Just how important is the 2015 class...

[M3N]

None of the teams you just mentioned won national titles.

They haven't won't titles but they have won BCS games.. And I'm sure many Here would take a BCS rose or orange win.

Look at Stanford's recent success. BCS wins and they did it with middle of the pack recruiting.

 

[kmwcane]

Every class is important, you win titles with back to back to back to back top 5 classes. The top 5 is the difference between the best teams and the rest.

LOL.

We don't need top 5 classes to win.

First and foremost we need top shelf coaching. Coaching trumps talent IMO.

Look at teams like MSU, Iowa, Ark(Petrino) etc.. They win and have very little heralded players.

But I'll go ahead and play this game. With our current coaching situation, yes we need top 5 classes to compete.

We need top 5-10ish classes to win a national title, which si the goal here. The goal is not to be a team like Iowa (who sucks) or MSU who wins sparingly and has no chance of playing for the title.

Here are the last two national title winners and some of their recruiting class rankings, starting with the class the year before they won the title, e.g., 2012 for FSU (2013 title winner)

2013 title - FSU - 6, (cant find 2011), 10, 7 (on rivals)
2012 title - Alabama - (cant find 2011), 5, 1, 1

There doesn't need to be a choice between coaching or talent, the best coaches routinely bring in the best talent. We have neither top-shelf talent or top-shelf coaching. Bottom line you do not win a national title without consistently elite recruiting classes.

FSU won because of a once in a generation type QB. Consistently underperformed each year prior to Jameis Winston despite great talent on paper.

Alabama has arguably one of the top 5 CFB coaches of all time so can't argue there. Saban is a top shelf coach and recruiter.

I'm not saying it is a choice between either talent or coaching. I'm saying coaching > talent up to a certain point, say with top 20 talent. A great coach can win national titles with consistent top 20 classes (especially at Miami where I contend S. FL recruits are underrated). And once a great coach starts winning at whatever school, recruiting tends to get easier as more prospects wish to play for the great coach.

It is easier to overcome a talent gap with superior coaching than vice versa. Ask Ron Zook.

 

[cubin10]

what exactly is "UM" caliber talent? haven't seen it in over a decade, so my memory is fuzzy

go back and check out 30for 30, it's on TV quite a bit of time.

 

[Gatorhater]

The field play this year is much more important than the 2015 recruiting class. There is a ton of talent this year but I believe we will need to kick some rear to get it. To many studs from 2015 are already getting $$$$. Only the feeling that the REAL U is coming back, will make swing some back. We have some top players on board already, but to clean up we need to show up on the field. That will at least raise the price for SEC and criminoles.

 

[weownfsu]

Every class is important, you win titles with back to back to back to back top 5 classes. The top 5 is the difference between the best teams and the rest.

LOL.

We don't need top 5 classes to win.

First and foremost we need top shelf coaching. Coaching trumps talent IMO.

Look at teams like MSU, Iowa, Ark(Petrino) etc.. They win and have very little heralded players.

But I'll go ahead and play this game. With our current coaching situation, yes we need top 5 classes to compete.

We need top 5-10ish classes to win a national title, which si the goal here. The goal is not to be a team like Iowa (who sucks) or MSU who wins sparingly and has no chance of playing for the title.

Here are the last two national title winners and some of their recruiting class rankings, starting with the class the year before they won the title, e.g., 2012 for FSU (2013 title winner)

2013 title - FSU - 6, (cant find 2011), 10, 7 (on rivals)
2012 title - Alabama - (cant find 2011), 5, 1, 1

There doesn't need to be a choice between coaching or talent, the best coaches routinely bring in the best talent. We have neither top-shelf talent or top-shelf coaching. Bottom line you do not win a national title without consistently elite recruiting classes.

FSU won because of a once in a generation type QB. Consistently underperformed each year prior to Jameis Winston despite great talent on paper.

Alabama has arguably one of the top 5 CFB coaches of all time so can't argue there. Saban is a top shelf coach and recruiter.

