- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: LSU drops to 8 on 2010 recruiting...
Posted on 12/20/09 at 12:36 am to peopleschamp
Posted on 12/20/09 at 12:36 am to peopleschamp
quote:
I think losing Davis and Hardrick is not good anyway you look at it.
There are ways to look at it in a good way. For instance, there were rumors that Trovon Reed went to Auburn because Davis was at LSU. Maybe Reed flips to LSU and that secures Lache. I'd take Reed and Lache over Davis. Not saying this is going to happen, but it could.
0
Posted on 12/20/09 at 12:46 am to peopleschamp
quote:
I think losing Davis and Hardrick is not good anyway you look at it.
Losing good recruits is not a good thing anyway you look at it. But that is not what we were discussing.
The argument, with much merit in it, made by HiddenFlask though was that the rankings are skewed to begin with and we should be far ahead of where we are regardless of losing the two recruits.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 1:12 am to CalTiger
quote:
The argument, with much merit in it, made by HiddenFlask though was that the rankings are skewed to begin with and we should be far ahead of where we are regardless of losing the two recruits.
This. There are probably only 5 recruits in this class that would be 3 stars if they were committed to Bama.
Worle would be changed to an RB and listed as a 4 star.
Gibson would be a Rivals 250 ATH
Blue would be a Rivals 100 RB
Muncie and Welter would be being hailed as LB's with great high school accolades and "very high ceilings" both 4 stars
There is no way Porter loses his fourth star
Zach Lee would be the number 1 QB in the nation (Which he possibly is) and pushing for a fifth star in the top 50.
Hunter would be a rivals 100 guy (which he should be)
Sorry for rambling, that was just my rant about our players who are underrated.
I can't think of any player for Bama that I have looked at and said, "man, he's underrated".
That's the difference.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 1:41 am to TheHiddenFlask
The bias goes to high subscription areas...not just Bama bias. Louisiana is one of the smaller population states for such a big program...
They devote more resources to areas like Florida/Cali/Ohio/Texas...less of their studs fly under the radar. Kids committing early means less exposure from Rivals scouts and less exposure in major combines...combine that with LSU is probably not a big subscription area...and there you go.
It might be one reason Mike S is somehow still employed by Rivals.
They devote more resources to areas like Florida/Cali/Ohio/Texas...less of their studs fly under the radar. Kids committing early means less exposure from Rivals scouts and less exposure in major combines...combine that with LSU is probably not a big subscription area...and there you go.
It might be one reason Mike S is somehow still employed by Rivals.
This post was edited on 12/20/09 at 1:42 am
Posted on 12/20/09 at 1:54 am to deuce985
quote:
They devote more resources to areas like Florida/Cali/Ohio/Texas...less of their studs fly under the radar. Kids committing early means less exposure from Rivals scouts and less exposure in major combines...combine that with LSU is probably not a big subscription area...and there you go.
This is probably the best concise explanation of the situation I've seen in a while. It should be required reading for anyone who's new to the whole process and is trying to make sense of the ratings - the system is about as straightforward as Southern politics...
This post was edited on 12/20/09 at 1:57 am
Posted on 12/20/09 at 1:56 am to yurintroubl
I'm really lost..how do we know we lost Davis for sure?
Posted on 12/20/09 at 4:40 am to TxTyger13
quote:
I'm really lost..how do we know we lost Davis for sure?
Link to Mike Davis page on rivals
We don't know if we have lost him but considering the switch (and that it was Texas who offered him) it seems highly unlikely that he might be persuaded to come back.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 7:30 am to EricB
Don't worry the team that beat ALABAMA in the Sugar Bowl was ranked 55th in 2009 and are ranked 60th at this time. I don't think I would be worried too much.Don't seem like the ranking translated too well for Alabama. Besides recruiting isn't finished for 2010.Personally, I think the rating system is overrated in it's importance. Not alot separates the top 10 to 15 teams.
This post was edited on 12/20/09 at 7:36 am
Posted on 12/20/09 at 8:13 am to Roaad
3 star Hester worked out pretty well for us. Heck, look how many 4 and 5 stars who have not worked out. I'm happy with our class.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 10:16 am to TenTex
quote:
3 star Hester worked out pretty well for us. Heck, look how many 4 and 5 stars who have not worked out. I'm happy with our class.
He was a 2 star and I hate you for that.
