re: Brossette dropped to a 3*

quote:

---

Do the services drop kids to kind of force their hand in opening up the recruitment or flipping

---

People say things like this, but there's no real trend. Players fluctuate for a myriad of reasons. Uncommitted players tend to get more spotlight, because there's more news interest.

So, there's a small advantage in coverage, but no service gives bonus points for not committing.

The funny thing is when he committed to us last year, he was the #4 RB and Guice was the #6 RB. Now he is the #16 RB on composite and #19 RB on 247. That is complete bullshite.

I read on articles high SoSo's overrated arse jumped so high because he had a great senior year, well Brossette did too, and broke the Louisiana rushing TD record.

quote:

---

On Rivals

---

Another reason why 247 is really the only answer for recruiting questions.

quote:

---

Brossette a 3*? Now, that's some funny shite. These recruiting sites are getting worse every year.

---

Hester was a 2*....but was he? it all pans out, I just want him at LSU no matter what the *'s say

quote:

---

quote:
"LSU sure can coach em up."

Was talking with a UT booster yesterday and he is pretty confident brosette flips to play for Charlie.

Edit: no, I don't have a link. And I don't know how connected to the UT program he is other than to say he is filthy rich season ticket holder.

---

As I said the other day, I heard this 6 months ago. I hope, if this is the case, that he makes his decision to flip before NSD.

We do need Brossette in this class. He may damn well prove to be the best back or find a spot in our rotation. Frank doesnt want to lose him to Texas. Kids a straight up gamer.

quote:

---

You can't gauge him much in shorts and 7 on 7s. It's like they dropped him because he wasn't a great receiver or some shite.

---

I agree to an extent, but there is something to be said for seeing a prospect in person regardless of position.

Stupid

The eye don't lie

Agree in part. My point was that all of the info on a kid, film, camps and combines, all star week and word from coaches and scouts are what should go into the rankings. In this case in particular, Brossette has been known about for 4 years and has been highly thought of all of that time. During those 4 years he's been to all of these major events and been seen multiple times and has plenty of film. I can understand the early thoughts being high because of projection and maybe he didn't progress the way they thought he would. That said he was still ranked and rates highly until the last 2 rankings changes. Even the last set of changes still had him as a 4* so apparently his body of work was still good enough to warrant that ranking. Then comes all star week, which BTW is and has always been a bad barometer of a running backs skill set because those things arent set up for the running game. A back like Brossette isn't gonna succeed in a spread out, passing based setup. He's a between the tacklea , power back that isn't a space or receiving back so he's not gonna shine in that setup. He struggled at the all star practices partly because he just had a tough week and partly because the setup is designed for a kid like him to fail. So basically they took a bad week of practice, in a setup not designed for him to succeed and based his ranking on it despite all the evidence to the contrary they've compiled the past 4 years. Its a bad way to base a ranking. Its not an exact science and we all know that but it discredits the whole process by allowing one week of practice to supercede 4 years of evidence to the contrary.

Along the lines of judging them based on going against the elite, is it fair to punish a kid for being invited to the event and attending the event and yet rewarding kids that didn't have the honor of even being invited? The kids ranked ahead of him didn't get invited but because they weren't there they are rewarded with keeping their ranking based on film and their previous body of work. Just saying that his body of work is still the same as it was prior to the event. He shouldn't be punished for attending the event and having a tough week against the elite while other kids kept their rankings despite not performing at all against those other elite kids.

Go check the 4* rankings at RB and watch film of the bottom 7-8 guys and then watch Brossette and tell me who is a 4* and who isn't. They are all playing against mostly non elite competition so the playing field is even. In particular watch Bradrick Shaws film and compare it to Brossette. If that kids a 4(have no issue with it) then Brossette is. Nothing about Brossette body of work is 3* worthy. As a pure rb the kids a 4*.