6:00:13 GMT -8
It's evident that sporting the Top 100-150 players in the country is very very easy.. Spotting a 6'5 280 lb DE that runs 4.6 verticals 38 inch etc, isn't that difficult hence automatic 4-5 star... My question is the Hardest evaluations come from the 2-3 star athletes.. There's too many factors too many numbers, too many opinions on whose good and who isn't.. Heres the ultimate question to you all
All these scouting services and such do these evals on guys and we are supposed to take their word on it and judge and make statements on how good we are going to be etc... Has anyone stopped to ask whose doing these evaluations? These aren't coaches and often times looks like guys who never played ball never coached ball, etc.. So what makes these guys experts?
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Jul 12, 2012 6:40:22 GMT -8
It's evident that sporting the Top 100-150 players in the country is very very easy.. Spotting a 6'5 280 lb DE that runs 4.6 verticals 38 inch etc, isn't that difficult hence automatic 4-5 star... My question is the Hardest evaluations come from the 2-3 star athletes.. There's too many factors too many numbers, too many opinions on whose good and who isn't.. Heres the ultimate question to you all All these scouting services and such do these evals on guys and we are supposed to take their word on it and judge and make statements on how good we are going to be etc... Has anyone stopped to ask whose doing these evaluations? These aren't coaches and often times looks like guys who never played ball never coached ball, etc.. So what makes these guys experts? Each service employs one or two analysts for each region. Those analysts have to make their judgment of players off of tape and camps that they attend or word of mouth from other coaches/analysts that they trust. Like you said, the upper level guys are easy to make a call on. They play at big time programs and go to all of the big camps. The next level guys are a different deal though. They cannot possibly properly evaluate every single prospect at every single school in their region, it's simple numbers.
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 12, 2012 6:47:29 GMT -8
It's evident that sporting the Top 100-150 players in the country is very very easy.. Spotting a 6'5 280 lb DE that runs 4.6 verticals 38 inch etc, isn't that difficult hence automatic 4-5 star... My question is the Hardest evaluations come from the 2-3 star athletes.. There's too many factors too many numbers, too many opinions on whose good and who isn't.. Heres the ultimate question to you all All these scouting services and such do these evals on guys and we are supposed to take their word on it and judge and make statements on how good we are going to be etc... Has anyone stopped to ask whose doing these evaluations? These aren't coaches and often times looks like guys who never played ball never coached ball, etc.. So what makes these guys experts? To me, it's pretty simple, you either need to get at least 3 or 4, 4-stars and rest 3-stars (like most of our future Big East mates) OR get 15 3-stars with a super coach (like Boise does). We have neither.
|
|
|
Post by RockNFish on Jul 12, 2012 7:16:14 GMT -8
Boise ratings according to Rivals 2002 - 0 (3*) 2003 - 2 (3*) 2004 - 2 (3*) 2005 - 5 (3*) 1 (4*) 2006/07 - Fiesta Bowl Champions
They do tend to have all 2*, don't see many with 0*
|
|
|
Post by spgonzo on Jul 12, 2012 7:21:33 GMT -8
