"and Jim Harbaugh is gonna pay for it"
- Thread starter ngrant
- Start date
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post...st-position-group-rutgers-new-jersey-strategy
Links are appreciated:
"Brian Bennett: Great, more hashtags and sayings. At least nobody has talked about chopping wood in a while.
Anyway, the dream for Rutgers is obviously to keep all of the major in-state talent home and build a powerhouse that way. But I don't think that's realistic. A big reason the Big Ten wanted Rutgers is to open up the New Jersey recruiting area, and several league teams have historically found success there. Michigan is killing it in the Garden State, getting Rashan Gary and Jabrill Peppers out of there, and Jim Harbaugh giving the commencement speech at powerhouse Paramus Catholic High School is a sign of the Wolverines' intentions to remain major players there. Penn State has always had a pipeline in New Jersey, and Wisconsin and Nebraska have gotten good players from there as well. Urban Meyer can recruit anywhere.
So it's fantasy for Rutgers fans to believe that Ash, who came in with no real connections to the state, is suddenly going to build a wall around New Jersey ("and Jim Harbaugh's gonna pay for it!"). What he and his staff need to do is try to get a few blue-chippers every year and then do an outstanding job evaluating the two- and three-star players in the state. From there it's about development and coaching. No matter what catchy hashtag you devise."
------
Whatever, dude.
Bennet hates Rutgers, always has, always will.
What's to like about what he wrote?
What's to like about what he wrote?
Did he write that before or after two top ten NJ players pledged their commitments to Rutgers?
Does it matter. What did he say that was inaccurate? It is unrealistic to think that Rutgers is going to keep all NJ talent home in the foreseeable future. Other Big Ten schools (and non-B1G schools) will continue to recruit NJ, and some will have success. The challenge for Rutgers in NJ is to get some of the blue-chippers (since all is not realistic) and do a better job than anyone else in identifying under-recruited talent who have upside potential and can be developed.
I don't think anyone at ESPiN ever take the time to review facts, history, or truth. It's all about perception. PSU is about to get locked out for the 2nd year in a row for multiple top NJ players. UM focused on NJ last year and no so much this year. Part of that is tied to certain member on the UM staff. As each year pass the connection to NJ is less.
Rutgers will not keep all the instate talent. Rarely does any state university keep all, or the best of the state's talent. Just look at the recruiting of other states -- Va., NC., even Ohio. But if RU gives guys a credible option, they'll keep a good share, and that's all they need to do to be competitive. And ESPN can kiss my ass.
Last edited:
I don't think anyone has ever expected to keep *all* the major in-state talent home. No school does that.
- Florida had four 5-star players this year... no Florida school managed to get any of them. Of the 11 players rivals rated 6.0 or better, just 4 stayed in state.
- California had six 5-star players this year... four stayed in state, no more than 2 to any one school. Of the 13 players rated 6.0 or better, 8 stayed in state (and no one school got more than 4).
- Texas had three 5-star players... two stayed in state, and only one to a P5 school. Of the 8 players rated 6.0 or better, 5 stayed in state (and no one school got more than 3).
Overall there were 33 5-star players this year... but just 13 stayed in state for college.
***
What we need to do is get a *decent percentage* of the major in-state talent. If we can get 5-6 of the Top 10 and 12-13 of the Top 20 players in NJ each year, we'd be in great shape (especially if we could get one or more of the Top 3 each year). Add in 1-2 of the Top 10 in PA, NY, and MD... and we'd consistently be ranked in the Top 20 in recruiting classes each year.
It's not about getting *all* of them... it's about consistently getting classes at least as good as 2012. In NJ, we picked up 4 of the Top 10 (including #1), and 9 of the Top 20 (and one more Top 10 guy if you count Pollard transferring in later). In PA, we got 2 of the Top 10 (including #3), and 4 of the Top 20, and in MD we got 1 of the Top 10.
- Florida had four 5-star players this year... no Florida school managed to get any of them. Of the 11 players rivals rated 6.0 or better, just 4 stayed in state.
- California had six 5-star players this year... four stayed in state, no more than 2 to any one school. Of the 13 players rated 6.0 or better, 8 stayed in state (and no one school got more than 4).
- Texas had three 5-star players... two stayed in state, and only one to a P5 school. Of the 8 players rated 6.0 or better, 5 stayed in state (and no one school got more than 3).
Overall there were 33 5-star players this year... but just 13 stayed in state for college.
***
What we need to do is get a *decent percentage* of the major in-state talent. If we can get 5-6 of the Top 10 and 12-13 of the Top 20 players in NJ each year, we'd be in great shape (especially if we could get one or more of the Top 3 each year). Add in 1-2 of the Top 10 in PA, NY, and MD... and we'd consistently be ranked in the Top 20 in recruiting classes each year.
It's not about getting *all* of them... it's about consistently getting classes at least as good as 2012. In NJ, we picked up 4 of the Top 10 (including #1), and 9 of the Top 20 (and one more Top 10 guy if you count Pollard transferring in later). In PA, we got 2 of the Top 10 (including #3), and 4 of the Top 20, and in MD we got 1 of the Top 10.
