And the lamest argument of all-time is....

#1
A

andy112382

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
151
Likes
14
#1
The recruiting star count argument.

It makes me laugh everytime I see someone pull that out in a debate about football...'oh we need coaches because their recruits aren't enough stars for me!'

I could go all day with examples of why this argument, at best, has a stump of a leg MAYBE at best to stand on, but you could make a nice roster or two of well documented lowly ranked recruits that are quite good. You can also look at teams like Boise St who never ranks over 70th best class but still looks pretty darn good against 'higher recruiting' teams or heck, South Carolina who knocked off Bama, a team full of 5-star recruits. Or if you went just star count, shouldnt the Florida/Bama game be a deadlock since both have plenty of 4 and 5 star guys?

Anywho, if you would actually follow recruiting closely other than glance at the list, you would know several of the three star guys are quite good (Worley tops that, saw him in person two weeks ago and I can certainly confirm this) and we are in the running for several top guys like the #2 WR in the nation on scout.com, on his short list per the insiders at scout.com.......

Dooley clearly stated how he was going to build this, team back starting with getting guys who are tough, gritty players who will bleed orange, may not be the biggest and fastest in the sport but cant be beat when it comes to heart and toughness (which can win games) then finish the class with those playmakers, game changing players that fully compliment the supporting cast doing the 'dirty work' grinding it out......look at his class and who is left on our board and his recruiting matches this perfectly.

(Just to note, a close second place for dumbest argument I have seen is the 'fire Dooley' posts, not as many but incredibly idiotic, too stupid to even respond to....4 coaches in 4 years, seriously want that?)
 
#2
#2
How many of the last 10 national championship teams have not had at least 1 #1 ranked class?
 
#3
#3
andy112382 said:
The recruiting star count argument.

It makes me laugh everytime I see someone pull that out in a debate about football...'oh we need coaches because their recruits aren't enough stars for me!'

I could go all day with examples of why this argument, at best, has a stump of a leg MAYBE at best to stand on, but you could make a nice roster or two of well documented lowly ranked recruits that are quite good. You can also look at teams like Boise St who never ranks over 70th best class but still looks pretty darn good against 'higher recruiting' teams or heck, South Carolina who knocked off Bama, a team full of 5-star recruits. Or if you went just star count, shouldnt the Florida/Bama game be a deadlock since both have plenty of 4 and 5 star guys?

Anywho, if you would actually follow recruiting closely other than glance at the list, you would know several of the three star guys are quite good (Worley tops that, saw him in person two weeks ago and I can certainly confirm this) and we are in the running for several top guys like the #2 WR in the nation on scout.com, on his short list per the insiders at scout.com.......

Dooley clearly stated how he was going to build this, team back starting with getting guys who are tough, gritty players who will bleed orange, may not be the biggest and fastest in the sport but cant be beat when it comes to heart and toughness (which can win games) then finish the class with those playmakers, game changing players that fully compliment the supporting cast doing the 'dirty work' grinding it out......look at his class and who is left on our board and his recruiting matches this perfectly.

(Just to note, a close second place for dumbest argument I have seen is the 'fire Dooley' posts, not as many but incredibly idiotic, too stupid to even respond to....4 coaches in 4 years, seriously want that?)
Click to expand...

Look at the national champions over the last 10 years. All of them, except maybe the 2002 OSU team, were loaded. It's pretty much the same with SEC champions.
 
#4
#4
FWIW, Scout had us ranked as the #1 class in 2005.. Rivals had us at #4.. Just saying..

Here is the Scout.com list from 2002-2010.

2002:

1. Texas
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. Miami (Fl)
5. Tennessee
6. Florida State
7. UCLA
8. Texas A&M
9. Georgia
10. Virginia

2003:

1.USC
2.LSU
3.Oklahoma
4.Florida
5.Notre Dame
6.Miami (Fl)
7.Tennessee
8.Michigan
t9.North Carolina State
t9.Texas A&M

2004:

1.USC
2.LSU
3.Miami (Fl)
4.Florida State
5.Michigan
6.Georgia
7.Oklahoma
8.Florida
9.Tennessee
10.Texas

2005:

1.Tennessee
2.Michigan
3.Florida State
4.Georgia
5.Oklahoma
6.USC
7.Ohio State
8.Iowa
9.California
10.Nebraska

2006:

1.USC
2.Florida
3.Texas
4.Georgia
5.Notre Dame
6.Penn State
t7.LSU
t7.Oklahoma
t9.Auburn
t9.Michigan

2007:

1.Florida
2.USC
3.Texas
5.LSU
6.Auburn
7.South Carolina
8.Pittsburgh
9.Oregon
10.Michigan

2008:

1.Alabama
2.Notre Dame
3.Miami (Fl)
4.Ohio State
5.Georgia
6.Michigan
7.LSU
8.Florida State
9.USC
10.UCLA

2009:

1.Ohio State
2.Alabama
3.LSU
4.Georgia
5.UCLA
6.North Carolina
7.Texas
8.Tennessee
9.USC
10.Oklahoma

2010:

1.Florida
2.Oklahoma
3.Texas
4.Alabama
5.USC
6.Auburn
7.LSU
8.UCLA
9.Florida State
10.Penn State

If you want to count the stars I can give you that too..
 
