Search results

I really don’t know, and you’re closer to it than me for sure, but some folks who have access don’t seem to think the staff is so high on spells, and the recruitment is consistent with that.

There’s a reason. Don’t know what it is, but it’s there.

It’s really amazing how obvious it was that we weren’t recruiting properly before. It’s like we had coaches who thought recruiting was like dating and it’s wrong to work backup options. The reality is it’s a business and the old UM approach failed over and over and over.

The thing about Spells is that the UM staff isn’t as high on him as many fans are. Or at least that’s what some folks are saying. Don’t know who’s right or wrong. Our staff has been wrong a pot the past 2 decades. But T Rob has more credibility in my view than prior DB coaches. Still...

Yep, you’ve been clear. And you see kids and make your own views. No criticism of that at all, we need more folks with your depth of knowledge around here. But when little was the topic, tons of folks were saying we like spells a lot more. Now, it’s unclear where we prioritize him.

What do you make of the talk above in this thread that Spells isn’t one of our top prospects at CB?

A lot of folks on this board seemed sure that Spells was a lot better than Little as a prospect.

Not yet I’m not. Why do you ask?

You sound ridiculous, mane. Everyone here other than your dumb *** understands my comment. The idea that the last two decades are somehow an obscure part of our ‘history’ is too weird to even discuss. In case you’re too young to know, btw., we’ve now sucked for as long or longer than we were...

The idea that we know whether they’re evaluatong well or not based on offers to kids who haven’t played a down of cfb yet is odd. First, because evaluations have to show up over time in outcomes. It’s not about popularity. Second, because the evals that matter for our staff are those of the...

Likely false on your first point, but o worries either way. As for your second point, I’m happy to stand by my comments. You can jerk off over the ‘80s-‘90s. Our more relvant and recent ‘history’ of evaluations doesn’t involve Howard, Jimmy, Dennis or Butch, but rather failed coach after...

You’re on some other topic entirely. Just because we’ve been bad evaluators doesn’t mean we also hsven’t had bad coaches. They tend to go together. No idea why that continues to need to be spelled out. That’s why we went from dominant to mediocre coastal whatever.

Says the guy who isn’t old enough to know much of anything about our ‘history.’ You need to learn how to avoid trying to dry hump in public.

Yes, unless you haven’t noticed how putrid we’ve been for ages. No ACC titles in ever, for example. One coastal. No significant nfl players in over a decade. You probably haven’t noticed that Reed and Taylor ain’t out there anymore.

That would be a bad strategy, historically, since we’ve evaluated poorly.

You sure you’re not triggered, Hoss?

According to QP, recruiting is something that happens to us, not something we do. Failure is just a result of bad luck.

If I printed out all the emoticons you follow me with, I’m pretty sure we’d know the answer to this.

By ‘some’, QP means ‘himself’

Son, we compete in CFB with the $EC, and the $EC has to be defended against by men with bags. Who's gonna do it? You? You, moderator rvm? Manny has a greater responsibility than you could possibly fathom. You weep for Cooper, Ridley and Jeudy. You curse the staff and AD. You have that...