Renato Brown

[2Focusd804]

@2Focusd804 @TheRichtShow @OriginalGatorHater this has nothing to do with Renato Brown specifically, more so the bigger picture. We have10 decommitments in 2018 so far and that is HORRIBLE optics. And no matter if you want to state that players dropped us, we dropped them, we re-evaluated, it does not look good and it only provides more ammo for our competition.

We are already trying to compete against more established and recent success of bigger programs (Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, etc.) Than we have the to deal with the "bag men" as well. We are coming off of 3 losses to end the season, two against top 10 programs, where you can be assured opposing staff's are telling these impressionable kids that we still aren't back yet and still have a distance to go. Now we are losing kids left and right. And regardless of what the blind homers want to say, we aren't dropping all these kids. These kids for the most part are exploring other options on there own. And for the kids that people want to state we dropped, well that's another problem in itself in that this staff CLEARLY needs to do a better job of evals and not jump the gun taking commits so quickly.

But like I stated originally, all the folks saying "good" or "who cares" when these lower rated kids bounce, where were these same people when we originally took these kids? I can assure you that if I took the time to dig up the old threads, very few, if any where questioning these takes and where more likely to be saying the staff found an under the radar guy or a kid with upside and potential. But now, because the kids are telling us to kick rocks, the kids suck. Like I said, you can't make this **** up.

Naw in general I agree about the de-committs being a bad look. I said the same thing in another thread. Either the coaches can't properly evaluate or they can't hang on to commits. Either way it's concerning to me

 

[2Focusd804]

Why are people freaking out? Every commit we have lost lately for 2019 are average 3 star kids. We are not losing Solomon, Smith, Payton, those types of guys. Also, the last 4 commits we have received have all been blue chip 4* recruits.

Relax

Why we're they takes in the first place then?

 

[2Focusd804]

"They're 3* bro, who cares if they de-commit?'


Why did our staff recruit and take his commitment then? If all these kids are bad and getting pushed out then our staff can't evaluate for **** and that's a bigger problem than kids decommitting because we not recruiting them enough, bags being dropped, etc

 

[Storm]

I may be wrong, never saw nothing but a few highlights, but I thought he was that powerful big body DT that we have needed more of forever! I don't know what happened from either side, but dropping or slow playing this kid is not what we needed. We ain't at that level where we slow play any DT.

Apparently the staff disagress. And, if reports are correct he was gonna be a OT or OG here.

I don't understand some of you. If the staff says they don't like him at DT then they don't like him there. You want them to sign him as a DT then whine in a couple years about why they recruited this kid. He could have been a cane, just not at DT.

This is a conversation that should wait till NSD. Then maybe you can say we should have taken that Brown kid, nobody knows till then.

 

[Lexcane]

"They're 3* bro, who cares if they de-commit?'


Why did our staff recruit and take his commitment then? If all these kids are bad and getting pushed out then our staff can't evaluate for **** and that's a bigger problem than kids decommitting because we not recruiting them enough, bags being dropped, etc

Who tf knows? The bigger question is why the fu&&& are you crying and *****ing about it? Seriously, no one gives a shi&&& bout this except for a few fans/trolls like you on this forum. Brown will find another home, we'll recruit another DT to replace him.

 

[2Focusd804]

Who tf knows? The bigger question is why the fu&&& are you crying and *****ing about it? Seriously, no one gives a shi&&& bout this except for a few fans/trolls like you on this forum. Brown will find another home, we'll recruit another DT to replace him.

Yea who cares if our coaches can't evaluate talent properly, it's not like that's important in recruiting or anything. Go sit at the kids table, the adults are talking

 

[Lexcane]

Yea who cares if our coaches can't evaluate talent properly, it's not like that's important in recruiting or anything. Go sit at the kids table, the adults are talking

How are the coaches not evaluating talent properly? Do you hear how retarded you sound? We are loaded top to bottom with talent at every position on the team and you think the coaches can't evaluate properly because of some random decommits? Are you slow?