Last edited:
#5
#5
i agree that the star system sholdn't be something that you put all of your stock into, but it still definitely counts for something. go back and look how many great players in college recently were 4 and/or 5 star recruits.
 
#6
#6
duckman398686 said:
i agree that the star system sholdn't be something that you put all of your stock into, but it still definitely counts for something. go back and look how many great players in college recently were 4 and/or 5 star recruits.
Click to expand...

Sam Bradford! Randall Cobb!! Nick Reveiz!!!
 
#9
#9
Come on guys, do a little more than reply 'but the #1 class has meant national titles....'

First, we have had a #1 ranked class or two and it meant squat.

Second, who from those classes were the difference makers? Two star? Three star? Four? Five?

Here, let me give you some names to back what I am saying:

Name........(Stars)

Mark Ingram (3)
LaMichael James (2)
Greg McElroy (3)
Pat White (2)
Joe Flacco (3)
Kevin Kolb (3)
TJ Yates (3)
Chase Daniel (3)
Patrick Willis (2)
Peria Jerry (2)
Channing Crowder (3)
Brandon James (2)
Derrick Locke (0/NR)
Randall Cobb (2)
Justin Harrell (3)
Tony McDaniel (3)
Tauren Poole (3)
Arian Foster (3) ....see the NFL stats/2010
Jerod Mayo (3)


The are more than enough to keep going, but you get the picture......man our class would have sucked big time if we had a class with THOSE losers....stupid 2 and 3 stars guys.....

And before some says it, I am not saying 4 and 5 star guys aren't needed, but it they are just as likely to be flops and these guys are to be huge suprises....in other words, star system can be ripped apart or held together with plenty of names as evidence, which means we dont know who of our 3, 4, 5 star guys will do what until a few years from now, so when using it as an argument on why you dont like our coaches right now, it is incredibly lame.
 
#10
#10
Alabama and Florida land top 5 recruiting classes they convert to top 10 football teams.
 
Last edited:
#11
#11
webleedorange said:
Here is the Scout.com list from 2002-2010.

2002:

1. Texas
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. Miami (Fl)
5. Tennessee
6. Florida State
7. UCLA
8. Texas A&M
9. Georgia
10. Virginia

2003:

1.USC
2.LSU
3.Oklahoma
4.Florida
5.Notre Dame
6.Miami (Fl)
7.Tennessee
8.Michigan
t9.North Carolina State
t9.Texas A&M

2004:

1.USC
2.LSU
3.Miami (Fl)
4.Florida State
5.Michigan
6.Georgia
7.Oklahoma
8.Florida
9.Tennessee
10.Texas

2005:

1.Tennessee
2.Michigan
3.Florida State
4.Georgia
5.Oklahoma
6.USC
7.Ohio State
8.Iowa
9.California
10.Nebraska

2006:

1.USC
2.Florida
3.Texas
4.Georgia
5.Notre Dame
6.Penn State
t7.LSU
t7.Oklahoma
t9.Auburn
t9.Michigan

2007:

1.Florida
2.USC
3.Texas
5.LSU
6.Auburn
7.South Carolina
8.Pittsburgh
9.Oregon
10.Michigan

2008:

1.Alabama
2.Notre Dame
3.Miami (Fl)
4.Ohio State
5.Georgia
6.Michigan
7.LSU
8.Florida State
9.USC
10.UCLA

2009:

1.Ohio State
2.Alabama
3.LSU
4.Georgia
5.UCLA
6.North Carolina
7.Texas
8.Tennessee
9.USC
10.Oklahoma

2010:

1.Florida
2.Oklahoma
3.Texas
4.Alabama
5.USC
6.Auburn
7.LSU
8.UCLA
9.Florida State
10.Penn State

If you want to count the stars I can give you that too..
Click to expand...

That's a pretty good testament to why we are where we are. The '05 class busted, and '06-08 weren't up to snuff.