Hester was a national recruit.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 10:18 am to deuce985
quote:
The bias goes to high subscription areas...not just Bama bias. Louisiana is one of the smaller population states for such a big program...
They devote more resources to areas like Florida/Cali/Ohio/Texas...less of their studs fly under the radar. Kids committing early means less exposure from Rivals scouts and less exposure in major combines...combine that with LSU is probably not a big subscription area...and there you go.
This is very true. However, it doesn't explain why things like the Center controversy happens. Bama gets a special bump for some reason.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 10:52 am to TheHiddenFlask
IMO Rivals got it right in 2008 and 2009. Alabama's freshmen and sophmores are playing lights out on the field. Look at how many players from the 2008 class are contributing for us.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 11:06 am to ACL11190
quote:
Look at how many players from the 2008 class are contributing for us.
Lack of upperclassmen?
Posted on 12/20/09 at 11:07 am to TheHiddenFlask
quote:
That's the difference.
If it's Rivals you are referring to how do you explain the #2 ranking Alabama has on Scout? Is EVERY recruiting service biased towards Alabama now??
Posted on 12/20/09 at 11:15 am to TideSaint
quote:
If it's Rivals you are referring to how do you explain the #2 ranking Alabama has on Scout? Is EVERY recruiting service biased towards Alabama now??
This year yall have a very good class. Also, if you read the whole thread, I didn't say that they were giving garbage players great rankings for no reasons. They are good, but never go "under the radar" a la Mo Claiborne and they never get underrated.
P.S. yall are number 3 on scout right now, and by a pretty good margin.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 11:16 am to TheHiddenFlask
TBH i just think it's because they are that good.
Mark Ingram
Mark Barron
Julio Jones
Marcell Dareus
Barrett Jones
Courtney Upshaw
Jerrell Harris
Chris Jordan
All of these guys contribute alot and i thinks it's just because they're better than alot of the upperclassmen.
Mark Ingram
Mark Barron
Julio Jones
Marcell Dareus
Barrett Jones
Courtney Upshaw
Jerrell Harris
Chris Jordan
All of these guys contribute alot and i thinks it's just because they're better than alot of the upperclassmen.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 11:17 am to ACL11190
quote:doesn't hurt that they had no talented upperclassmen to compete with them.
All of these guys contribute alot and i thinks it's just because they're better than alot of the upperclassmen.
That is what Flask is saying. Young guys starting at Bama do so out of necessity. . .well, not so much anymore. You guys are getting deeper, so you'll see the recruiting classes taper off when the "playing time" pitch gets removed.
This post was edited on 12/20/09 at 11:19 am
Posted on 12/20/09 at 11:18 am to TheHiddenFlask
quote:
They are good, but never go "under the radar" a la Mo Claiborne and they never get underrated.
Marcell Dareus - 3 star
Terrance Cody - 3 star
Mark Ingram - Low 4 star
Posted on 12/20/09 at 12:59 pm to TheHiddenFlask
quote:
Mo Claiborne and they never get underrated.
This is where i dont think they are being biased, they just are not really looking at some of these kids. I couldnt believe mos ability on the field and listed as a 3 star. He also received some pt when we had 22 srs.
Posted on 12/20/09 at 1:31 pm to ACL11190
quote:
Marcell Dareus - 3 star
Terrance Cody - 3 star
Mark Ingram - Low 4 star
Of course Hindsight is 20/20
None of those guys were elite prospects. They worked out, but no one was saying, man that kid from Michigan that everyone passed on should really be a 6.0 4 star or that really out of shape JUCO kid is gonna be something special.
Offers:
Cody- Bama, AU, Ole Miss, USF, So. Miss., Tennessee
# Ht:6'5"
# Wt:395 lbs
# 40:5.5 secs
Ingram- Bama, Az. State, Michigan State, Iowa, Tenn, Washington, Wisconsin
BTW: I didn't know "low 4 star" was equivalent to 189 in the national rankings.
Dareus- Bama, Arky, AU, UNC, Oregon, Tenn
I don't exactly consider him to be a star.
If you want to play the hindsight game:
Jacob Hester - 2 star - LSU, Miami, Oklahoma, Texas, Oregon
Kirston Pittman - 3 star - LSU, UF, FSU, Michigan, Miami, Texas (first round draft pick)
Kelvin Sheppard - 3 star - LSU, UF, UGA, Maryland, Tenn, VT
Brandon Lafell - 3 star - 2,430 total recieving yards
Trust me, you won't win this battle.
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News