It's evident that sporting the Top 100-150 players in the country is very very easy.. Spotting a 6'5 280 lb DE that runs 4.6 verticals 38 inch etc, isn't that difficult hence automatic 4-5 star... My question is the Hardest evaluations come from the 2-3 star athletes.. There's too many factors too many numbers, too many opinions on whose good and who isn't.. Heres the ultimate question to you all All these scouting services and such do these evals on guys and we are supposed to take their word on it and judge and make statements on how good we are going to be etc... Has anyone stopped to ask whose doing these evaluations? These aren't coaches and often times looks like guys who never played ball never coached ball, etc.. So what makes these guys experts? To me, it's pretty simple, you either need to get at least 3 or 4, 4-stars and rest 3-stars (like most of our future Big East mates) OR get 15 3-stars with a super coach (like Boise does). We have neither. Awesome. We need to compare ourselves to our new conference mates and we are not comparable at this point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2012 7:24:00 GMT -8
It's evident that sporting the Top 100-150 players in the country is very very easy.. Spotting a 6'5 280 lb DE that runs 4.6 verticals 38 inch etc, isn't that difficult hence automatic 4-5 star... My question is the Hardest evaluations come from the 2-3 star athletes.. There's too many factors too many numbers, too many opinions on whose good and who isn't.. Heres the ultimate question to you all All these scouting services and such do these evals on guys and we are supposed to take their word on it and judge and make statements on how good we are going to be etc... Has anyone stopped to ask whose doing these evaluations? These aren't coaches and often times looks like guys who never played ball never coached ball, etc.. So what makes these guys experts? To me, it's pretty simple, you either need to get at least 3 or 4, 4-stars and rest 3-stars (like most of our future Big East mates) OR get 15 3-stars with a super coach (like Boise does). We have neither. Rubbish Boise built its program on two stars so did TCU only in the last two yerars have they beeen getting better recruits. They did the same thing we are doing ge tthe best athelte possibles and coach him up as well as work him out. There sre so many players who played multiple positions,or the worng position for his potential. Ie QB's that would be safetys or runingbacks, runningbacks that would be safetys and so on. Then there is the issue of the services do not agree on aything but the very top atheletes. JC players are not rated, Tyler Morris is a3 star ESPN and Socut,two stars rivals. Dakota Turener same thing. Last year we had 13 of those guys. I have talked to Biggins, Lemmings et all,they are no football geniuses,they can not tell if a guy is has grea tpotential for another position only how he performs in his position now. If stars mean s much why do they differ so much from service to service. Luca Bruno for innstance three stars rivals,scouts,66 grade ESPN too slow best shot og. Fact is I would rather have Beggs and Ricks both tall fast,much more potential,than a guy who is smaller slower. Then the Alumni gets all woofed up about stars and it can effect recruiting. When Cal signed Mike Muhammed from El Centro 6'4 200lb linebacker played de)in hhigh school Cal fans went berserk, NO stars a bum. He turned out thier best linebacker. Several three stars ended up dog meat.aLl thier igh rated QBs overrated.. Big slow but good HS players get three stars. Tall skiny raw recrutis with double the potential get nada.. Even Cal and UA,UCLA have some two stars and non rated in the mix,soo tey musrt tink they are good. why would you want stanops say over Cormier or Baltazar? Because he is a sure fre top players if not at rb at safety or lber. Very fast very to going to be about 6'1 220 Christian Piarra three stars great high school player not D! quality. Escobar,Mc Fadden,Lockett two stars. I want Randy Ricks bad would take him over Bruno who is stall a good kid. 6'5 electronic 4.62. Randy will be 6;'5 250 easy and blisteingly fast . He coudl even play tight ende orlinebacker. Bruno is a olineman or a dt period.