Just for the sake of argument, it looked like '09 was back on the right track, at least until all of the defections. I show '10 at #9 on Rivals, another solid class. Where will '11 be?
 
#14
#14
No doubt everyone has potential, they just have to be developed. The question is can our current staff do that?
 
#15
#15
webleedorange said:
2002:

7. UCLA
8. Texas A&M
10. Virginia

2003:

8.Michigan
t9.North Carolina State
t9.Texas A&M

2004:

3.Miami (Fl)
5.Michigan

2005:

2.Michigan
4.Georgia
9.California

2006:

4.Georgia
5.Notre Dame
6.Penn State
t9.Michigan

2007:

7.South Carolina
8.Pittsburgh
10.Michigan

2008:

2.Notre Dame
3.Miami (Fl)
5.Georgia
6.Michigan
10.UCLA
Click to expand...



I don't remember these classes leading to devasting teams.....

Look I could go to the same list and find you a chunk of teams that ended in the top 25 that had classes ranked below 30th, like I said, you can spin this argument any which way you please.
 
#17
#17
rmsmith said:
No doubt everyone has potential, they just have to be developed. The question is can our current staff do that?
Click to expand...

EXACTLY! Thank you, someone gets it.

And we will find out extremely soon about how our staff is at that, like over the next 2 years seeing how many freshmen are playing. A unique situation where we dont have much of the 'last coaches guys' to see pass through before we see what the current coaches guys can do, we will know soon enough. Just give them this season and going into next season we should see a big step between freshmen with 0% experience to sophmores with a ton of experience come that time and a depth chart being revived.
 
#19
#19
webleedorange said:
FWIW, Scout had us ranked as the #1 class in 2005.. Rivals had us at #4.. Just saying..

Here is the Scout.com list from 2002-2010.

2002:

1. Texas
2. Oklahoma
3. Ohio State
4. Miami (Fl)
5. Tennessee
6. Florida State
7. UCLA
8. Texas A&M
9. Georgia
10. Virginia

2003:

1.USC
2.LSU
3.Oklahoma
4.Florida
5.Notre Dame
6.Miami (Fl)
7.Tennessee
8.Michigan
t9.North Carolina State
t9.Texas A&M

2004:

1.USC
2.LSU
3.Miami (Fl)
4.Florida State
5.Michigan
6.Georgia
7.Oklahoma
8.Florida
9.Tennessee
10.Texas

2005:

1.Tennessee
2.Michigan
3.Florida State
4.Georgia
5.Oklahoma
6.USC
7.Ohio State
8.Iowa
9.California
10.Nebraska

2006:

1.USC
2.Florida
3.Texas
4.Georgia
5.Notre Dame
6.Penn State
t7.LSU
t7.Oklahoma
t9.Auburn
t9.Michigan

2007:

1.Florida
2.USC
3.Texas
5.LSU
6.Auburn
7.South Carolina
8.Pittsburgh
9.Oregon
10.Michigan

2008:

1.Alabama
2.Notre Dame
3.Miami (Fl)
4.Ohio State
5.Georgia
6.Michigan
7.LSU
8.Florida State
9.USC
10.UCLA

2009:

1.Ohio State
2.Alabama
3.LSU
4.Georgia
5.UCLA
6.North Carolina
7.Texas
8.Tennessee
9.USC
10.Oklahoma

2010:

1.Florida
2.Oklahoma
3.Texas
4.Alabama
5.USC
6.Auburn
7.LSU
8.UCLA
9.Florida State
10.Penn State

If you want to count the stars I can give you that too..
Click to expand...

Stars matter. The end
 
#20
#20
For you Rivals guys here you go.

2002:

#1 Texas
#2 Tennessee
#3 Georgia
#4 Florida State
#5 Ohio State
#6 Auburn
#7 Oklahoma
#8 Miami (FL)
#9 UCLA
#10 Colorado

2003:

#1 LSU
#2 Florida
#3 USC
#4 Oklahoma
#5 Miami (FL)
#6 Georgia
#7 North Carolina State
#8 South Carolina
#9 Mississippi State
#10 Texas A&M

2004:

#1 USC
#2 LSU
#3 Florida State
#4 Miami (FL)
#5 Michigan
#6 Georgia
#7 Florida
#8 Oklahoma
#9 Ohio State
#10 Texas

2005:

#1 USC
#2 Florida State
#3 Oklahoma
#4 Tennessee
#5 Nebraska
#6 Michigan
#7 Miami (FL)
#8 Texas A&M
#9 California
#10 Georgia

2006:

#1 USC
#2 Florida
#3 Florida State
#4 Georgia
#5 Texas
#6 Penn State
#7 LSU
#8 Notre Dame
#9 Oklahoma
#10 Auburn