I'm not saying it is a choice between either talent or coaching. I'm saying coaching > talent up to a certain point, say with top 20 talent. A great coach can win national titles with consistent top 20 classes (especially at Miami where I contend S. FL recruits are underrated). And once a great coach starts winning at whatever school, recruiting tends to get easier as more prospects wish to play for the great coach.

It is easier to overcome a talent gap with superior coaching than vice versa. Ask Ron Zook.

FSU won because they happened to recruit a 5 star QB? You don't say. Again you are trying to make some sort of dichotomy here that doesn't exist. Bottom line, you need elite talent to win national championships, which is the goal here. The teams winning NC's consistently have highly ranked recruiting classes and elite talent. It's a fact. Not sure why you guys are discussing "Coaching versus talent" when it's pretty clear that you need elite talent to win a national title. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

 

[kmwcane]

Every class is important, you win titles with back to back to back to back top 5 classes. The top 5 is the difference between the best teams and the rest.

LOL.

We don't need top 5 classes to win.

First and foremost we need top shelf coaching. Coaching trumps talent IMO.

Look at teams like MSU, Iowa, Ark(Petrino) etc.. They win and have very little heralded players.

But I'll go ahead and play this game. With our current coaching situation, yes we need top 5 classes to compete.

We need top 5-10ish classes to win a national title, which si the goal here. The goal is not to be a team like Iowa (who sucks) or MSU who wins sparingly and has no chance of playing for the title.

Here are the last two national title winners and some of their recruiting class rankings, starting with the class the year before they won the title, e.g., 2012 for FSU (2013 title winner)

2013 title - FSU - 6, (cant find 2011), 10, 7 (on rivals)
2012 title - Alabama - (cant find 2011), 5, 1, 1

There doesn't need to be a choice between coaching or talent, the best coaches routinely bring in the best talent. We have neither top-shelf talent or top-shelf coaching. Bottom line you do not win a national title without consistently elite recruiting classes.

FSU won because of a once in a generation type QB. Consistently underperformed each year prior to Jameis Winston despite great talent on paper.

Alabama has arguably one of the top 5 CFB coaches of all time so can't argue there. Saban is a top shelf coach and recruiter.

I'm not saying it is a choice between either talent or coaching. I'm saying coaching > talent up to a certain point, say with top 20 talent. A great coach can win national titles with consistent top 20 classes (especially at Miami where I contend S. FL recruits are underrated). And once a great coach starts winning at whatever school, recruiting tends to get easier as more prospects wish to play for the great coach.

It is easier to overcome a talent gap with superior coaching than vice versa. Ask Ron Zook.

FSU won because they happened to recruit a 5 star QB? You don't say. Again you are trying to make some sort of dichotomy here that doesn't exist. Bottom line, you need elite talent to win national championships, which is the goal here. The teams winning NC's consistently have highly ranked recruiting classes and elite talent. It's a fact. Not sure why you guys are discussing "Coaching versus talent" when it's pretty clear that you need elite talent to win a national title. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Winston was more than just a "5 star quarterback". He is a once in a generation type talent. There are so many "5 star" quarterbacks that never did anything close to what Jameis did as a true freshmen in their entire 4 years. If you can get a QB like Winston, or Cam Newton, or Vince Young, then you can win a title despite average coaching.

Twisting my words. Never said it was one or the other. I said coaching > talent. Never once did I say talent did not matter. I'd rather have an elite coach that got #15 recruiting classes each year than a bad/average coach that got top 5 "elite" classes each year is my point.

 

[weownfsu]

Again I'm not sure what your point is here.

" I said coaching > talent. Never once did I say talent did not matter. I'd rather have an elite coach that got #15 recruiting classes each year than a bad/average coach that got top 5 "elite" classes each year is my point."

Can you please tell me what the point of this sentence is? Who is deciding between that? I have no idea why you keep talking about coaching.

