forums

2026 Derrek Cooper 5* RB/ATH from Chaminade Commits to Texas

Advertisement
Page305 said:
Hold up... in the last 3 yrs, we've had the #4, #5 and the #6 ranked class???? No way. This can't be true at all. I mean.... if by the slightest chance you are right, then ****. We are closer to them then what I think and I also need to give Mario more credit(even though I am already a supporter). I would actually call him elite at recruiting if true. Something is telling me you're wrong as **** tho. Or maybe this factors in HS and Portal combined? But still .... that's true?? If so, yes impressive.
Click to expand...

1000034284.jpg


My bad. Our 23 class composite ended at 7th due to the very late deflections. Last year you add in Stubbs and the linebacker were even higher too. People just like to moan on here without taking the time to see why...
 
Calinative said:
This was literally a discussion comparing TEAMS tiers, not just slotting recruiting finishes into tiers. I made my post in response to saying Texas and Miami are/not on the same level. Yeah there is a big talent differential between 5 and 14. I'm not denying that whatsoever. I'm saying a Team in the 2nd tier of general recruiting ability can finish in that general area. There are teams who say always finish top 3-5. There are teams who always finishe 10-20. There are teams who sometimes finish 5 or 10.... If every year a team is oscillating between finishing 5th and 10th, so is then AVERAGING a 7th place finish, you're going to say no, thats not a Tier 2 recruiting team?... That's the point.

Also how the **** are you going to disagree WITH ME in a statement I made that was the FIRST to do a tier ranking and what I said originally, then say OF COURSE I'M the one whose disagreeing with you? That aint how **** works lol. The **** kinda female jedi mind trick is that? I made a statement. YOU are the one who disagreed with me lmao
Click to expand...
Oh good lord, now I get tough guy Cali??? What kind of female ****??? Ask yourself that since you’re the one on here arguing any and everything with any and everyone every day. Only you would find a way to call 5-14 the second tier, claim some kind of average mean score and declare us Tier 2 as opposed to looking at where everyone finishes each year, within meaningful groupings. Like tier 2 is 5-8 or 5-9, tier 3 goes from there to 14. You called 5-14 tier 2 because of some average we have but that makes no sense to include 11,12,13 & 14 as part of the same group as 5-8/9. When we finished 4th we were tier 1. When we finished 14 we were tier 3. I suppose you can add up the annual rankings and then divide by the years and then determine where that number fits within the tier groups that make more sense but it’s a longer term average and not where we are at in terms of better recency. If you are doing that I would do the two most recent classes but personally, I would look at what we’re doing last recruiting season and this season but again, I just go year by year and wherever we fall in is our latest tier.
 
Brooklyndee said:
View attachment 330505

My bad. Our 23 class composite ended at 7th due to the very late deflections. Last year you add in Stubbs and the linebacker were even higher too. People just like to moan on here without taking the time to see why...
Click to expand...
I mean maybe whatever website it was using was heavily including portal rankings for 2025, otherwise we finished like 11th-14th by the main rankers.. Finished 8th in ON3s avg NIL ranking (made up numbers but probably as good indicator of their expected value?)... But we did have the like #5portal class, so maybe that whats confusing it...
 
TwentySix said:
ChatGPT, Grok, and the like have barely been around for 2 years and have completely destroyed people’s ability to take 5 minutes to do actual research.

Not a shot at you @Brooklyndee, but every single tweet now has people under it asking Grok if it’s true, to explain, etc.
Click to expand...
What’s a Grok? Is it something Cali can debate or is it indisputable (in which case there’s an 81% chance he’ll still argue about it).
 
Advertisement
RVACane said:
Oh good lord, now I get tough guy Cali??? What kind of female ****??? Ask yourself that since you’re the one on here arguing any and everything with any and everyone every day.
Click to expand...
Lol you said I'm the disagreeable one when all I did was state an opinion and YOU disagreed with me, then LITERALLY tried to do a jedi mind trick type **** that females be making in arguments to try to flip it as if I'm the one starting arguments to debate you purposefully trying to disagree lol. It's crazy to literally disagree with me in a comment you werent in then act like it's crazy that I was disageeing with you lol.

In this thread I have disagreed with one person saying that there was "no excuse" to go for it on 4th down at Syracuse AND another saying basically the opposite against GTech lol. I'm just being the centrist here stating Marios decision were CLEARLY significantly improved and were objectively good by and large last season. Period. Acting like a coin flip decision that maybe barely increases your win probability is some terrible reflection on his gameday coaching abilities is just unreasonable. You can disagree with the decisions, but lets not act like the RESULT being not in our favor is everything. Because then I'm just going to bring up all the 4th downs we DID get. But I'm sure that would be just more of me being disagreeable rigth? lol Can't have it both ways dude.

