Anthony Russo ranked #2 at elite 11 heading into day 4
- Thread starter RRRRUUUU
- Start date
Plenty of Flood guys have played and contributed. More GS guys? Maybe. Given they are/were upper classman, does this really confound you that much?
I'm thinking we need to start at football basics with you.
Let me help out RUsmrtr a little bit:
con·found
kənˈfound/
verb
- 1.
cause surprise or confusion in (someone), especially by acting against their expectations.
"the inflation figure confounded economic analysts"
synonyms: amaze, astonish, dumbfound, stagger, surprise, startle, stun, throw, shake, discompose, bewilder, bedazzle, baffle, mystify, bemuse, perplex, puzzle, confuse; More
- 2.
mix up (something) with something else so that the individual elements become difficult to distinguish.
"'nuke' is now a cooking technique, as microwave radiation is confounded with nuclear radiation"
dated
- 1.
used to express anger or annoyance.
"oh, confound it, where is the thing?"
RUsmrtrthna5thgrdr admits to being a Flood hater, defends Penn St every chance he gets and insults people as well ( when pissed off after being criticized ) .
That sounds like someone with an agenda that will refuse to admit (Did u watch 2014?) RU's 8-5 season in 2014 was far better than most so called experts thought it would be and smarter only wants to focus on the bad part of season to prove his hate is right.
Guess smarter doesn't understand RU went into the B1G with a lot of improvements needed, especially depth and comparing Kyle to Greg is not the best way to show your football smarts.
Schiano was the man that brought RU FB to respectability, but never bring it ( in 11 years) to a major bowl game.
Kyle might not be the man to do that, but he hasn't had the time or support ( by the administration) to prove he can or can not .
As for recruiting Greg had some good years, but only had one 10+ win season and that season ended with losses to Cincinnati and WV in 2 of RU's last 3 conference games.
Sounds like smarter is just using what he can find that fits his agenda against Flood, but refuses to admit the whole story paints a better picture of Kyle Flood than he wants us to see.
From the concerned RU fan smarter was claiming he is, now the truth comes out that his only concern is getting rid of Flood because he is consumed with hatred of the mam that stops him from seeing anything good about RU FB because
of that blind hatred for Flood he has..
Smarter might not be a troll , but doesn't deserve to have his complaints taken seriously because of the way he looks at the RU FB program under a man he despises.
I don't think smarter was being sarcastic when he posted his feelings about Kyle Flood RU FB HC and his posts about RU FB
reflecta an agenda, more than caring ( in my opinion)
That sounds like someone with an agenda that will refuse to admit (Did u watch 2014?) RU's 8-5 season in 2014 was far better than most so called experts thought it would be and smarter only wants to focus on the bad part of season to prove his hate is right.
Guess smarter doesn't understand RU went into the B1G with a lot of improvements needed, especially depth and comparing Kyle to Greg is not the best way to show your football smarts.
Schiano was the man that brought RU FB to respectability, but never bring it ( in 11 years) to a major bowl game.
Kyle might not be the man to do that, but he hasn't had the time or support ( by the administration) to prove he can or can not .
As for recruiting Greg had some good years, but only had one 10+ win season and that season ended with losses to Cincinnati and WV in 2 of RU's last 3 conference games.
Sounds like smarter is just using what he can find that fits his agenda against Flood, but refuses to admit the whole story paints a better picture of Kyle Flood than he wants us to see.
From the concerned RU fan smarter was claiming he is, now the truth comes out that his only concern is getting rid of Flood because he is consumed with hatred of the mam that stops him from seeing anything good about RU FB because
of that blind hatred for Flood he has..
Smarter might not be a troll , but doesn't deserve to have his complaints taken seriously because of the way he looks at the RU FB program under a man he despises.
