Search results

The ‘miss rate’ may be more important than the ‘hit rate’ when it comes to evals. Empty / useless roster spots are so harmful. For the level of comp we play, we should be less dependent on getting lucky on a few kids. Hit the average for our recruiting level and we’ll win 10+ games a season...

I don’t disagree. I put them in easy takes because i think their long suit gets a kid above the bar - not because i think they’re guaranteed. Seymour for physical size/ability/potential and rodriguez for play, toughness. Agree its a crapshoot and I admit I would have put Donaldson into easy...

I share your concern. Don’t know. Maybe he can be a tool box kid but i recall the LB era for this program and don’t see enough kids like that anymore.

It’s a tricky topic. People want to look at draft picks as evidence of evals, but that’s a few kids a year. IMO it shows you only a small piece of the picture - essentially if you can find kids with relatively high ceilings. to me, the biggest issue with evals is whether a coach or staff has...

Fwiw, i like brashard’s skill set and we’ve been lacking kids like this so I’m excited to see what he can do. But not ready to crown any WR recruits after what we’ve been through as a program.

I hope that’s right. I’ve not spent the time assessing I used to. Here’s how I see it: - obvious kids: LT, JW, Arroyo - seem like easy takes (should have high success rate): Chase Smith, Seymour, Thad, Garcia, Curtis (given need), Rodriguez, Borregales kids where evals will really matter: -...

Dorito did know LBs. E. Jackson, Paul, Perryman, Grace, Shaq and Pinckney. Pretty solid era for Lb evals. Some issues with kids who couldn’t stay on the team.

Off memory - hard to assess because the quality of kid receptive declined with the brand. Coker got plenty of good kids, but evaluated poorly to not at all. The culture also took time to degrade, and some of the assistants under coker knew evals. Randy was quirky. He did know how to see...

Lol yup. I posted that above in this thread. Wilfork was out last first round dt. We had them in the ‘00s, ‘90s, ‘80s, ‘70s, and even ‘60s, but not the ‘10s. Worst run ever for the program.

Yep but special coaches aside, our staffs over the past 2 decades have generally been bad at this. I don’t know all that they have done or not, but you can see the shape of most things in life by identifying the reverberations. Sonar does that. MRIs do. Look at our evals over time and IMO...

In the spirit of these discussions, here’s my cfb glossary in a nutshell: Evaluations are who you get. Every kid has an uncertainty factor (multiple, really). You find out fast what you got, even if it’s not popular to admit it. [Doesn’t mean you get results fast, because depending on...

This is exactly right. We’ve evolved a theory where one very important thing (evaluations) that’s going wrong can’t be fixed because everyone blames the consequences of the flaw on something else (development). It’s an ‘unfalsifiable‘ theory, because the worse we evaluate, the more convinced...

Yup. And Pitt’s DL evals have been solid.

Does anyone else find it odd that UM had first round DTs in the ‘60s, ‘70s, ‘80s, ‘90s, and ‘00s, but in the 2010s? Wilfork was our last first round DT. How in the world can someone say we’ve been recruiting DT ‘just fine’? Is the standard around here that we win the Coastal once a decade?

You’re misreading his comment. He wrote “Over the years I've become increasingly certain that anyone who finds this sexually attractive was probably breast fed too long and has very serious mommy issues.” He’s not telling you about milf’s. He’s telling you about the _guys_ who are attracted...

Cool, thanks 4 the analysis! /your standard is idiotic, btw. Quit embarrassing yourself. If no one should comment unless they’re watching practice live, wtf are you doing here jizzing all over yourself?

Fair enough. I hope they have a better eval view than just size and hustle. Explosion, toughness, hands, arm length, punch, raw hitting matter for interior DL. It’s not fair to the kid to say much more than you did at this point. But agreed, this is the time. Most really good DTs, you know...

If he were that good, he’d have been drafted somewhere, right? He had a very strong year for us, but wasn’t the talent our fans seem to think.

You keep changing your excuses. The staff is led by a Hc who wasn’t known as a good recruiter when he came here and spent his first 3 years as a LB corch who dodn’t evaluate or recruit LBs well. So sorry if I’m not impressed or deferential yet. Also, these ‘good recruiters’ you talk about are...

You should probably learn to write more accurately, if that’s the case. Your comment was that you trust the coaches “over online scouts that base their opinions off a 5 min video.”. That’s unspecific, plural and presumptuous (since you clearly don’t know what other posters base their views on)...