2007:

#1 Florida
#2 USC
#3 Tennessee
#4 LSU
#5 Texas
#6 South Carolina
#7 Auburn
#8 Notre Dame
#9 Georgia
#10 Alabama

2008:

#1 Alabama
#2 Notre Dame
#3 Florida
#4 Ohio State
#5 Miami (FL)
#6 Oklahoma
#7 Georgia
#8 USC
#9 Florida State
#10 Michigan

2009:

#1 Alabama
#2 LSU
#3 Ohio State
#4 USC
#5 Texas
#6 Georgia
#7 Florida State
#8 Michigan
#9 North Carolina
#10 Tennessee

2010:

#1 USC
#2 Florida
#3 Texas
#4 Auburn
#5 Alabama
#6 LSU
#7 Oklahoma
#8 UCLA
#9Tennessee
#10 Florida State
 
#21
#21
webleedorange said:
For you Rivals guys here you go.

2002:

#1 Texas
#2 Tennessee
#3 Georgia
#4 Florida State
#5 Ohio State
#6 Auburn
#7 Oklahoma
#8 Miami (FL)
#9 UCLA
#10 Colorado

2003:

#1 LSU
#2 Florida
#3 USC
#4 Oklahoma
#5 Miami (FL)
#6 Georgia
#7 North Carolina State
#8 South Carolina
#9 Mississippi State
#10 Texas A&M

2004:

#1 USC
#2 LSU
#3 Florida State
#4 Miami (FL)
#5 Michigan
#6 Georgia
#7 Florida
#8 Oklahoma
#9 Ohio State
#10 Texas

2005:

#1 USC
#2 Florida State
#3 Oklahoma
#4 Tennessee
#5 Nebraska
#6 Michigan
#7 Miami (FL)
#8 Texas A&M
#9 California
#10 Georgia

2006:

#1 USC
#2 Florida
#3 Florida State
#4 Georgia
#5 Texas
#6 Penn State
#7 LSU
#8 Notre Dame
#9 Oklahoma
#10 Auburn

2007:

#1 Florida
#2 USC
#3 Tennessee
#4 LSU
#5 Texas
#6 South Carolina
#7 Auburn
#8 Notre Dame
#9 Georgia
#10 Alabama

2008:

#1 Alabama
#2 Notre Dame
#3 Florida
#4 Ohio State
#5 Miami (FL)
#6 Oklahoma
#7 Georgia
#8 USC
#9 Florida State
#10 Michigan

2009:

#1 Alabama
#2 LSU
#3 Ohio State
#4 USC
#5 Texas
#6 Georgia
#7 Florida State
#8 Michigan
#9 North Carolina
#10 Tennessee

2010:

#1 USC
#2 Florida
#3 Texas
#4 Auburn
#5 Alabama
#6 LSU
#7 Oklahoma
#8 UCLA
#9Tennessee
#10 Florida State
Click to expand...

Stars matter. The end
 
#25
#25
andy112382 said:
Come on guys, do a little more than reply 'but the #1 class has meant national titles....'

First, we have had a #1 ranked class or two and it meant squat.

Second, who from those classes were the difference makers? Two star? Three star? Four? Five?

Here, let me give you some names to back what I am saying:

Name........(Stars)

Mark Ingram (3)
LaMichael James (2)
Greg McElroy (3)
Pat White (2)
Joe Flacco (3)
Kevin Kolb (3)
TJ Yates (3)
Chase Daniel (3)
Patrick Willis (2)
Peria Jerry (2)
Channing Crowder (3)
Brandon James (2)
Derrick Locke (0/NR)
Randall Cobb (2)
Justin Harrell (3)
Tony McDaniel (3)
Tauren Poole (3)
Arian Foster (3) ....see the NFL stats/2010
Jerod Mayo (3)


The are more than enough to keep going, but you get the picture......man our class would have sucked big time if we had a class with THOSE losers....stupid 2 and 3 stars guys.....

And before some says it, I am not saying 4 and 5 star guys aren't needed, but it they are just as likely to be flops and these guys are to be huge suprises....in other words, star system can be ripped apart or held together with plenty of names as evidence, which means we dont know who of our 3, 4, 5 star guys will do what until a few years from now, so when using it as an argument on why you dont like our coaches right now, it is incredibly lame.
Click to expand...

That's because there are 1,402,242,123X more 2 and 3* players than 4/5*. Also, incredible argument about our top class that flopped. I guess that should mean that we just don't do that anymore. Incredible logic.

Stars matter. Bottom-line.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top