Posted: 06/29/2014 9:15 PM
Posted: 06/30/2014 12:22 PM
"What's wrong with three stars, bub?"Cal currently has eight commits. They are all apparently 3 star rated. So again,
it doesn't look like Sonny and his staff or the new SAPHC facilities aren't having
too much success at attracting 4 and 5 star recruits. Not even mentioning u$C (8) or
ucla (5) 4 star recruiting, Northern Pac-12 section Whoregon (5) , Wazzu (3),
UDub (1), and even the 'furds (2) have all gotten 4 star commits already. I'll
have to concede even odd-ball Tedford had at least one four by this time.
There's really nothing wrong with 3 star commits. It's just that if that's all you can
get then to have a good team the coaching level has to correspondingly increase.
Like, the Beavers are competitive with primarily two star recruits but their coaching
under Riley is proportionately very good and that much better.
Last edited 07/14/2014 5:02 PM by Bluebloodthescorned
Posted: 06/30/2014 3:29 PM
Posted: 06/30/2014 10:50 PM
Bluebloodthescorned wrote:"What's wrong with three stars, bub?"Cal currently has seven commits. They are all apparently 3 star rated. So again,it doesn't look like Sonny and his staff or the new SAPHC facilities aren't havingtoo much success at attracting 4 and 5 star recruits. Not even mentioning u$C (6) orucla (4) 4 star recruiting, Northern Pac-12 section Whoregon (4) , Wazzu (3),UDub (1), and even the 'furds (1) have all gotten 4 star commits already. I'llhave to concede even odd-ball Tedford had at least one four by this time.There's really nothing wrong with 3 star commits. It's just that if that's all you canget then to have a good team the coaching level has to correspondingly increase.Like, the Beavers are competitive with primarily two star recruits but their coachingunder Riley is proportionately very good and that much better.
"What's wrong with three stars, bub?"Cal currently has seven commits. They are all apparently 3 star rated. So again,
too much success at attracting 4 and 5 star recruits. Not even mentioning u$C (6) or
ucla (4) 4 star recruiting, Northern Pac-12 section Whoregon (4) , Wazzu (3),
UDub (1), and even the 'furds (1) have all gotten 4 star commits already. I'll
Posted: 07/01/2014 11:31 AM
HuskyInAZ wrote: Not to rub salt in the wound, but UW has 3 4-star commits to date and Stanford has 2.
"We're HUSKIE fans!"
Not to rain on your parade, but I'm using Rivals.com's Yahoo Sports ratings. As of today,
UDub only has ONE four star recruit as well as the 'furds too.
Last edited 07/01/2014 6:46 PM by Bluebloodthescorned
Posted: 07/01/2014 4:13 PM
Posted: 07/01/2014 5:47 PM
Posted: 07/01/2014 7:05 PM
RyanGorcey wrote: You know why Cal has to go after three-stars at this point (granted, I think at least two guys on the current commit list will wind up as 4s before signing day)? Easy answer: 1-11. They have to win games before hauling in some of the big fish, although, gun to my head, I think Isaiah Langley is going to make the call for Cal at The Opening.
I wholeheartedly agree with you Mr. Gorcey. But, if this is so and I believe it to be, then
why at this time (at least in my opinion) recruit so many three star iffy-recruits?
I mean, if one was to feel Cal is going to make a stunning comeback from last season's
horrid performance, then shouldn't Cal retain as many schollies as it can so as to accommodate
all those four (five?) star recruits who will realize Cal is a real winner! Also, if Cal can't get four
star recruits like Langley before winning games, all the more why Coach Dykes should wait until
after the end of the presumed up and coming winning season. You don't think that maybe Coach
Dykes believes his Cal team isn't ready yet to win games?