 

[2Focusd804]

How are the coaches not evaluating talent properly? Do you hear how retarded you sound? We are loaded top to bottom with talent at every position on the team and you think the coaches can't evaluate properly because of some random decommits? Are you slow?

Let's break it down for you in terms you'll understand

1. We took commitments from all these kids that de-committed which means they thought these kids were good enough for Miami. This is a fact

2. There has been a bunch of de-commits recently, for 2019 and 2020. This is also a fact

3. Either Miami could not hold onto the kids commitments or they decided the player was no longer good enough to play for Miami. If they couldn't hang on to commitments, that's a problem. If they thought the player was good enough for Miami and then upon closer inspection, determined that they weren't, that is also a problem.

The reason that this is an issue is because it shows that the coaches either aren't able to determine a players true skill set or they are taking commitments from borderline prospects just to say we have commitments.

A bunch of de-commits, whether dropped or not makes Miami look bad. Look at the elite teams and compare their de-commits to Miami over the last 2 years.

 

[No_Fly_Zone]

If you look at the majority of the c/o 2019 decommits, they were long-tenured commits that were dropped by the staff or the staff simply stopped pursuing. Basically, at one point the staff believed they were potentially UM quality players, but upon reevaluation (with more information) the staff changed their mind.

People need to understand the evaluation process is fluid. Some kids don't grow as projected, some kids put out bad film when they transfer to a school with better comp, some kids get beat up when they finally show up at camps, and some kids don't test will athletically despite looking sound on film. This is information that comes in at different points in the recruiting process. A good staff will reevaluate and try to correct initial evaluation errors. A bad staff will hold the commit out of fear and bury their collective heads in the sand. We have the former.

If you want to discuss the optics of decommits and whether early offers should be accepted in the first place, that's valid. It doesn't look good when a kid appears to walk away. But don't kid yourselves, in most circumstances the kids and the coaches know the difference between a true decommitment and a staff giving a recruit very strong hints he should look elsewhere.

And obviously it isn't good when quality kids leave a class (I still believe Pierre could have played here and will be difficult to replace in this class). But that's a different conversation and I don't honestly believe anyone was arguing that point (I hope).

 

[caneaddict]

youre a phuckface
#respectmyderision

 

[skeeter]

How are the coaches not evaluating talent properly? Do you hear how retarded you sound? We are loaded top to bottom with talent at every position on the team and you think the coaches can't evaluate properly because of some random decommits?

Nah, we are not "loaded top to bottom at every position"...Richt is in the process of improving the talent. It is not where you are saying it is, but will be in another year or 2.

Stop exaggerating and acting like your little opinion means anymore than anyone else on this board. Miami currently has top 8-12ish talent. Let's keep it on the uprise though.

 

[2Focusd804]

If you look at the majority of the c/o 2019 decommits, they were long-tenured commits that were dropped by the staff or the staff simply stopped pursuing. Basically, at one point the staff believed they were potentially UM quality players, but upon reevaluation (with more information) the staff changed their mind.

People need to understand the evaluation process is fluid. Some kids don't grow as projected, some kids put out bad film when they transfer to a school with better comp, some kids get beat up when they finally show up at camps, and some kids don't test will athletically despite looking sound on film. This is information that comes in at different points in the recruiting process. A good staff will reevaluate and try to correct initial evaluation errors. A bad staff will hold the commit out of fear and bury their collective heads in the sand. We have the former.

If you want to discuss the optics of decommits and whether early offers should be accepted in the first place, that's valid. It doesn't look good when a kid appears to walk away. But don't kid yourselves, in most circumstances the kids and the coaches know the difference between a true decommitment and a staff giving a recruit very strong hints he should look elsewhere.

And obviously it isn't good when quality kids leave a class (I still believe Pierre could have played here and will be difficult to replace in this class). But that's a different conversation and I don't honestly believe anyone was arguing that point (I hope).