|
|
|
Post by badfish on Jul 12, 2012 7:27:18 GMT -8
idk wtf u just said, but I hope we get Randy Ricks too
|
|
|
Post by RockNFish on Jul 12, 2012 7:33:48 GMT -8
To me, it's pretty simple, you either need to get at least 3 or 4, 4-stars and rest 3-stars (like most of our future Big East mates) OR get 15 3-stars with a super coach (like Boise does). We have neither. Rubbish Boise built its program on two stars solid TCU only in the last two yerars ahve they beeen getting ne better recruits. They did the same thing wae are doing ge tthe best athelte possibles and coach him up as well as work him out. There sre so many players who played multiple positions,or the worng position for his potential. Ied QB's that would be safetys or runingbacks, runningbacks that would be safetys and so on. Then there is the issue of the services do not agree on aything but the very top atheletes. JC players are not raed, Tyler Morris is a3 star ESPN and Socut,two stars rivals. Dakota Turener same t hing. Last year we had 13 of those guys. I have talked to Biggins, Lemmings et all,they are no football geniuses,they can not tell if a guy is has greatpotential for another position only how he performs in his position now. If stars mean s much why do they dciffer so much from service to service. Luca Bruno for innstance three stars rivals,scouts,66 grade ESPN too slow best sahot og. FRact is I woudl rather have Veggf and Ricks both tall fast,much more potential. Then the Alumni gets all woofed up about stars and it vcan effect recrutying. When Cal recrutied Mike Muhammed from El Cengtro 6'4 200 Cal fans went bersek, NO stars a bum. He turned out thier best linebacker. Several three stars ended up dog meat. Big slow but good HS players. Even Cal and UA have some two stars and no rated in the mix,soo tey musrt tink they are good. why would you want stanops say over Cormier or Baltazar? Because he is a sure fre top players if not at rb at safety or lber. Very fast very to going to be about 6'1 220 Christian Piarra three stars great high school player not D! quality. Escobrt,Mc Fadden two stars. I want Randy Ricks bad would take him over Bruno who is stall a good kid. 6'5 electronic 4.62. Randy will be 6;'5 250 easy and blisteingly fast . He coudl even play tight ende orlinebacker. Bruno is a olineman or a dt period. I can feel the steam comming out of your ears! - I'm with you man. Let the f****** coaches recruit and coach - the results will speak for themselves. Yes an 8 win season sucks, but who the hell do these people think we're going to get to coach here? Where is the extra 3M a year to pay a high profile staff going to come from? Who is this magic coach that’s going to come here and win national championships right away? And why the hell would any coach want to come here if we fire coaches for only winning 8 games?
|
|
|
Post by k5james on Jul 12, 2012 7:35:38 GMT -8
Rubbish Boise built its program on two stars solid TCU only in the last two yerars ahve they beeen getting ne better recruits. They did the same thing wae are doing ge tthe best athelte possibles and coach him up as well as work him out. There sre so many players who played multiple positions,or the worng position for his potential. Ied QB's that would be safetys or runingbacks, runningbacks that would be safetys and so on. Then there is the issue of the services do not agree on aything but the very top atheletes. JC players are not raed, Tyler Morris is a3 star ESPN and Socut,two stars rivals. Dakota Turener same t hing. Last year we had 13 of those guys. I have talked to Biggins, Lemmings et all,they are no football geniuses,they can not tell if a guy is has greatpotential for another position only how he performs in his position now. If stars mean s much why do they dciffer so much from service to service. Luca Bruno for innstance three stars rivals,scouts,66 grade ESPN too slow best sahot og. FRact is I woudl rather have Veggf and Ricks both tall fast,much more potential. Then the Alumni gets all woofed up about stars and it vcan effect recrutying. When Cal recrutied Mike Muhammed from El Cengtro 6'4 200 Cal fans went bersek, NO stars a bum. He turned out thier best linebacker. Several three stars ended up dog meat. Big slow but good HS players. Even Cal and UA have some two stars and no rated in the mix,soo tey musrt tink they are good. why would you want stanops say over Cormier or Baltazar? Because he is a sure fre top players if not at rb at safety or lber. Very fast very to going to be about 6'1 220 Christian Piarra three stars great high school player not D! quality. Escobrt,Mc Fadden two stars. I want Randy Ricks bad would take him over Bruno who is stall a good kid. 6'5 electronic 4.62. Randy will be 6;'5 250 easy and blisteingly fast . He coudl even play tight ende orlinebacker. Bruno is a olineman or a dt period. I can feel the steam comming out of your ears! - I'm with you man. Let the f****** coaches recruit and coach - the results will speak for themselves. Yes an 8 win season sucks, but who the hell do these people think we're going to get to coach here? Where is the extra 3M a year to pay a high profile staff going to come from? Who is this magic coach that’s going to come here and win national championships right away? And why the hell would any coach want to come here if we fire coaches for only winning 8 games? I'll be on board with firing a coach for "only" winning 8 games...after about a decade of "only" winning 8 games.
|
|
|
Post by spgonzo on Jul 12, 2012 7:37:04 GMT -8
idk wtf u just said, but I hope we get Randy Ricks too HAAAAHAHAHAHA!!! Classic.
