WR recruiting profile

[No_Fly_Zone]

Relevant to the conversation so I'm going to drop this link to some excellent work done by @Lance Roffers a couple of years ago, and copy-paste some of the more relevant charts and WR discussion below. In a nutshell, this all indicates a lot of the testing numbers and measurables we (and coaches) tend to get hung up on for WRs aren't actually that determinative of success at the position.

When @Lance Roffers looked at All-Conference WRs in college to determine whether there was any difference at that level, he noted the below:

As explained by @Lance Roffers:

The only position group of the entire study that didn’t show a high correlation between athletic testing and P5 All-Conference performance was the WR group. Much like the data regarding the NFL Combine showed little correlation, so to does the HS data. Route-running seems to be by far the biggest component to being a successful WR at any level. There was almost no correlation with height, weight, speed, SPARQ etc. Short-shuttle was the only metric that showed a positive and statistically relevant correlation which ties in heavily with route-running.

Of course, the critical WR skill missing from the testing/measurables is sure-handedness. But a kid's ability to catch a football is a bit more difficult to measure, requires a good sample size of film, and is obviously far more subjective than something like a 40 yard dash time. That's why, IMO, productivity is crucial. Consider it a shortcut to good hands (I suspect there is a correlation between being a productive WR and having good hands). And I am certain it's hard to be a productive WR at any level with bad hands.

 

[Gooner#44]

I can see why WR can be lower than some but how the **** is there that much difference in WR and TE based on those #s? Seems odd.

 

[No_Fly_Zone]

I can see why WR can be lower than some but how the **** is their that much difference in WR and TE based on those #s? Seems odd.

I'm not certain at all. But if I had to guess, maybe it has to do with some combination of the following: (1) the potential for mismatches and exploiting coverages at the TE position results in a premium being placed on measurables/athleticism; (2) a less technical route tree and being lined up against LBs and Ss means TEs can get away with being less than stellar route runners compared to WRs; (3) the fact TEs are still asked to do more blocking than WRs so height/weight is more important.

 

[Gooner#44]

I'm not certain at all. But if I had to guess, maybe it has to do with some combination of the following: (1) the potential for mismatches and exploiting coverages at the TE position results in a premium being placed on measurables/athleticism; (2) a less technical route tree and being lined up against LBs and Ss means TEs can get away with being less than stellar route runners compared to WRs; (3) the fact TEs are still asked to do more blocking than WRs so height/weight is more important.

Possible, those make sense for sure, but for two positions that similar that gap is odd.

 

[305to954]

I want him on both return teams, unless he can't field punts. I think he is the best "open space" guy we have right now. If TS really is that SHUTDOWN CB people here think I don't want him getting protocoled returning punts tbh.

I hear that but you always put your most trusted guy at PR. **** even above most dangerous weapon. And if Tyrique is a playmaker back there (was in HS) and can be trusted I’d put him back there. Pat petereson did it..honey badger..we used Sean T, roscoe, Phil Buchanon etc etc. I’m not worried about PR wear n tear. Guy barely get lit up on PR

 

[Gooner#44]

I hear that but you always put your most trusted guy at PR. **** even above most dangerous weapon. And if Tyrique is a playmaker back there (was in HS) and can be trusted I’d put him back there. Pat petereson did it..honey badger..we used Sean T, roscoe, Phil Buchanon etc etc. I’m not worried about PR wear n tear. Guy barely get lit up on PR

If he is sure handed I suppose I can get behind it, I just wanna see Knighton in the open field with the ball (and not fumble)

 

[TexasCane90]

Seems like we’re talking by each other. The question is why we keep missing on guys who are quick and can separate. The answer is because we’re insufficiently focused on skills the nfl takes for granted (because don’t apply if you‘re too weak in them), and we undervalue. Hands, toughness, use of body, blocking. If WRs don’t do these things, the nfl ain’t generally interested. So they’re differentiating re elite physical skills and it makes sense for them. The college need-state is different - we aren’t playing against NFL defenses. And we’re picking kids at an earlier stage of development, where not all of the kids we pick amongst are tough, catch with their hands well, etc. And our game is just different. We should not be trying to make recruiting decisions based on what the nfl needs. That’s a big mistake, imo.

We miss on too many kids with semi-elite or elite physical traits because we aren’t effectively screening them for ‘table stakes’ capabilities or potential. It’s not bad luck. We’ve been doing it wrong. We’re way past ‘coincidence’ as an explanation. We aren’t focusing nearly enough on hands, toughness, use of body etc. These should be the first cut. Instead, we have tried too hard to find kids who look good in 7-7 or camps, and spent too little time figuring out if their traits translate to our game.