See here is the issue that I see. We shouldn't be accepting kids that are borderline. Great players are great players, an extra spring evaluation shouldn't make the difference on whether are player is Miami caliber or not. If a kid is borderline they shouldn't be a take until we get more input and we've seen this staff do this already with kids like Bandy and Mike Harley. They waited for more information before sending an offer to the kids even if it was later than other programs or later than public perception says the offer should have went out. Spring evaluations should be about finding new kids who develop late or flew under the radar and then re-stacking the board. Of course things like character issue, coaching/philosophy changes can happen after commitments and the fit is no longer there but when you look at our de-commit numbers between last year and this year and compare it to other top programs we are way higher. At the end of the day we'd all rather not take kids that aren't Miami caliber even if it costs us 50 de-commits but honestly if feels kind of amateurish to load up on a bunch of commits and then start weeding them out after they commit rather than be more selective before hand.

 

[MikeCane18]

See here is the issue that I see. We shouldn't be accepting kids that are borderline. Great players are great players, an extra spring evaluation shouldn't make the difference on whether are player is Miami caliber or not. If a kid is borderline they shouldn't be a take until we get more input and we've seen this staff do this already with kids like Bandy and Mike Harley. They waited for more information before sending an offer to the kids even if it was later than other programs or later than public perception says the offer should have went out. Spring evaluations should be about finding new kids who develop late or flew under the radar and then re-stacking the board. Of course things like character issue, coaching/philosophy changes can happen after commitments and the fit is no longer there but when you look at our de-commit numbers between last year and this year and compare it to other top programs we are way higher. At the end of the day we'd all rather not take kids that aren't Miami caliber even if it costs us 50 de-commits but honestly if feels kind of amateurish to load up on a bunch of commits and then start weeding them out after they commit rather than be more selective before hand.

De-commits happen to every school out there. It's either offer too early and coaches get **** on when they re-evaluate and cool on a guy or offer too late (A. Samuel) and they get **** on for not offering back in spring. The fact is there is no exact science or formula out there for when you do and don't hand out offers or take commitments. It changes because the kids minds change hourly.

 

[2Focusd804]

De-commits happen to every school out there. It's either offer too early and coaches get **** on when they re-evaluate and cool on a guy or offer too late (A. Samuel) and they get **** on for not offering back in spring. The fact is there is no exact science or formula out there for when you do and don't hand out offers or take commitments. It changes because the kids minds change hourly.

Eh not sure this is entirely accurate but fair enough

 

[No_Fly_Zone]

See here is the issue that I see. We shouldn't be accepting kids that are borderline. Great players are great players, an extra spring evaluation shouldn't make the difference on whether are player is Miami caliber or not. If a kid is borderline they shouldn't be a take until we get more input and we've seen this staff do this already with kids like Bandy and Mike Harley. They waited for more information before sending an offer to the kids even if it was later than other programs or later than public perception says the offer should have went out. Spring evaluations should be about finding new kids who develop late or flew under the radar and then re-stacking the board. Of course things like character issue, coaching/philosophy changes can happen after commitments and the fit is no longer there but when you look at our de-commit numbers between last year and this year and compare it to other top programs we are way higher. At the end of the day we'd all rather not take kids that aren't Miami caliber even if it costs us 50 de-commits but honestly if feels kind of amateurish to load up on a bunch of commits and then start weeding them out after they commit rather than be more selective before hand.

I generally agree that kids that are truly borderline should not be takes until it's time for Plan B. I just don't think that's what is happening.

You can't look at recruiting and prospect rankings in a time vacuum. For instance, it is easy sitting here today to say Diamante Howard is not a Miami-caliber OLB or DB (after two more years of film, after he got tested at The Opening, after camps, and after his body just didn't develop). But back when he committed (in 2016), he was a 4-star OLB, 247 had him in their top 50 for the class, and he was ranked as a top 3 OLB and top 10 overall player in Florida. Nothing about that screams borderline. The problem is he did not develop the way we (and the recruiting services and a host of other schools) expected him to. The staff re-evaluated him and let the player know he should look elsewhere.