|
|
|
Post by missiontrails on Jul 12, 2012 7:51:41 GMT -8
Methinks ownwords and gonzo are praying for an 0 - 12 season. Nothing would make them happier. Did you see how Rocky was folding his arms in that pic today in the U-T? It's obvious he doesn't know how to coach.
|
|
|
Post by spgonzo on Jul 12, 2012 7:55:19 GMT -8
Methinks ownwords and gonzo are praying for an 0 - 12 season. Nothing would make them happier. Did you see how Rocky was folding his arms in that pic today in the U-T? It's obvious he doesn't know how to coach. You are funny. I am not worried about this year. We will have 7 or 8 wins. Beat the teams we are supposed to and lose to the ones we are supposed to. I am worried about Big East play. Rocky knows how to be a mid tier team/coach in the MWC, I just don't know if he can be a mid tier team/coach in the BE.
|
|
|
Post by montyismyhomie on Jul 12, 2012 7:56:52 GMT -8
I love how we all just witnessed how long it takes to build a legitimate powerhouse in our basketball program and now some of our more impatient fans (myownwords and spgonzo) stupidly think that after just two winning seasons we should somehow be a powerhouse in recruiting. Then they get on their high horse and defend their lack of knowledge with claims of "I just have higher expectations! And you should too!". I guess we are all entitled to an opinion but that doesn't change the fact that your opinions are uninformed and wrong. When we go 7-6 this year ( which is very likely to happen) ill fully expect you two clowns to be leading the Fire Rocky chants. I'll be here to chit on those arguments as well.
|
|
|
Post by spgonzo on Jul 12, 2012 8:06:14 GMT -8
I love how we all just witnessed how long it takes to build a legitimate powerhouse in our basketball program and now some of our more impatient fans (myownwords and spgonzo) stupidly think that after just two winning seasons we should somehow be a powerhouse in recruiting. Then they get on their high horse and defend their lack of knowledge with claims of "I just have higher expectations! And you should too!". I guess we are all entitled to an opinion but that doesn't change the fact that your opinions are uninformed and wrong. When we go 7-6 this year ( which is very likely to happen) ill fully expect you two clowns to be leading the Fire Rocky chants. I'll be here to chit on those arguments as well. Lack of knowledge? Uninformed? My arguments have been backed up with facts. I am saying our recruiting has not taken the next step. We do not need to be a powerhouse, we just need to be on par with the UCF's of the world. We are not going to win many battles against the elite, but we need to win some. We have not captured the momentum of our recent success. Rocky is a good MWC coach, but he is not going to take us to the next level. He is an old school coach that is laying a great foundation of toughness, but coaching in a big boy conference is very different than a mid-major. Ask Dan Hawkins.
|
|
|
Post by aztecfankrishnan on Jul 12, 2012 8:33:49 GMT -8
I just posted this on another thread, but it makes more sense here:
There really isn't a big difference between 3 and 2 star players. To focus on 3 vs 2 stars is silly. Conversely, the facts are pretty clear that 4 and 5 star players have the greatest likelihood of excelling in college football. Thus, to become a truly elite program you need classes full of 4 and 5 star players. However, with shrewd recruiting and top flight coaching you can build a program with 3 and 2 star recruits that will eventually allow you to get more 4 and 5 star players (the Boise model). It's just not realistic to expect that to already have happened for the Aztecs who just a mere 4 years ago was one of the worst programs in college football.
Things are immensely better with recruiting, coaching, wins and losses and conference affiliation. Enough with the negativity and over emphasis on stars!