The bottom line is that you need elite talent to win national titles, which was my point when I was responding to some poster other than you who said you don't need top 5 classes to win, and cited teams like MSU and Iowa...who not surprisingly never win national titles. You need elite recruiting classes to win national titles, bottom line, which was what my post said. I'm not sure why you keep responding to me talking about how you'd rather have an elite coach than elite talent, when nobody is forcing you to choose between the two and it wasn't part of my post to begin with.

Also Jameis wasn't a true freshman.

 

[kmwcane]

Again I'm not sure what your point is here.

" I said coaching > talent. Never once did I say talent did not matter. I'd rather have an elite coach that got #15 recruiting classes each year than a bad/average coach that got top 5 "elite" classes each year is my point."

Can you please tell me what the point of this sentence is? Who is deciding between that? I have no idea why you keep talking about coaching.

The bottom line is that you need elite talent to win national titles, which was my point when I was responding to some poster other than you who said you don't need top 5 classes to win, and cited teams like MSU and Iowa...who not surprisingly never win national titles. You need elite recruiting classes to win national titles, bottom line, which was what my post said. I'm not sure why you keep responding to me talking about how you'd rather have an elite coach than elite talent, when nobody is forcing you to choose between the two and it wasn't part of my post to begin with.

Also Jameis wasn't a true freshman.

My response to you was initially based upon your comments about Golden and staff not bringing in enough talent. I've said repeatedly in this thread that many, many S. FL recruits are underrated based upon a myriad of factors. Therefore, in my opinion, which I have based upon NFL draft numbers and how S FL prospects play at other universities, a great deal of "3 star" recruits from S FL would be 4 and 5 star types in other regions of the country. So it follows that Miami's roster does in fact have enough talent to win a national title but for inadequate coaching. That is where I disagree with you. I don't disagree with elite talent being necessary to win a title, never did in any of my responses (though I'm sure we disagree on where the exact line of demarcation is when it comes to defining an "elite class" based upon recruiting rankings).

So what if Jameis wasn't a true freshman? That does nothing to refute my point that having a once in a generation type QB is another route, though obviously much less likely, to win a title at the college level.

 

[weownfsu]

Sorry but your logic doesn't follow at all. Even if south florida kids were underrated, it sure doesn't show up for UM. South Florida kids being underrated doesn't mean that UM is picking the right ones. Guys like David Perry aren't good players, Jawand Blue hasn't done anything, Vernon Davis (is he even still on the team), Dwayne Hoilett, etc...all of these guys are useless, while the best players on the team are by and large the highly ranked guys (Duke, Howard, Coley, Flowers, etc.) There's just no basis for claiming that UM has enough talent to win a national title just because uM recruits some south Florida 3 stars. In fact it is laughable based on our on-field results, and while our coaching sucks, talent still shows up to an extent. It's obvious that guys like Duke and Coley are great. If we were recruiting a bunch of kids who had talent and were underrated, you'd notice. Instead the kids who show out consistently are the highly-ranked players.

 

[FrancisSawyer]

FrancisSawyer I appreciate your post. As you probably know we've discussed this up and down, but I definitely agree there are more playmakers on both sides of the ball than we've had in a while. As has already been said though the key is how we coach that talent up and what we get out of it. So to that extent I agree with Matador.

Considering the maturation and depth of talent now on the roster, what I really want to know is whether we will play conservative and hope not to make mistakes or whether we will go out and impose our will on other teams? Again, good post.

what exactly is "UM" caliber talent? haven't seen it in over a decade, so my memory is fuzzy

Its pretty much self explanatory not to mention obvious what I mean by that. Are you being coy or are you just obtuse? I'll define by example.

