- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Axioms of Recruiting (in LA)
Posted on 2/15/15 at 8:36 am to AlwysATgr
Posted on 2/15/15 at 8:36 am to AlwysATgr
quote:
No single recruit is ever going to make or break a recruiting class.
I think this is true; however, it falls to reason that an aggregation of misses in one class or consecutive classes could hurt you.
quote:
LA produces more quality prospects than we can sign.
quote:
Early departures hurt lots
May not be an "axiom" specific to Louisiana recruiting, but both of these to varying degrees speak to the necessity of recruiting for need....one thing (LB) we could have done a lot better at in 2015. We did it on the OL, but LB was a big need.
0
Posted on 2/15/15 at 9:09 am to lsufanva
quote:
lsufanva
Excellent post. I agree with everything except the point about Landon Collins. We sucked at safety the year before last. Last year we were fairly good, but Collins would have been a big upgrade over Martin.
Also, while out oline is good, we would be even better with CRob. And just imagine if Hawkins and Vadal had declared.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 9:38 am to Poodlebrain
quote:
This needs to be qualified. The quality prospects LA produces are not distributed among all positions in proportion to requirements for a championship contending team.
Yep. For example, Louisiana has for the longest time, supplied a large amount of WRs and RBs and will continue to so so. What they haven't supplied, are quality QBs and LBs consistently.
Thanks to the advancement in recruiting like multiple recruiting sites, much more events ( 7 on 7, elite 11, SPARQ, NUC, etc), many more ways to get your tape seen (HUDL, maxpreps, prepforce, undertheradar sports, etc), all the stones are being overturned. That's why so many Louisiana kids are being found out. I think like 60 kids got signed to D1 scholarships for 2015. That's crazy!
Posted on 2/15/15 at 10:30 am to DEG
quote:
I agree with this except when it comes to a home run QB recruit.
How do you know the guy is a home run recruit though? I could give you a list of 5 star QBs over the last few years and probably half at most panned out. That's what they are saying. If you are a prophet, then yeah you could tell if a recruit would make or break a team, but I know of none in this day. So with what we have go go on, no recruit will make or break a class. We can believe that all we want, and even say it during the excitement of the commit, but when you step back and look at it, it's still nothing but a guess.
This post was edited on 2/15/15 at 10:31 am
Posted on 2/15/15 at 10:31 am to AlwysATgr
well said. Unfortunately, the people who need to read this, won't read this.
This post was edited on 2/15/15 at 10:33 am
Posted on 2/15/15 at 10:33 am to Datbayoubengal
Yes and no.
Doesn't even have to be a home-run QB recruit. But not addressing the position and acquiring depth is he difference between LSU and Alabama since 2009.
Doesn't even have to be a home-run QB recruit. But not addressing the position and acquiring depth is he difference between LSU and Alabama since 2009.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 11:01 am to chilge1
quote:QB is the obvious position, but I would add LSU has lacked quality depth at LB as well. LSU had to use D.J. Welter at MLB in 2013, and as the substitute for Beckwith in 2014. LSU could not defend Alabama effectively against the run when Welter was in the game.
Doesn't even have to be a home-run QB recruit. But not addressing the position and acquiring depth is he difference between LSU and Alabama since 2009.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 11:04 am to Poodlebrain
I see your point but MLB play didn't "make or break" the 2013-14 teams.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 12:44 pm to chilge1
I'm want LSU to sign players that want to be here. I don't care what state they come from.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 3:32 pm to arcalades
quote:
Are you saying it doesn't matter that Peyton didn't go to LSU? Are you saying Kevin Faulk didn't make that recruiting class, and thus have a huge effect on following classes? You can't miss out on several top 10 players in your state, especially when they go to rivals, and expect to be the best team.
Kevin Faulk "made" the '95 class. But that was a different era. We were coming off six straight losing seasons then. We've had 15 winning seasons in a row, etc. IMO, this is a different era.
We missed on CRob, Kenny Young, Speedy, Hootie, Sims, Willis, and as an OOS bonus Tony Brown in '14 and stilled finished with the 2nd rank class.
When we're stockpiling talent and classes on top of one another, a single recruit isn't going to make/break the class.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 3:36 pm to ArcticCat
quote:
Two prospects of equal promise, one in-state and one out-of-state, sign the in-state player.
Agreed. I almost included this in the OP but was trying to pare things down as much as I could to avoid the dreaded "TLDR" stigma. But in-state recruiting is the lifeblood of our program.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 3:42 pm to AlwysATgr
quote:
1) No single recruit is ever going to make or break a recruiting class.
Sure but let's not downplay the importance of elite players, by which I mean the top 3 or 4 in-state players in a given year. When we have a year like 2012 when we lose the 3 best players in state, that's a problem. A big problem.
quote:
6) Recruiting is not a science.