Also, I think Spring evaluations absolutely need to include a re-evaluation of the kids already committed (and there is no doubt this staff takes that aspect seriously). During the recruiting process, it is inevitable that you will get more and more information (data) regarding recruits (committed or otherwise). It only makes sense to incorporate that new information into the decision making process (regardless of whether the kid is committed or not).

My basic point is, for the most part, I don't believe the staff is taking "borderline" recruits as placeholders or anything like that. I think they take kids they project will be contributors first, then fill in their class as needed. But sometimes, information obtained later on in the process makes them rethink the player's ability to contribute, resulting in commitments. I'm not sure how you fix it entirely, other than having a blanket rule like, we won't take any commits until the start of a recruit's junior year, or something like that. But that sort of strict protocol creates has its own pitfalls, and likely results in losing out on kids who commit elsewhere (and actual develop as expected and take their commitment seriously).

 

[2Focusd804]

I generally agree that kids that are truly borderline should not be takes until it's time for Plan B. I just don't think that's what is happening.

You can't look at recruiting and prospect rankings in a time vacuum. For instance, it is easy sitting here today to say Diamante Howard is not a Miami-caliber OLB or DB (after two more years of film, after he got tested at The Opening, after camps, and after his body just didn't develop). But back when he committed (in 2016), he was a 4-star OLB, 247 had him in their top 50 for the class, and he was ranked as a top 3 OLB and top 10 overall player in Florida. Nothing about that screams borderline. The problem is he did not develop the way we (and the recruiting services and a host of other schools) expected him to. The staff re-evaluated him and let the player know he should look elsewhere.

Also, I think Spring evaluations absolutely need to include a re-evaluation of the kids already committed (and there is no doubt this staff takes that aspect seriously). During the recruiting process, it is inevitable that you will get more and more information (data) regarding recruits (committed or otherwise). It only makes sense to incorporate that new information into the decision making process (regardless of whether the kid is committed or not).

My basic point is, for the most part, I don't believe the staff is taking "borderline" recruits as placeholders or anything like that. I think they take kids they project will be contributors first, then fill in their class as needed. But sometimes, information obtained later on in the process makes them rethink the player's ability to contribute, resulting in commitments. I'm not sure how you fix it entirely, other than having a blanket rule like, we won't take any commits until the start of a recruit's junior year, or something like that. But that sort of strict protocol creates has its own pitfalls, and likely results in losing out on kids who commit elsewhere (and actual develop as expected and take their commitment seriously).

I get what you're saying. I wasn't referring to any recruiting ranking but the coaches evaluation. True enough they may project kids to grow and they don't (which is why I'm not a fan of taking commits 2+ years early but I'll save that for another thread). I'm not even sure the Pastor was the coach when Howard committed either. Upon further research the amount of de-commitments Miami has had the last 2 years isn't necessarily an anomaly but I'd like to see the number start trending down

 

[Lexcane]

Who's mad? I just laugh at folks like you who ALWAYS try to have it both ways. If the staff takes an under the radar kid who nobody wants, the staff found a diamond in the rough. Once that same kid decommits, now the staff pushed him out and it's not a big loss. The dudes who think like you live in a fluffy, fantasy world where there is only good, no bad. Must be nice to live in that fake existence.

Like literally NO ONE gives a shiznit bout Renato Brown. The only one whining and crying is YOU and that other troll Focus2dagrave or whatever his idiotic username is. Even Renato Brown himself not gonna give two tin shiznits about the decommit because he's gonna have 20 other schools to choose from. He'll go somewhere where he's wanted and we'll get someone else we want.

10 decommits, 20 decommits, 30 decommits, none of that matters because we'll wind up with kids to replace em with. All this crying and whining is utterly meaningless and pointless.

 

[BigDikCane]

CMR needs to start looking in the Sarasota/Bradenton and Polk county area for DTs

 

[CANEGANG954]

I was worried about this decommitment in particular because of the DT depth we currently have. Ran into an extremly reliable source from UM today and asked specifically about this situation Me: We lost a good one from 19. His response "I know you follow recruiting; Fake News". Brought joy to my heart, I already trust this staff but I'm excited to see what this class ends up with in the end.