This class gets us over the top

#1

tabrams

Supportin' the Cause
Joined
Jul 27, 2008
Messages
2,738
Likes
573
#1
Fills our needs, and is full of players who will almost all be on the 2-deep early In their careers...

There are some stars in this class too. The Kicker. The OL. The LB.

They got more players from LA and FL, talent rich states.

The coaches board doesn't follow star systems... so if we don't know their board then we really don't know how good they think they did.

Too many are worried here about stars even when those players leave... need to create a New before/ after system for rankings.
 
Likes: 27 people
#4

djohnnyg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2013
Messages
3,514
Likes
3,987
#4
The reason so many are rightly concerned with "stars" is because the teams that get the most are WINNING almost all of the time. Bama is the prime example...Ohio St. is another. It isn't the end all be all...but it is VERY important if we are serious about contending for the SEC...No less the NC.

Having the # 17th ranked class today...is not the worst..it's the 17th best. We need to do better...plain and simple.

That being said...if these signees were carefully selected as fits for a program with realistic SEC title hopes in mind...then all the best and prove us "star chasers" wrong.
 
Likes: 6 people
#5

ATLVols

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2012
Messages
2,481
Likes
2,438
#5
Today the class seems disappointing. I do think we did well to fill holes at running back, offensive line, kicker, and linebacker. Those were big needs. The rest are filled with guys who will offer depth at the very least. I wish we had more guys that could step right in and make a big difference though.
 
#6

Ethan Hooper

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
3,120
Likes
1,463
#6
I'm happy with this class. There are definitely players that I wished we could have landed, but it's a solid class. We addressed all of our needs. There aren't many instant impact players, but most of these kids have really high ceilings and just need time to develop.
 
Likes: 13 people
#7

Hacksaw

BELIEVE THE HEUP!
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
4,403
Likes
10,359
#7
Fills our needs, and is full of players who will almost all be on the 2-deep early In their careers...

There are some stars in this class too. The Kicker. The OL. The LB.

They got more players from LA and FL, talent rich states.

The coaches board doesn't follow star systems... so if we don't know their board then we really don't know how good they think they did.

Too many are worried here about stars even when those players leave... need to create a New before/ after system for rankings.
Agreed. Good post.
 
Likes: 2 people
#8

tfaircloth08

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
263
Likes
162
#8
The reason so many are rightly concerned with "stars" is because the teams that get the most are WINNING almost all of the time. Bama is the prime example...Ohio St. is another. It isn't the end all be all...but it is VERY important if we are serious about contending for the SEC...No less the NC.

Having the # 17th ranked class today...is not the worst..it's the 17th best. We need to do better...plain and simple.

That being said...if these signees were carefully selected as fits for a program with realistic SEC title hopes in mind...then all the best and prove us "star chasers" wrong.
Fwiw, Clemson, you know the team who has played in 2 straight national championship games and won the most recent one, finished with their class ranking at 16. Doesn't make 17 seem as bad
 
#9

amazingGRACE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
9,172
Likes
7,143
#9
Fwiw, Clemson, you know the team who has played in 2 straight national championship games and won the most recent one, finished with their class ranking at 16. Doesn't make 17 seem as bad
Yeah but that's an absolutely terrible comparison. We literally doubled their class size & their average player rating is 92
 

Attachments

Likes: 16 people
#14

MiramarVol

Sanctified Vol
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
11,040
Likes
8,517
#14
The marque players of this class were Trey Smith, Chandler, Murphy, Ignont, Crosby, and Gray. An Honorable Mention to Page, Reid, Bailey, and LaBruzza.

I feel without Smith, Chandler, Crosby and Ignont, we would have a very disappointing class. All of those are our most glaring need as far as positional fills goes.

Page and Reid will contribute early because they are some headhunters. We'll see them on ST and soon.

Our CB play will improve and this class of Sham, LaBruzza, and Bailey will be vying for time with Buchanan and Osborne. I see Coach Warren getting these guys in the right position to make plays.
 