I don't think smarter was being sarcastic when he posted his feelings about Kyle Flood RU FB HC and his posts about RU FB
reflecta an agenda, more than caring ( in my opinion)
Everyone knew Guarantano was a great athlete. I mean he wasn't exactly lighting it up with his passing stats as a Junior last year. His hype is more on his potential both as an athlete and a strong arm. He would have been an awesome get. However, Russo has shown in this camp that he is every bit as good as the best QBs in the country and he should be counted among them. We all pretty much knew Russo isn't going to be killing anyone in the combine either. You don't need to be an elite athlete to be a pro style pocket passer. Whether he is a 3 star or 4 star is irrelevant at this point but I'm willing to bet he is rated a 4 star in at least one of the recruiting cycles before signing day.
By the way: Glad there's another thread about how Anthony is doing, even though I am a part of it, hate seeing this thread hijacked because of RUsmrtrthna5thgrdr's posts ( and posts about him) that made this thread move from Russo being the subject discussed, into a argument with RUsmrtrthna5thgrdr and discussing what we think about smarter while he tells off some of the posters he's arguing with .
Mad hat I really hope that in 2 years when flood is hopefully fired people might realize that I'm looking big picture... I know u don't like me and my opinions but im not gonna change my thoughts and u of all people know that I'm well informed when I talk, look I'm frustrated ok? I want us to win consistently and I'm sick of hearing how great 8-5 was when we got blown out in 4 of our 5 losses, it doesn't make sense to me! I'm not satisfied with the status quo and I want us to keep our best talent home! Is that too much to ask?
Tyler Donohuefrom Twitter1h
Helluva throw from #Rutgers QB commit @Anthony_Russo15. Helluva catch by #OhioStateWR commit@Austin_Mack10.
Video Link: vine.co/v/enlwZHmaKqr
Sanjay Kirpalanifrom Twitter1h
Anthony Russo has been a QB that has impressed me all week. Was lights out in his last drive!#TheOpening
Tom VanHaarenfrom Twitter1h
Ohio State TE Jake Hausmann with a TD catch, Austin Mack had a nice grab on the drive
Video Link: vine.co/v/enlHjJPZD7W
Helluva throw from #Rutgers QB commit @Anthony_Russo15. Helluva catch by #OhioStateWR commit@Austin_Mack10.
Video Link: vine.co/v/enlwZHmaKqr
Sanjay Kirpalanifrom Twitter1h
Anthony Russo has been a QB that has impressed me all week. Was lights out in his last drive!#TheOpening
Tom VanHaarenfrom Twitter1h
Ohio State TE Jake Hausmann with a TD catch, Austin Mack had a nice grab on the drive
Video Link: vine.co/v/enlHjJPZD7W
Scarlet and Grey, smh. [eyeroll] This is why people see you as a troll.
Look at 2014. Ok.
Rutgers finished 7-5 and was bowl eligible in our first season in the Big Ten, and went on to paste a P5 team in our bowl game. We finished with a better overall record and conference record than neighboring-state rival TTFP, though lost a close game to them at home. We finished 4th in the Big Ten East, one of the toughest divisions in college football. We won the Lambert Trophy for the first time. We exceeded all preseason prognostications and surprised analysts throughout the year.
Clearly the time to fire the coach. [eyeroll]
As for Flood's guys vs. Schiano's guys. 62% of the rushing yards last year were from players who committed in 2013 or later (Hicks, Martin, Grant, Goodwin, Laviano, Tsimis). 4 of our top 6 receivers were also Flood guys (Turzilli, Grant, Patton, Tsimis) and accounted for 38% of the receiving yards and 45% of the touchdowns. All of our kick returners were Flood guys (Grant, Hicks, Goodwin), as well as both punters. On defense, we saw significant contributions from Turay, Barnwell, Stephenson, and Cioffi.
Look at 2014. Ok.
Rutgers finished 7-5 and was bowl eligible in our first season in the Big Ten, and went on to paste a P5 team in our bowl game. We finished with a better overall record and conference record than neighboring-state rival TTFP, though lost a close game to them at home. We finished 4th in the Big Ten East, one of the toughest divisions in college football. We won the Lambert Trophy for the first time. We exceeded all preseason prognostications and surprised analysts throughout the year.