Duke Johnson, Tracy Howard, Artie Burns, Jamal Carter, Corn Elder, Deon Bush, Alquadin Mohammed, Stacey Coley, Erick Flowers, KC McDermott, Trevor Darling, Danny Isadora, Trent Harris, Jermaine Grace, Deon Bush, Kiy Hester, Darrion Owens,,Chad Thomas, Anthony Moten, Alex Figuaroa, Raphael Kirby, Demetrius Jackson, Micheal Smith, Joe Yearby, Mark Walton, Dexter Williams, Jordan Cronkrite, Brad Kaaya, Kevin Olsen, Jack Allison, Charles Perry, Stan Dobard, Tyre Brady, Malcolm Lewis, Chocolate Gray, Braxton Berrios, Bowman Archibald, Tim Irvin, Jaquan Johnson, Jordan Scarlett, Juwon Young, Denzel Perryman, Tyrek Cole, Deon Cain, Davonte Davis, Tevon Coney, Scott Patchan, Calvin Ridley, Devante Phillips, Sam Bruce, Steve Newbold, Shamar Kilby Lane, Shaun Burgess Becker, Shaquille Quarterman, Cecil Cherry, Jason Strowbridge, Devonaire Clarington, and Tyriq McCord just to name a few

Does that jog your memory?

Actually, if you go back and look at some of our very good teams in the '80's and early '90s, and analyzed the rosters, you wouldn't find "Miami-calibre" talent from top to bottom. A lot of our talent behind the starters was ordinary. We just had some good starters and won by outcoaching, out conditioning, and more determination to win. Believe me. We had a ton of kids who were ordinary recruits, including some of our guys who became stars. We never recruited big name kids in large numbers. Everybody thinks we did, but we really didn't.

Here are a couple of good examples: we got such a celebrated player in Jessie Armstead, who eventually became a very good college player. When he and Darrin Smith were in the program at the same time, I thought Darrin was probably as good, if not better. Some might argue, but Smith was not a big name recruit. Guess what? The pros seem to agree--Darrin was a 2nd round draft pick, Jessie was 8th round. Was it because Jessie had a history of injuries? Maybe.

Same with Vilma and D.J. Williams. When they both came in, I was hearing that in practices Vilma was actually better. Both ended up great, but I think that proves that some kids are just as good even if they are not big names. I don't think Vilma was such a big name coming out of HS.

I appreciate the input Bird and while I fully understand and agree with Matador, the acquisition of top notch talent cannot be understated. It has become apparent to most and I'm sure you will agree that Golden is not the type to wow you with X's and O's. If we accept that as a given then it becomes imperative to acquire as much talent as possible to mitigate and overcome this staff's coaching deficiencies.

The crux of my argument is that we need to stack talent in order to fully actualize what we already have in place. Roster building can be a cyclical thing. Once you have a solid class foundation in place there is a window of opportunity to surround those foundational players with the necessary compliment pieces.
In short, I dont want to see the 2012 class leave empty handed because Golden took to long to surround them with more talent.

 

[FrancisSawyer]

I don't think you can ever have a down-year recruiting class and expect to get to BCS. So yes, this is a crucial class. And next year will be crucial, and the year after, and so on. Your overall point is a great one that we're very close to having depth and symmetry of BCS-level talent across all positions, and that 2015 will fill the final hoels and complete the stack, if it closes correctly. For all Golden doubters, we can at least thank him for accomplishing that. And if he can't win on the field, there will be plenty of other strong HC candidates to choose from, as people will salivate over taking on a team with this type of upside.

Exactly what I was trying to articulate. You summed that up quite nicely. Brevity has never been my strong suit.

 

[Biscuits]

The 2014 season is infinitely more important.

 

[FrancisSawyer]

The 2014 season is infinitely more important.

I absolutely agree that the 2015 recruiting class will be a function of the 2014 season on the field to a large extent.

 

[Dwinstitles]

None of the teams you just mentioned won national titles.

They haven't won't titles but they have won BCS games.. And I'm sure many Here would take a BCS rose or orange win.

Look at Stanford's recent success. BCS wins and they did it with middle of the pack recruiting.

I don't want to be Stanford and when Miami has been good we have been real good, and that takes recruiting. I mean fkin Coker won with talent if he can Golden can, Jimbo won also. Jimbo is not all world until last year but everyone saw this coming because of his recruiting classes, you had to be fkin blind if u did not think Fsu would win one or two with the classes they were bringing in.