I agree to a point on small being a miss, but the kids you listed are *tough* - if we’d focused on toughness more than measurables, we’d have signed some, which is part of my point.

The losing battles strikes me as a mistaken explanation. Yes, but unrelated. Winning a few battles for grandma kids might have masked our eval issues but it doesn’t change them. We need to change how we assess kids who are not grandma kids, no matter how many grandma kids we sign.

This.

WE ARENT AN NFL MINOR LEAGUE TEAM

a **** triple option GT team has won the coastal and ACC more than us. Am I saying not to get kids who are still projects (Greg R or Zion’s) no! But at times sacrificing taking kids who could dominate at this level for the sake of taking a kid who COULD be better here and be a true nfl prospect is dumb. I want to see the Miami Hurricanes win tons of games and compete for nattys if they go off to be high draft picks Thats a bonus.

 

[Gooner#44]

This.

WE ARENT AN NFL MINOR LEAGUE TEAM

a **** triple option GT team has won the coastal and ACC more than us. Am I saying not to get kids who are still projects (Greg R or Zion’s) no! But at times sacrificing taking kids who could dominate at this level for the sake of taking a kid who COULD be better here and be a true nfl prospect is dumb. I want to see the Miami Hurricanes win tons of games and compete for nattys if they go off to be high draft picks Thats a bonus.

All you gotta say is we have won the Coastal in tackle football as many times as the Duke Blue Devils. Ugh.

But to your post, look a the teams winning/playing for the NC right now, they actually are winning and are a pipeline to the NFL, they go hand in hand now a days. You are not winning big unless you have NFL draft picks playing. Bama, Clemson, Ohio St, LSU 2 years ago, LOADED with NFL picks. It is what CFB is now.

 

[g8rh8rMD]

I want him on both return teams, unless he can't field punts. I think he is the best "open space" guy we have right now. If TS really is that SHUTDOWN CB people here think I don't want him getting protocoled returning punts tbh.

Yep. Lot's of complaining that Berrios didn't return more, but I remember saying at the time, we'll miss him when he's gone.

We don't need our top corner or #1 back returning punts.

IDGAF if 90% of the time the opposing punter gets off a good kick, we fair catch the ball. As long as we don't put the ball on the ground, and we have someone back there who can make the other team pay when then punter outkicks his coverage or puts the ball in the wrong spot, or when the return team is undisciplined with their lanes.

Put someone back there with reasonable athleticism, but most importantly good judgment and football IQ.

 

[g8rh8rMD]

All you gotta say is we have won the Coastal in tackle football as many times as the Duke Blue Devils. Ugh.

But to your post, look a the teams winning/playing for the NC right now, they actually are winning and are a pipeline to the NFL, they go hand in hand now a days. You are not winning big unless you have NFL draft picks playing. Bama, Clemson, Ohio St, LSU 2 years ago, LOADED with NFL picks. It is what CFB is now.

But you can't get NFL draft picks if you can't take the second best talent in the ACC and finish at least second in the ACC. Our problem is not that we don't have enough talent.

Our problem is that we do less with more, better than anyone in our conference, possibly the country.

Maybe Manny is in the process of turning that around, but until we've got a competent coach who shows he can do something with the talent we have, *****ing about not having a roster full of 4 and 5 stars like Baga is pointless.

 

[Gooner#44]

But you can't get NFL draft picks if you can't take the second best talent in the ACC and finish at least second in the ACC. Our problem is not that we don't have enough talent.

Our problem is that we do less with more, better than anyone in our conference, possibly the country.

Maybe Manny is in the process of turning that around, but until we've got a competent coach who shows he can do something with the talent we have, *****ing about not having a roster full of 4 and 5 stars like Baga is pointless.

And there in lies the rub, I agree. Need a Coach/Staff in place to rectify that, maybe we have the one now? We will know soon.

 

[Ethnicsands]

Relevant to the conversation so I'm going to drop this link to some excellent work done by @Lance Roffers a couple of years ago, and copy-paste some of the more relevant charts and WR discussion below. In a nutshell, this all indicates a lot of the testing numbers and measurables we (and coaches) tend to get hung up on for WRs aren't actually that determinative of success at the position.