RVACane said:
Only you would find a way to call 5-14 the second tier, claim some kind of average mean score and declare us Tier 2 as opposed to looking at where everyone finishes each year, within meaningful groupings. Like tier 2 is 5-8 or 5-9, tier 3 goes from there to 14. You called 5-14 tier 2 because of some average we have but that makes no sense to include 11,12,13 & 14 as part of the same group as 5-8/9. When we finished 4th we were tier 1. When we finished 14 we were tier 3. I suppose you can add up the annual rankings and then divide by the years and then determine where that number fits within the tier groups that make more sense but it’s a longer term average and not where we are at in terms of better recency. If you are doing that I would do the two most recent classes but personally, I would look at what we’re doing last recruiting season and this season but again, I just go year by year and wherever we fall in is our latest tier.
Click to expand...
I mean look at the TEAMS that are ranked 11-14. I mean maybe you'd say it should be like 12 teams in tier 2, as generally UTenn and PSU are on the outside looking in of the top 10 more than not. They usually finish like 10-14. Also remember I said this was for the ENTIRE FBS. But I absolutely think it'd be reasonable to say group it

Tier 1 - UGA, Ohio St, Texas ... then maybe Bama and Oregon for the last spot ... or you just include both and make it a top 5. I'd say those are the top 5 recruiting programs in general for recent past, now, and likely going forward with NIL. Only other one that really has an argument I think is probably A&M as they have shown they will spend their way to the top there sometimes. But I'd say in general A&M is probably in the 3-6 range.

Tier 2 - A&M, LSU, Miami, USC, Notre Dame, UF and FSU (I'm sure once htey move on from their coaches they'll be firmly in this tier), Michigan with their rejuvinated NIL spending, and Clemson.... Outside looking in is UTenn who has a good argument to be in this tier.

I mean in total thats a list of 14 or so Teams that are CLEARLY superior to all the teams after them pretty much. You want to make it 3 tiers for the top 14-16 teams, go ahead. But All the teams in tier 2 imo in general can be ranked in pretty much any order year over year and it wouldn't be very surprising. When teams I have listed jump into tier 1 or fall out of tier 2, that is surprising... Like whats the point of grouping teams into a tier if they are constantly moving in and out of it?

I don't particularly care much one way or the other. This is just how id group cfb recruiting as a whole - ALL 136 FBS programs. If you have four tiers of 4 teams at the top you're going to have like 10 tiers lol

If I was breaking it into tiers FOR MIAMI, it'd be much smaller. Because I don't expect us to finish outside the top 15, or be inside the top 3 very often if ever. So FOR US it'd be more like 1-3 = A++, 4-6 = A, 7-9 = B+, 10-12 = C+, 12-15 = C, >16 = F ... but you also should take portal into consideration...
 
Last edited:
Page305 said:
That's exactly what I figured... but what threw me off was that that's the second time this week someone has got last yrs ranking completely wrong. and I mean COMPLETELY wrong. Had me thinking I was trippin' looool
Click to expand...
We have been consistently an elite recruiting team compared to the rest of the ACC, but nationally we’re a notch or two below.
 
Last edited:
No_Fly_Zone said:
Two things:

1. "World is collapsing..." seems like a purposeful exaggeration of legitimate criticisms intended to diminish those criticisms via a strawman rather than actually addressing them headlong. So let's address the known truths: we were prioritizing DL c/o 2026 and have missed on most of our major targets, we lost a local 5* WR to Fran Brown, and it looks like we are about to lose the local, No. 2 RB in the class to Texas. We went from "Wow" threads about how UM was about to **** off the entire world to an "insider" forced into early retirement due to excess butthurt. So while the world isn't collapsing, those are significant recruiting Ls and UM's current recruiting ranking is nowhere near where most of the people who "report" on UM football were claiming it would be going into the summer.

2. It's not just this recent recruiting "before the season is started..." that's created this negative perception. The class of 2025 did not meet expectations. Full stop. But all last season we were told to "watch the finish" and everyone was on "flip watch". Heaven forbid anyone comment on the status of the recruiting class last season... they'd get downvoted to oblivion followed by a chorus of disparaging comments about Mario closing or how clearly the "mope" didn't pay attention to c/o 2024. Then signing day came and the finish was poor and the flips did not meaningfully materialize. Now, we are once again being told the staff is looking to play the flip game -- in a recruiting cycle where some believe it will be more difficult to flip recruits than last year because of the House settlement and establishment of the NIL clearinghouse. I can understand why people would be down on that. If that was not enough, we can't forget the finish on the field, either (trust me... I tried... with a lot of bourbon... but it only worked for a few hours). We lost 2 of our last 3 games, missed the ACCCG, missed a 12-team CFB playoff, and lost our (weak) bowl game against a runner-up program from a conference some people in this thread are clowning. The on-field finish was somehow worse than our recruiting close.