 

[Dwinstitles]

LOL.

We don't need top 5 classes to win.

First and foremost we need top shelf coaching. Coaching trumps talent IMO.

Look at teams like MSU, Iowa, Ark(Petrino) etc.. They win and have very little heralded players.

But I'll go ahead and play this game. With our current coaching situation, yes we need top 5 classes to compete.

We need top 5-10ish classes to win a national title, which si the goal here. The goal is not to be a team like Iowa (who sucks) or MSU who wins sparingly and has no chance of playing for the title.

Here are the last two national title winners and some of their recruiting class rankings, starting with the class the year before they won the title, e.g., 2012 for FSU (2013 title winner)

2013 title - FSU - 6, (cant find 2011), 10, 7 (on rivals)
2012 title - Alabama - (cant find 2011), 5, 1, 1

There doesn't need to be a choice between coaching or talent, the best coaches routinely bring in the best talent. We have neither top-shelf talent or top-shelf coaching. Bottom line you do not win a national title without consistently elite recruiting classes.

FSU won because of a once in a generation type QB. Consistently underperformed each year prior to Jameis Winston despite great talent on paper.

Alabama has arguably one of the top 5 CFB coaches of all time so can't argue there. Saban is a top shelf coach and recruiter.

I'm not saying it is a choice between either talent or coaching. I'm saying coaching > talent up to a certain point, say with top 20 talent. A great coach can win national titles with consistent top 20 classes (especially at Miami where I contend S. FL recruits are underrated). And once a great coach starts winning at whatever school, recruiting tends to get easier as more prospects wish to play for the great coach.

It is easier to overcome a talent gap with superior coaching than vice versa. Ask Ron Zook.

FSU won because they happened to recruit a 5 star QB? You don't say. Again you are trying to make some sort of dichotomy here that doesn't exist. Bottom line, you need elite talent to win national championships, which is the goal here. The teams winning NC's consistently have highly ranked recruiting classes and elite talent. It's a fact. Not sure why you guys are discussing "Coaching versus talent" when it's pretty clear that you need elite talent to win a national title. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Winston was more than just a "5 star quarterback". He is a once in a generation type talent. There are so many "5 star" quarterbacks that never did anything close to what Jameis did as a true freshmen in their entire 4 years. If you can get a QB like Winston, or Cam Newton, or Vince Young, then you can win a title despite average coaching.

Twisting my words. Never said it was one or the other. I said coaching > talent. Never once did I say talent did not matter. I'd rather have an elite coach that got #15 recruiting classes each year than a bad/average coach that got top 5 "elite" classes each year is my point.

The thing is we "recruiting whores" knew Winston was a beast and a perfect fit for a team with stupid talent. We knew he was better than EJ we were just hoping he wasn't, he was high rated. So we should tell Allison to go to another school because we will coach a 2 star guy? U take the elite talent u win, your coaching job becomes easier.

 

[Dwinstitles]

Again I'm not sure what your point is here.

" I said coaching > talent. Never once did I say talent did not matter. I'd rather have an elite coach that got #15 recruiting classes each year than a bad/average coach that got top 5 "elite" classes each year is my point."

Can you please tell me what the point of this sentence is? Who is deciding between that? I have no idea why you keep talking about coaching.

The bottom line is that you need elite talent to win national titles, which was my point when I was responding to some poster other than you who said you don't need top 5 classes to win, and cited teams like MSU and Iowa...who not surprisingly never win national titles. You need elite recruiting classes to win national titles, bottom line, which was what my post said. I'm not sure why you keep responding to me talking about how you'd rather have an elite coach than elite talent, when nobody is forcing you to choose between the two and it wasn't part of my post to begin with.

Also Jameis wasn't a true freshman.

agree


Also the best coaches in college are the best recruiters lol. When Bama hired Saban they were told he's not the best coach he's the best recruiter and it's true.