Last edited 07/16/2014 4:07 PM by Bluebloodthescorned
Posted: 07/01/2014 8:54 PM
Last edited 07/01/2014 8:59 PM by RyanGorcey
Posted: 07/01/2014 10:43 PM
RyanGorcey wrote: A few things to respond to here.There are PLENTY of offers out to four- and five-star guys. (I don't doubt, but where are their commits to Cal?) All you have to do is read my first camp confidential article to see that that's the case (I believe you. I do not question your word.), and that those four-star athletes are digging Cal, to some extent, at least.(No doubt again, but not enough to commit to Cal. They don't seem to want to be at Cal that badly? That is, does Cal really want to build a program on these type of guys? Oh sure, these guys are just waiting to see if Cal wins so why not wait on them?) Now, those are guys that Cal is theoretically holding spots for, and actively recruiting.(So, Cal must be reducing its four star commit slots as its first EIGHT have been taken already by three star commits?) Guys commit when they commit. Cal can't say "oh, don't commit, because IF we win games, we can get another, bigger fish, to commit." (I agree. So why offer a bunch of three star recruits now if Cal expects to "win games?" This expectation doesn't seem genuine given Cal's current recruiting strategy, and if I can think such, surely some, if not most, four/five star recruits can likewise surmise the same.) You know who does that a lot? Hint: They wear white helmets and red shirts at home. (You mean the 'furds? If so, they have been doing pretty good lately. They might be doing something right.) You evaluate, then offer who you offer, you get commits when the kids decide to pull the trigger. Some of those kids wind up seeing their stock rise, others don't. (I agree so why not wait a little longer before taking in another three star commit? That is, a three star recruit seems to be more susceptible to these rises and falls than a four star recruit, just sayin'. )As for "retain[ing] as many schollies as it can," that's downright foolish. (I disagree, especially when Cal's early recruiting isn't like its sister school ucla.) Coaches are always optimistic, but they also have to be realistic. (I agree, maybe Dykes is being more realistic from the get-go in that his optimism might not really flow into next season.) You can't say "no thanks" to a kid because he's not a big-enough fish, because -- Guess what? -- you may not have that season you hope for. (I agree, so why offer until you see who the "big-enough fish" really are and see if forthcoming wins will bring them in because just wanting to be here doesn't seem to be working. If Cal doesn't have the season that we all hope for, then there should be plenty of good three star recruits, based on their most recent play, not only available but willing to immediately accept a Cal offer.) You offered these kids for a reason, after all. You get kids who want to play for you. Ideally, those guys are four- and five-star guys. (That's my point...where are they? They don't seem to want to play for Dykes.) But, remember, Tedford did some of his best work with under-rated and under-recruited guys at the beginning of his tenure, when Cal was coming off of that 1-10 season. Point is, start with kids who want to be here, and who want to play for this staff, then build on top of those guys. (I agree that in the long run this may be successful, but given the Pac 12 and fan impatience, there may not be enough time in that it seems to me Cal will continue to get chopped up with three star recruiting preventing Cal from winning, ergo perpetuating a four and five star recruiting vacuum and possibly another coaching change in the very near-term.)As for Langley committing to Cal before the presumptive winning starts, as it were, you also have to remember that he's a local kid, who has friends on the team and who's watched Cal his whole life. (Sure, but does he really want to be "here?" I mean, shouldn't have he committed by now instead of collecting offers from almost every major school in the West? This is great for his ego...fine...but doesn't do much for Sonny's recruiting credibility.) He's a special circumstance (Jabari Bird ring a bell?), and if he does pull the trigger, he's a guy other four-stars can rally around. (So, he may bring in more four star recruits than Sonny (Cal) potentially winning or the new sports facilities are able to. Another reason why Cal should save all those four star slots for his pals. Sounds great to me, he should commit now to Cal. I wonder what's delaying him?) If you read that first camp confidential article, you'd read some VERY germane comments with respect to guys that the Bears are going after/bringing in. (I've learned what teenagers say and do are, most of the time, entirely different things. In other words, I don't hold my breathe anymore.)
Last edited 07/09/2014 8:13 AM by Bluebloodthescorned
Posted: 07/13/2014 6:03 PM
Posted: 07/13/2014 10:34 PM
GoBears58 wrote: Langley and the kid from San Leandro just gave Curly Joe the finger.... just like the TE from Campolindo and Mixon last year. Top talent want nothing to do with Dykester.
"Nice tie, Blueblood!"
"Does anybody here know if they play high school
football in the SF Bay Area?"
Given Cal's recruiting so far, the evidence is beginning to
support your stance. I mean, I would think Dykes' recruiting
was pretty damn good if he was recruiting for San Jose State,
but unfortunately, he's not.
Last edited 07/30/2014 7:42 AM by Bluebloodthescorned
MSN PrivacyLegalAdvertise on MSNAbout our adsRSS
© 2014 Microsoft|