This "the B1G invited Rutgers so they could recruit N.J." narrative is complete nonsense. The B1G HAS been sucking players out of N.J. for years. Just look at the rosters of Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, etc. over the past 20 years.
If anything, now that Rutgers is on a par with those teams (at least, in terms of schedule, T.V. exposure, being in the same league, etc.) many B1G teams will find it more difficult to lure players away from Rutgers now. And no school ever keeps ALL for their top in-state talent home.
The B1G invited Rutgers to get the +/- 15 million highly desirable market-segment T.V viewers that Rutgers attracts or will attract especially if Rutgers becomes a perennial top 25 team. Period.
If anything, now that Rutgers is on a par with those teams (at least, in terms of schedule, T.V. exposure, being in the same league, etc.) many B1G teams will find it more difficult to lure players away from Rutgers now. And no school ever keeps ALL for their top in-state talent home.
The B1G invited Rutgers to get the +/- 15 million highly desirable market-segment T.V viewers that Rutgers attracts or will attract especially if Rutgers becomes a perennial top 25 team. Period.
Last edited:
Unfortunately, the perception has matched reality. It has been a long time since we have mattered to top NJ kids. That MAY be changing, but until it does, the perception that we won't keep top players in-state is going to persist. Melton and Clark are a great start for the Class of 2017, but so far they are the exceptions to the rule that top kids leave the state.
The exciting thing is that Rutgers generally is going to be the only place where they can play with guys they grew up with. If they have confidence in Ash and this program, they can get just about everything they can get elsewhere here at Rutgers, with the added benefit of playing with their buddies. Let's be honest...Michigan and Ohio State (and even Penn State) are going to always have a larger stadium and fan base, but at the end of the day, 95% of their time is in meeting rooms, weight rooms, academic buildings, etc...where all the other stuff doesn't matter. Being able to do so with your friends is a great benefit.
I suppose for the odd recruit here and there, getting to play in front of friends and family 1-2 times over their college career might provide an edge for a school like Ohio State or Michigan over Notre Dame or an SEC/ACC school. Can't imagine that'd be that frequent, though.
If RU can get 4 out of the Top 10 and 9 out the Top 20 NJ recruits each year they will be doing about as well as these other top recruiting schools. Add a couple out of Eastern Pennsylvania each year, which has been happening, along with an occasional Florida recruit and prospects throughout B1G territory and they'll be just fine.
In 2011 and 2012 - we pretty much had our pick of New Jersey's best. Even in 2013, we would have landed many of Jersey's best if Flood was not the coach. Are we going to get them all? Of course not. But this idea that we can't dominate our own state is a very big pet peeve of mine. It's an urban legend that is promoted, even by the Rutgers faithful. Melton and Clark ARE NOT EXCEPTIONS.
For perspective, in terms of where we are with 2017 recruiting. Let's compare this year's to last year's.
So far - we have commits from top tier guys - Melton and Clark. Some services have Clark numero uno in NJ. Compared to last year, that is like getting Amir Mitchel and Will Fries on board - in April!!! By the way, Melton junior stats are 1700 total yds w/ 27 TDs. That is better than Amir's 1400/22TDs. So, don't even bring up that Amir is a four star while Melton is only three. And yes, Clark is much better than WIll Fries.
Now in terms of who we have very realistic or even great chance of landing - for 2017 - it would be Lewis, Hansard, Perry, Bell, Hand, Warren, Lovett. Again, for comparison to 2016, that would have been like having a realistic or great shot at Guarantano, Walker, Johnson, Chambers, Fuller and Hawkins - yes, the Michigan commits minus Gary.
Mind you, this is all happening and Ash hasn't even won a single game yet. Imagine when he starts to beat Harbough, Franklin, et al, on the field?! You don't think that recruiting wall will built around New Jersey? You better believe it. Sky would be the limit.
So, guys like Bennett can poke fun all he wants. Rutgers recruiting dominance of this area is not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. And that "when" may have already started.
Getting as many of our kids as out-of-state schools are getting isn't really doing as well as they are, is it?
Do you think it is realistic in the near-term to consistently get 60% of the Top 10 and 60-70% of the Top 20?
Depends on which out of state school you are talking about. Besides Pennsylvania and Ohio the other Big Ten states aren't exactly swimming with talent. Throw Maryland in to that group if you want as well.
Ash will only have one chance to beat Franklin, so he better get it done.
The other B1G coaches are taking recruits. They're speaking at commencements. They're sleeping at recruits' homes. Some of them, I assume, are good people.
247 has another prediction of Bell to Rutgers which is 7 writers since the spring game vs 1 vote for Michigan. Hansard has Rutgers leading by 43% with another vote for Rutgers today. I think we get at least one of them which will be 3 out of the top 10 NJ players, way better than Schiano. Flood got only 1 Top 10 NJ recruit in 4 years, shows how bad Flood was in recruiting. If we don't show garbage on the field this year, we can continue the recruiting effort next year and I feel Rutgers will get very competitive in the near future.