Likes: 3 people
#15

rekinhavoc

Respect the Hemi! No Interviews.
Joined
Aug 22, 2007
Messages
11,343
Likes
21,278
#15
I would go with the coaches on talent evaluations. The organizations that rate players admit they can't see them all and mainly concentrate on highly publicized recruits. I have also seen them admit this and that they slap a 3* on recruits they have never seen or watched any film on by their offer list. Our coaches go more in depth than that.
 
Likes: 3 people
#18

ScottishVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2016
Messages
729
Likes
1,193
#18
The marque players of this class were Trey Smith, Chandler, Murphy, Ignont, Crosby, and Gray. An Honorable Mention to Page, Reid, Bailey, and LaBruzza.

I feel without Smith, Chandler, Crosby and Ignont, we would have a very disappointing class. All of those are our most glaring need as far as positional fills goes.

Page and Reid will contribute early because they are some headhunters. We'll see them on ST and soon.

Our CB play will improve and this class of Sham, LaBruzza, and Bailey will be vying for time with Buchanan and Osborne. I see Coach Warren getting these guys in the right position to make plays.
I agree with all you say, and I would like to add Butler to your mix.
 
#19

chavisut

@insidetweeter
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
44,325
Likes
11,511
#19
Having a class of 14 is really bad management, even if that was their aim, and could come back to bite them in a few years.
Why? Maybe their developing and have much less attrition. Why just take a bunch of low tier recruits and force out players being developed?

They landed top flight talent.
 
Last edited:
Likes: 2 people
#20

secking

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
7,193
Likes
11,160
#20
Having a class of 14 is really bad management, even if that was their aim, and could come back to bite them in a few years.
How is that? They only had 14 scholarships to give, literally most (71) of their players return. They will be at 85 just like everyone else, exactly how will that bite them?

They also signed 14 studs, no fillers in their class. They will have another small class this year as not many seniors again. If anything, that is good news for everybody else because most teams get a recruiting bump after winning a championship.
 
Likes: 1 person
#21

InVOLuntary

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2012
Messages
50,503
Likes
86,944
#21
I get what Kristy* is selling. Class imbalance hurts you. One year all your talent is experienced and the next year, while it may be good talent it is inexperienced. I think this is especially true if you have a lot of great talent. Then you may have a huge number leave because of expired eligibility and a lot of juniors leaving. This could make your next year highly dependent on underclassmen.
 
Likes: 2 people
#22

Kristy*

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2015
Messages
5,345
Likes
13,869
#22
2 small classes in a row is REALLY bad management. So, in 4 years, they will be extremely freshman and sophomore heavy and could be well below the 85-man limit. Their heavy classes they will have to take to refill can't sustain the same "level" of recruits. And it will be much harder to maintain their success. A good program should be able to recruit 20 a year at least.
 
#23

chavisut

@insidetweeter
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
44,325
Likes
11,511
#23
2 small classes in a row is REALLY bad management. So, in 4 years, they will be extremely freshman and sophomore heavy and could be well below the 85-man limit. Their heavy classes they will have to take to refill can't sustain the same "level" of recruits. And it will be much harder to maintain their success. A good program should be able to recruit 20 a year at least.
22 isn't a small class.

Clemson seems to hit evaluations pretty well.

Large class can't sustain the talent level? Like this class?

Should they take a bunch of filler that will wash out and need to be replaced again by more filler in proceeding classes?
 
Last edited:
Likes: 2 people
#24

CrunchingTheVolz

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2016
Messages
4,999
Likes
2,723
#24
When you don't force players out and actually develop the talent you will sign smaller classes. You will also have more JRs and SRs which more years in the program leads to better players. When you are not very good at evaluations you better sign about 30 a year.

Only reason to be signing huge classes all the time is if your talent is leaving early to the NFL. See places like Bama.

"If I sign maybe 46 I might luck out and get a few ball players".

Signed
Butch.
 
Likes: 3 people
#25

volboy81

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Messages
4,259
Likes
1,329
#25
I think we did good. Stars can sometime be overrated & filling needs is just as, or more important than ✨ a lot of times. Hope this Jennings thing isn't too bad...
 

VN Store




Top