Also the 2016 class is the way we can come back, superior classes strong throughout like that will get us back. Consistent top elite classes if u *** one class up that's it your done look at 2010 and 09 radio backed those classes up horribly.

 

[kmwcane]

We need top 5-10ish classes to win a national title, which si the goal here. The goal is not to be a team like Iowa (who sucks) or MSU who wins sparingly and has no chance of playing for the title.

Here are the last two national title winners and some of their recruiting class rankings, starting with the class the year before they won the title, e.g., 2012 for FSU (2013 title winner)

2013 title - FSU - 6, (cant find 2011), 10, 7 (on rivals)
2012 title - Alabama - (cant find 2011), 5, 1, 1

There doesn't need to be a choice between coaching or talent, the best coaches routinely bring in the best talent. We have neither top-shelf talent or top-shelf coaching. Bottom line you do not win a national title without consistently elite recruiting classes.

FSU won because of a once in a generation type QB. Consistently underperformed each year prior to Jameis Winston despite great talent on paper.

Alabama has arguably one of the top 5 CFB coaches of all time so can't argue there. Saban is a top shelf coach and recruiter.

I'm not saying it is a choice between either talent or coaching. I'm saying coaching > talent up to a certain point, say with top 20 talent. A great coach can win national titles with consistent top 20 classes (especially at Miami where I contend S. FL recruits are underrated). And once a great coach starts winning at whatever school, recruiting tends to get easier as more prospects wish to play for the great coach.

It is easier to overcome a talent gap with superior coaching than vice versa. Ask Ron Zook.

FSU won because they happened to recruit a 5 star QB? You don't say. Again you are trying to make some sort of dichotomy here that doesn't exist. Bottom line, you need elite talent to win national championships, which is the goal here. The teams winning NC's consistently have highly ranked recruiting classes and elite talent. It's a fact. Not sure why you guys are discussing "Coaching versus talent" when it's pretty clear that you need elite talent to win a national title. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

Winston was more than just a "5 star quarterback". He is a once in a generation type talent. There are so many "5 star" quarterbacks that never did anything close to what Jameis did as a true freshmen in their entire 4 years. If you can get a QB like Winston, or Cam Newton, or Vince Young, then you can win a title despite average coaching.

Twisting my words. Never said it was one or the other. I said coaching > talent. Never once did I say talent did not matter. I'd rather have an elite coach that got #15 recruiting classes each year than a bad/average coach that got top 5 "elite" classes each year is my point.

The thing is we "recruiting whores" knew Winston was a beast and a perfect fit for a team with stupid talent. We knew he was better than EJ we were just hoping he wasn't, he was high rated. So we should tell Allison to go to another school because we will coach a 2 star guy? U take the elite talent u win, your coaching job becomes easier.

No, you didn't know that Winston would be a once in a generation type QB who would be only the second freshman to ever win the Heisman trophy. Easy to say all those things AFTER the fact.

Why would you tell Jack Allison to go to another school? That has nothing to do with the point I was making.

 

[kmwcane]

None of the teams you just mentioned won national titles.

They haven't won't titles but they have won BCS games.. And I'm sure many Here would take a BCS rose or orange win.

Look at Stanford's recent success. BCS wins and they did it with middle of the pack recruiting.

I don't want to be Stanford and when Miami has been good we have been real good, and that takes recruiting. I mean fkin Coker won with talent if he can Golden can, Jimbo won also. Jimbo is not all world until last year but everyone saw this coming because of his recruiting classes, you had to be fkin blind if u did not think Fsu would win one or two with the classes they were bringing in.

Larry Coker won with the greatest CFB team of all time. That is not going to happen again anytime soon. Miami shouldn't have to have 2001 talent to win titles, the coaching should be good enough to get the job done with less.

FSU had been reeling in great classes for years. And losing 2-3 games per year with "elite" talent. What changed? Jamies Winston, a QB so good that he won the Heisman as a freshmen. That is the difference for FSU.