That's all the out-of-state schools combined. No single OOS program gets that many Jersey kids. And that's basically about as well as Ohio State does in Ohio.
I'm a Schiano supporter but Ash appears to be doing a great job so far. The recruits still remember when Rutgers would win 9 wins a season and didn't allow Flood to ruin their memory of Rutgers football.
" Keep all the NJ Talent Home " ? Under Fudd RU was non existent is getting Top 10 NJ Talent.
With the most recent Signing Class , we were Zero for 40 over the last 4 Recruiting Top 10 NJ classes.
An absolute embarrassment . Ash will do 100 times better. Getting 3 or 4 each year will make a difference.
Not sure how to answer this... how do "near term" (in the next couple of years) and "consistently" (spread out over several years) go together? Do you mean just in 2017-2019?
I think that level of recruiting is the ultimate goal for Rutgers, the "ideal state" where the "sleeping giant" has been awakened - not "all" major talent in NJ, but "half or better" of the major talent in NJ (with a smaller handful of Top 10-20 guys from neighboring states). If we can do that consistently (say, 2 out of every 3 years), we'll be a perennial Top 20 program and sit in the upper half of the Big Ten pack.
If we ever got *all* of the major talent in NJ (every one of the Top 10, every year), we'd be a perennial Top 10 program competing for the Big Ten championship and national playoffs. But *nobody* gets all the top talent in any state.
Not so fast. Big difference between getting "All" ( which No Program ever, ever gets) and getting your Fair Share of your In state talent ( RU is getting Zero thru '16)
Look at the recent 2016 Recruiting Top 10 in state players at B1G programs:
OSU- 4 top 10 Ohio players
Michigan / MSU- 6 top Michigan Players
State Penn - 3 top Pennsylvania Players
RU - Zero NJ Top 10 players
To make matters worse, Michigan comes in and grabs 5 of the Top 10 NJ recruits in their 2016 Signing Class.
It's really sad to see how far back the RU program has been set under HC Flood. The talent gap is a real concern.
Ash will get it turned around and is showing that already with 2017 recruiting .
This year and next year will be real tuff for us the B1G ...but we will see improvement and RU rising in 2018 IMO.
I really like the job Schiano did for us but the 2012 class was the only one really worth bragging about. The 2011 class was highly rated and produced some great players (Croft, Lumpkin, etc.) but it also had a lot of busts and kids who never even saw the field so while it looked good on paper it was only above average in reality.
I'm thinking:
3 to 5 (1 through 10)
4 to 6 (11 through 20)
4 to 6 (21 through 30)
....so 11 to 17 of the Top 30 each season as a realistic "goal" for now.
Reasonable. I'd also add in an additional 1 to 3 guys from the Top 10 of NY, PA, MD, and DE. (Like Muller, Denman, Coleman
After NJ, Eastern Pennsylvania and NYC should be prime recruiting areas. And never ignore Florida.
Let's define near-term as the next 8 years. Beyond 8 years is just a wild guess based on too many unknown factors.
I think within an 8-year horizon, it is unrealistic to expect Rutgers to average 50% or better of the Top-10 guys in NJ (or even the Top-20). We may hit that on occasional years, but certainly not every year over the next 8 years.
Even the most optimistic scenarios would have 4 guys going to some of the other 13 B1G schools and 2 going to an ACC or SEC school. That leaves 4 of the top-10 guys for Rutgers, and that would be great. If we get 5 occasionally, that is fantastic. To expect to regularly get more than half is unrealistic in my mind.
That doesn't mean it is OK to get zero. It means we have to get some. Certainly Brian Bennett's comment is reasonable that Rutgers needs to get a few blue chippers and develop under-recruited guys with potential.
Your exactly right with this statement. The flood gates were already open and have been open for a long time to these schools already. It just sounds good to the media to say they brought in NJ for recruiting purposes. And want us to believe that's all we're good for in the conference. media> :chairshot:<RU
What I think the B1G wanted rather was more exposure in this area when it comes to recruiting. They wanted to keep that talent in the B1G rather then have it go to other conferences. I think we're seeing this effect already as the Fitzpatrick's to Alabama are not so prevalent now. Now your seeing OSU, Michigan, Michigan St. and eventually Rutgers(starting to see it now). Kids are seeing big time football right here and if they don't come here the majority are now staying in conference.
Sure, I'd buy that. I think my definition of "consistently" is maybe 2 out of every 3 years, or even 3 out of every 5 years, rather than every year. But the target should be half or better of the top guys in NJ - I think Nuts numbers looked pretty good.
While it would be difficult to do, can't we find talent in Michigan and Ohio that has been disrespected by UM and OSU when they go offer NJ recruits over them?
Ohio yes tons of talent there. Michigan I don't know why but there never seems to be much talent there. Even Michigan/Michigan St. don't take much instate talent. They seem to win with other states prospects. Maybe they're all playing hockey or basketball.
I noticed Pittsburgh, Penn State and Kentucky have been getting the second tier players out of Ohio State and Michigan.
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Sources: Marcus Freeman seeking Chris Ash, Mike Mickens to run Notre Dame defense- Latest: PiscatawayMike
-