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 12, 2012 8:37:54 GMT -8
I love how we all just witnessed how long it takes to build a legitimate powerhouse in our basketball program and now some of our more impatient fans (myownwords and spgonzo) stupidly think that after just two winning seasons we should somehow be a powerhouse in recruiting. Then they get on their high horse and defend their lack of knowledge with claims of "I just have higher expectations! And you should too!". I guess we are all entitled to an opinion but that doesn't change the fact that your opinions are uninformed and wrong. When we go 7-6 this year ( which is very likely to happen) ill fully expect you two clowns to be leading the Fire Rocky chants. I'll be here to chit on those arguments as well. When you actually want to engage in argument or debate instead of fact-void diatribes, please get back to me. And yes, it would appear from your comments that my expectations are indead higher than yours.
|
|
|
Post by spgonzo on Jul 12, 2012 8:43:29 GMT -8
I love how we all just witnessed how long it takes to build a legitimate powerhouse in our basketball program and now some of our more impatient fans (myownwords and spgonzo) stupidly think that after just two winning seasons we should somehow be a powerhouse in recruiting. Then they get on their high horse and defend their lack of knowledge with claims of "I just have higher expectations! And you should too!". I guess we are all entitled to an opinion but that doesn't change the fact that your opinions are uninformed and wrong. When we go 7-6 this year ( which is very likely to happen) ill fully expect you two clowns to be leading the Fire Rocky chants. I'll be here to chit on those arguments as well. When you actually want to engage in argument or debate instead of fact-void diatribes, please get back to me. And yes, it would appear from your comments that my expectations are indead higher than yours. +1
|
|
|
Post by myownwords on Jul 12, 2012 9:06:59 GMT -8
I just posted this on another thread, but it makes more sense here: There really isn't a big difference between 3 and 2 star players. To focus on 3 vs 2 stars is silly. Conversely, the facts are pretty clear that 4 and 5 star players have the greatest likelihood of excelling in college football. Thus, to become a truly elite program you need classes full of 4 and 5 star players. However, with shrewd recruiting and top flight coaching you can build a program with 3 and 2 star recruits that will eventually allow you to get more 4 and 5 star players (the Boise model). It's just not realistic to expect that to already have happened for the Aztecs who just a mere 4 years ago was one of the worst programs in college football. Things are immensely better with recruiting, coaching, wins and losses and conference affiliation. Enough with the negativity and over emphasis on stars! I feel that stars are our ONLY somewhat objective measure. It's the best we have to compare athletes objectively around the country. It is definitely imperfect, but it's all we have (objectively). There is a reason why higher stars have a much longer list of top schools chasing them. On that score we have had erratic results in our recruiting ranking nationally over the past 10 years. No straight line by any evaluation. And this year, in my opinion is so far, flat. The only way I know of to objectively evaluate coaching, from a fan's point of view, is by wins and losses. On that front we have done much better over the past few years. We'll see what happens this year to evaluate "objectively". But in my subjective opinion we will slip back because I do NOT feel that we have the right coach to take us to the "big time" level. And since our recruiting (objective evaluation) has not jumped, we require a Chris Petersen to work magic on mid tier recruits, and we do not have that person.
|
|
|
Post by rmksdsu30 on Jul 12, 2012 9:37:10 GMT -8
Im kinda tore in the middle i do agree a lot with gonzo and myownwords they are realists and see the whole picture they see both sides of the picture. Whereas, tom and james are so one sided there chit don't stink Ive never seen 2 other guys so high and mighty on themselves nobody knows everything but i tend to follow with those who view the whole picture the vision is that much clearer and real to believe even in a perfect world their is doubt!
|
|
|
Post by missiontrails on Jul 12, 2012 9:53:58 GMT -8
I love how we all just witnessed how long it takes to build a legitimate powerhouse in our basketball program and now some of our more impatient fans (myownwords and spgonzo) stupidly think that after just two winning seasons we should somehow be a powerhouse in recruiting. Then they get on their high horse and defend their lack of knowledge with claims of "I just have higher expectations! And you should too!". I guess we are all entitled to an opinion but that doesn't change the fact that your opinions are uninformed and wrong. When we go 7-6 this year ( which is very likely to happen) ill fully expect you two clowns to be leading the Fire Rocky chants. I'll be here to chit on those arguments as well. Ask Dan Hawkins. Or ask Urban Meyer.
|
|