View attachment 148265

View attachment 148266

When @Lance Roffers looked at All-Conference WRs in college to determine whether there was any difference at that level, he noted the below:

View attachment 148268

As explained by @Lance Roffers:



Of course, the critical WR skill missing from the testing/measurables is sure-handedness. But a kid's ability to catch a football is a bit more difficult to measure, requires a good sample size of film, and is obviously far more subjective than something like a 40 yard dash time. That's why, IMO, productivity is crucial. Consider it a shortcut to good hands (I suspect there is a correlation between being a productive WR and having good hands). And I am certain it's hard to be a productive WR at any level with bad hands.

Great find and post. I vaguely recall that thread but didn't remember the data. It's 100% consistent with what I'm saying, however. Moreso than most positions, it's a set of intangibles we need to identify -- or at least rule out kids who seem clearly to lack them. Absence of evidence that a kid is tough, physical and likes contact is probably evidence that he's not those things. Not conclusive perhaps, but enough to shift recruiting priorities. Likewise, if you don't find tape of a kid regularly catching with his hands in live action, then you should be wondering whether that's an issue. If the kid has big hands, and is tough and physical and athletic, maybe you bet he can 'develop' that skill. But most of the time, expecting a WR to 'develop' hands is like expecting a kit to develop an outside shot in hoops.

 

[Gooner#44]

Great find and post. I vaguely recall that thread but didn't remember the data. It's 100% consistent with what I'm saying, however. Moreso than most positions, it's a set of intangibles we need to identify -- or at least rule out kids who seem clearly to lack them. Absence of evidence that a kid is tough, physical and likes contact is probably evidence that he's not those things. Not conclusive perhaps, but enough to shift recruiting priorities. Likewise, if you don't find tape of a kid regularly catching with his hands in live action, then you should be wondering whether that's an issue. If the kid has big hands, and is tough and physical and athletic, maybe you bet he can 'develop' that skill. But most of the time, expecting a WR to 'develop' hands is like expecting a kit to develop an outside shot in hoops.

like expecting Ben Simmons to become a good FT shooter?

 

[puertorricane]

Separation, quickness and route-running is the name of the game in the NFL. You need to be able to beat press and then uncover quickly at the top of the route.

A lot of our worst misses are guys that fit this exact profile, which is so common in South Florida. Punt returners in particular are very good at beating press (equivalent to making the first tackler miss on a return), separating with quickness and catching in crowded spaces.

I'd boil down our WR woes to two main issues:

(1) Turning down too many talented small guys in favor of size. Some of these names are true sleepers, others we flat-out passed on: TY Hilton, Antonio Brown, Marquise Brown, Elijah Moore, TuTu Atwell, John Brown and Isaiah McKenzie. Those are all easily attainable pros who could have helped us. Zay Flowers at Boston College is a recent example.

(2) Losing battles. Amari Cooper, Jerry Jeudy and Calvin Ridley fit this category. We won the battle for Ahmmon Richards and then he got hurt. That's four first rounders right there.

TY Hilton fiu, Antonio Brown central michigan, John Brown pitt st, Isaiah Mckenzie didn't do much at Georgia until his junior year.
A lot of colleges passed on them not just us.
The four first rounders are a counter point to this thread since all of them have prototypical size the NFL loves.

 

[TexasCane90]

All you gotta say is we have won the Coastal in tackle football as many times as the Duke Blue Devils. Ugh.

But to your post, look a the teams winning/playing for the NC right now, they actually are winning and are a pipeline to the NFL, they go hand in hand now a days. You are not winning big unless you have NFL draft picks playing. Bama, Clemson, Ohio St, LSU 2 years ago, LOADED with NFL picks. It is what CFB is now.

And those teams you listed are playoff teams and **** right they have the talent. But we have more than enough talent to not lose to a rebuilding GT or Duke.

 

[Gooner#44]

And those teams you listed are playoff teams and **** right they have the talent. But we have more than enough talent to not lose to a rebuilding GT or Duke.

AMEN BROTHER, I been preaching that for years. Sad we are discussing that instead of how to compete with the other teams and have been for 15 plus years.

 

[Ethnicsands]

All you gotta say is we have won the Coastal in tackle football as many times as the Duke Blue Devils. Ugh.

But to your post, look a the teams winning/playing for the NC right now, they actually are winning and are a pipeline to the NFL, they go hand in hand now a days. You are not winning big unless you have NFL draft picks playing. Bama, Clemson, Ohio St, LSU 2 years ago, LOADED with NFL picks. It is what CFB is now.