So if the fanbase is particularly negative right now, it shouldn't be difficult to understand why that's the case.
Click to expand...
I guess you can say that. Reality is very different than what you say. #1 nothing is done until they're enrolled. Not just giving a verbal. You all just seem to believe your timeline is what matters. It don't. #2 this local 5 star NO ONE outside of locals view that way, yet he's definitely trying to crack people over the head like that's what he's worth. Not making excuses cause even though the numbers didn't make sense, we did want him. Just not at the number he was sticking to. At least that's my understanding and there's a reason none of the big players (unless you consider Michigan big)were involved in this. #3 Derek we definitely want and no matter what happens here now which is nowhere near set in stone losing him come signing day will hurt. Moist schools including us see him primarily as a linebacker but that definitely doesn't take away from the fact the kids a stud.

Right now while you're talking about how foolish it is for us to stay on recruits till signing day and push for the flips, we have the #9 ranked class in the country and it will be significantly higher... Top that off with 2 years ago when this same scenario was going on and some of us told y'all to relax we're doing this as a strategy to push for flips down the stretch opposed to being committed early and begging kids not to turn on us and schools knowing who's really involved all the way through. That class we were far further back in class rankings at that point than we are now. If this is what y'all consider the world is collapsing then fine. I'm sorry everything is so fragile in everyones world where off-season recruiting makes or breaks peoples days. Myself I'll simply stick to I'm not worried & keep it pushing. Cause my brother life is far too fragile as a man period in this world right now to allow anything that happens on here, especially in the off-season to change up my focus. Life itself gets my focus, the university I bled for gets my attention. No pressure in that.
 
skeeter said:
No excuse for kicking the late fg against Cuse

I honestly don’t know how he sleeps at night after that
Click to expand...
Analytics was like 51/49 going for 4th & goal at the 10 vs kicking a FG so you sound dopey making it seem like it was a 99/1 type decision. The success rate on 4th & goal from the 10 is less than 20%.
 
Last edited:
DC3 said:
I asked Chatgpt this and well

Bottom line:
Cristobal’s decision to kick was analytics-based—but based on a model that prioritized taking 3 points and banking on the defense. Modern fourth-down analytics, game theory, and situational context strongly favor going for it when you absolutely need a touchdown late in a close game.


If you’re looking for hard win probability figures, one of the standard fourth-down math models (like those from Ben Baldwin or nflfastR studies) would show that going for it increases win expectancy over kicking in that exact scenario—though I'd need NCAA-specific data to pin it precisely.


🏈 So, yes—analytics can justify kicking in some contexts, but in this Syracuse–Miami scenario, most evidence suggests Miami should’ve gone for it on 4th-and-10.

Heres the full breakdown - https://chatgpt.com/s/t_6879ad7d983481919a0802b578398506
Click to expand...

But yet the dumb *** u responded to had the audacity to give me a throw up response b/c their wittle feelings got hurt. That’s y I provided the complete situation to show how foolish it was to kick the field goal under THAT circumstance. I even said 5 mins to play w all 3 timeouts? Yes u kick the field goal; but, under 4 to play w/ only 2 timeouts, u have to roll the dice & trust ur #1 rated O.
 
Advertisement
grover said:
The anti-Mario crowd has been showing their hand since Mario was hired backed by the Columbus mafia.



Now that would have been something.
Click to expand...
Meanwhile the same people were onion fans and the stuttering elmo the car salesman fans. Is what it is. Some people just don't understand what they're looking at
 
ssvir said:
Analytics was like 51/49 going for 4th & goal at the 10 vs kicking a FG so you sound like a dope making it seem like it was a 99/1 type decision.
Click to expand...

Blind “analytics” with no context makes you a f uckin dope.

You can literally take your analytics book… with 3:47 and your playoff hopes on the line.

And set it on fire

Easy call there
 
skeeter said:
Blind “analytics” with no context makes you a f uckin dope.

You can literally take your analytics book… with 3:47 and your playoff hopes on the line.

And set it on fire

Easy call there
Click to expand...
It was something like 51/49% in favor of kicking the FG and less than 15% succeeding on 4th & goal from the 10.

You can tell me all you want how you "feel" but the math says either decision was basically the same.

You sound like the ******* playing blackjack that hits on 16 and gets lucky and then pretends that they made the "right" call.
 
Back
Top