But there are a ton of examples of our poor talent evaluation. Its not a science, but when you systematically miss on prospects like Chuck Hunter, Ryan Brown, Mike Wallace, etc....that's a problem.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 4:38 pm to TxTiger82
Compared to the LSU standard, many areas of talent deficit (QB, WR, LB, and DL) led to a five loss season last year.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 6:00 pm to AlwysATgr
Miles apologist
Posted on 2/15/15 at 6:07 pm to LCTFAN
quote:
Great post
I think it's terrible.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 6:40 pm to chilge1
I believe Cam may have offered Franks when he did in order to see what the other kid was made of...perhaps he doesn't have the chest to play SEC football...this league is damn tough...many high school QB is simply not tough enough to take the rigors and the hits...jmho
Posted on 2/15/15 at 7:27 pm to Penrod
Penrod, is agree with the points about Collins and Robinson. Was just trying to explain that missing in them had no effect on the wins and losses.
Collins would've started the last 2 years here and I doubt anyone will argue that. That said, he wouldn't have made such a huge difference that we would have won a game we lost. He would've been an upgrade over Martin, Mills and any other S we had but those guys performed well enough at the position that it didn't really matter in the end. Landing Collins would've been great and certainly would've improved depth but missing in him wasn't crippling as some try to say.
The miss of Robinson likely is only gonna be big for one year, 16. He wouldn't have started over Collins last year and its debatable if he would've beaten Hawkins. He's a better talent than both(though Hawkins talent is right there) and he would've given us great depth at OT so I can't say the miss is completely unimportant. As for next season, its likely he would start at LT allowing Hawkins to stay at RT and therefore solidifying the starting positions and depth. However, I do think our OTs will be on par without him as it would be with him barring injury. Again depth is where I see the biggest part of the equation on the miss. So that part I have to agree with. 16 is when we will be really missing having Robinson and the one occasion I think it may be the difference between a win or a loss. Our OT position is questionable in 16 as of now so he will be sorely missed. I do think we will be fine and not miss him as much as the surface appears to show but I can see the argument on the miss.
Moral of the story is this, to this point, none of our misses has been a cause for concern or made a difference in wins and losses. In 2 years I may change my stance as it pertains to Robinson. To this point though, it cannot be proven that missing in him is that big a deal. Only perception. Fun discussion. Why j love this board.
Collins would've started the last 2 years here and I doubt anyone will argue that. That said, he wouldn't have made such a huge difference that we would have won a game we lost. He would've been an upgrade over Martin, Mills and any other S we had but those guys performed well enough at the position that it didn't really matter in the end. Landing Collins would've been great and certainly would've improved depth but missing in him wasn't crippling as some try to say.
The miss of Robinson likely is only gonna be big for one year, 16. He wouldn't have started over Collins last year and its debatable if he would've beaten Hawkins. He's a better talent than both(though Hawkins talent is right there) and he would've given us great depth at OT so I can't say the miss is completely unimportant. As for next season, its likely he would start at LT allowing Hawkins to stay at RT and therefore solidifying the starting positions and depth. However, I do think our OTs will be on par without him as it would be with him barring injury. Again depth is where I see the biggest part of the equation on the miss. So that part I have to agree with. 16 is when we will be really missing having Robinson and the one occasion I think it may be the difference between a win or a loss. Our OT position is questionable in 16 as of now so he will be sorely missed. I do think we will be fine and not miss him as much as the surface appears to show but I can see the argument on the miss.
Moral of the story is this, to this point, none of our misses has been a cause for concern or made a difference in wins and losses. In 2 years I may change my stance as it pertains to Robinson. To this point though, it cannot be proven that missing in him is that big a deal. Only perception. Fun discussion. Why j love this board.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 8:43 pm to Stingray
quote:
Compared to the LSU standard, many areas of talent deficit (QB, WR, LB, and DL) led to a five loss season last year.
Certainly we can always get better, i.e., put better talent on the field which in turn would result in more wins/less losses. But of the 5 losses, who among them had better talent than we did? Bama probably but not my much. Auburn and State – dunno, you tell me. But I don’t think Arky or ND did. How much superior talent do we need before we beat teams with lesser talent?
Most of our “talent deficiencies” were due as much to early departures (Ego, Freak, Juice, OBJ), odd coaching decisions (why was it 4-5 games in before Beckwith started?), poor player development (especially along DL), and just an inexplicably bad approach on O as to recruiting misses 2-3 years back.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 10:25 pm to AlwysATgr
Never piss off the high school coaches or take them for granted.
Posted on 2/15/15 at 10:33 pm to TxTiger82
quote:
Sure but let's not downplay the importance of elite players, by which I mean the top 3 or 4 in-state players in a given year. When we have a year like 2012 when we lose the 3 best players in state, that's a problem. A big problem.
He didn't downplay the importance. He said one single player. With Franks, Patterson will not effect this class, plus we are looking to nab another pro style QB. Even on Allen, we just got Chidi Valentine, who will definitely be starting LT or RT depending on if Pocic declares early.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News