At the highest level of competition, you'll usually find a concentration of top competitors. The question for us is what we've been doing wrong, and how we can get there. Clemson didn't just show up where it is. They had to start somewhere. Too many people want to copy what the winner does without assessing how they got there. We don't have the recruiting options Alabama does. If we can beat them for some grandma obvious WR, great. But that's not what anyone is debating here. They question is if we can't, do we take the guy who we hope can be like their guys, except we don't know if he can catch with his hands or take a hit? Or do we take the guy we know can catch with his hands and take a hit, and accept that we'll win more games and recruit again next year and eventually beat or others for kids who can take us over the top. The Pats won superbowls with receivers others didn't want. People make it seem like you need Cooper, Jeudy, Smith et al to win. Meanwhile, we can't hardly win the Coastal. We're so caught up in trying to be like them, we can't even get out of our own way.

 

[Ethnicsands]

TY Hilton fiu, Antonio Brown central michigan, John Brown pitt st, Isaiah Mckenzie didn't do much at Georgia until his junior year.
A lot of colleges passed on them not just us.
The four first rounders are a counter point to this thread since all of them have prototypical size the NFL loves.

Yep. Those were grandma kids. Everyone knew they were great. Whether they came here or not doesn't help address the question of whether we're evaluating poorly when we're looking at less talented kids. If anything, talking about those 'lost first rounders' misses the whole point. How are we prioritizing and assessing the kids we recruit and take is the question. If your grandma could spot the kid on film, it's not an evaluation issue it's just recruiting.

 

[Gooner#44]

At the highest level of competition, you'll usually find a concentration of top competitors. The question for us is what we've been doing wrong, and how we can get there. Clemson didn't just show up where it is. They had to start somewhere. Too many people want to copy what the winner does without assessing how they got there. We don't have the recruiting options Alabama does. If we can beat them for some grandma obvious WR, great. But that's not what anyone is debating here. They question is if we can't, do we take the guy who we hope can be like their guys, except we don't know if he can catch with his hands or take a hit? Or do we take the guy we know can catch with his hands and take a hit, and accept that we'll win more games and recruit again next year and eventually beat or others for kids who can take us over the top. The Pats won superbowls with receivers others didn't want. People make it seem like you need Cooper, Jeudy, Smith et al to win. Meanwhile, we can't hardly win the Coastal. We're so caught up in trying to be like them, we can't even get out of our own way.

I hear you, you are right we do not have that luxury as of now..... BUT we have to get to that level IMO, and it starts with winning 10plus games a year and winning the Coastal on the regular. All teams can "evaluate great" with room full of blue chip WRs, that's where we need to get. Almost all the recent NCs have had stud QBs and stud WRs, we gotta figure put how to get em instead of hoping to hit on lesser kids only, you are right in that.

This Ibieta kid is a real topic of conversation around here, be interesting to see how this plays out and the future "I told you so" thread bumps that come from it.

 

[CaneThang2020]

South Florida produces at least 8 guys a year at the WR position who could legitimately help us win football games.

Even if 3-4 of them bail for the SEC, we should be loaded every year.

I think there's enough intersection that I can get on board with both of esf/D$'s observations here. I think the focus on size has been the biggest issue rather than a focus on separation. When you are Saudi Arabia, you don't push nuclear energy. Pump the oil baby. Forget about a hard focus on signing the next Andre Johnson and load the roster with Travis Benjamins. I would rather miss on a Mark Pope than continue whiffing on all the Dee Wiggins guys out there. It seems like we have signed 25 dudes like Wiggins the last 15 years and never hit. These Travis Benjamin type kids are everywhere in South Florida and too many of them get ignored. Look for the guys who separate with that PR profile D$ mentioned that also have that grinder/little things mentality ESF mentions. There are plenty who do both!!!!

If there's 8 kids we need to hit on the under the radar ones because Bama-UGA-Clemson-OhioSt will likely each take 1 apiece...now we've even got OU and TX taking kids (see 5* kid went to OU in 2021 "forget his name, Mario something i think" class and Alexis to TX in 2021.....so now that's 6 out of those 8. And that's not even COUNTING the 2 other major players in FL, the Gators and Noles........there's goes all 8.....we have to nail on our evaluations, but more importantly we have make sure we're rolling out an offense with a pulse that can consistently be in the Top 30 nationally at worse....we get kids the ball on OFF to make plays and we will not be losing kids to OU and TX, that's for sure. Big 4 will get theirs, nothing we do about that, but there's PLENTY of meat on the bone if we keep other OOS schools out of our territory for the kids we identify and want.

For example, one kid I wonder about is the kid from Chaminade, Malik Rutherford I think is his name, he signed with GaTech in 2021. If he winds up being a stud at GT he'll be another one, even though IMO we got 3 of the best available in FL, arguably 3 of the top 5 or 6 kids.