Clearly the time to fire the coach. [eyeroll]
As for Flood's guys vs. Schiano's guys. 62% of the rushing yards last year were from players who committed in 2013 or later (Hicks, Martin, Grant, Goodwin, Laviano, Tsimis). 4 of our top 6 receivers were also Flood guys (Turzilli, Grant, Patton, Tsimis) and accounted for 38% of the receiving yards and 45% of the touchdowns. All of our kick returners were Flood guys (Grant, Hicks, Goodwin), as well as both punters. On defense, we saw significant contributions from Turay, Barnwell, Stephenson, and Cioffi.
Hey RUChoppin, don't confuse the issue with facts! Don't let the facts that our competition has changed from AAC/Big East to Big 10 where we need bigger lineman. Don't let the fact that in the AAC/Big East days we played more spread teams and needed different type of players than in the Big 10. Don't let the fact that Flood seems to learn from his past mistakes and yes, we don't have any 4/5* recruits, he seems to be a doing a great job in generating interest, eye for talent and now recruiting the type of lineman needed to compete in the BIG. Don't let the fact that we don't have the facilities to showcase and compete with many in the BIG. Oh, yea, fire Flood, he su**ks, he only went 8-5 his 1st year, didn't get us into the Rose Bowl, he's the worst!
Thanks for sharing this tremendous insight with us. I never would have considered this to be the case.
The point is that identifying all the guys who will develop into talented college contributors is not an easy task. As everyone here has said many times, we would love to have all 4 and 5 stars, because the odds are better that prospects who Rivals evaluators think are going to be good as juniors in high school are more likely to develop than those who are rated lower.
But it is an inexact science. They are not all competing against the same level of competition with the same level of talent on their own teams, so that affects how good they look. Some prospects peak in the 10th grade; others mature much later.
In addition you have to consider the ability of coaches to develop and accentuate the strengths of their recruits.
But we have been over this again and again, and you choose to ignore it.
So you are not going to change your thoughts! You are a master at confirmation bias. You will make yourself well-informed and stock up on the evidence that supports your bias while ignoring any evidence in the other direction, much like der.
The guy isn't completely crazy. He's obnoxious and a pr*ck, and for someone who isn't going to climb out of his debt, fairly quick to put down other guys who will probably make more money than him if he starts high school teaching at 40. However, without an increase in recruiting I wouldn't expect much improvement from Flood. He can live in 6-8 win territory for a few years, thanks to the break in cross-over schedule, but why would anyone expect us to compete against the top tier with generally a worse quality of player than Schianos last two classes?
It really irks me when people say Rutgers did "better than the "experts" predicted". Plenty of people on this board, myself included, follow Rutgers much more than the so called experts, and were smart enough to realize Rutgers would be a 7-9 win team last year based on the Rutgers two-deep and opponents two-deep. This year should be the same. The following year our two-deep won't match up as well against the middle/upper tier of the conference but luckily we cross-over with the bottom tier.
It really irks me when people say Rutgers did "better than the "experts" predicted". Plenty of people on this board, myself included, follow Rutgers much more than the so called experts, and were smart enough to realize Rutgers would be a 7-9 win team last year based on the Rutgers two-deep and opponents two-deep. This year should be the same. The following year our two-deep won't match up as well against the middle/upper tier of the conference but luckily we cross-over with the bottom tier.
And it irks me even more to hear others, like you, proclaim that RU was a likely candidate for a 7-9 win season last year and then bemoan the fact that they barely met expectations. To expect the same (7-9 wins) this year (with one of the youngest line-ups out there) and an inexperienced QB tells me that Kyle Flood is a magician.
You don't make sense. He met expectations. That's what I said. Seeing how he faired in games against tougher opponents, what makes you feel he will exceed expectations, with less talent on the roster?
Oh that's right. 7 wins exceeds your expectations...
A couple things.
1. It wasn't a few analysts predicting doom and gloom for our step up to the big leagues - it was basically all analysts. We were pretty resoundingly expected to be in the cellar in our first year for a host of reasons. Yes, a few guys on this board with scarlet-colored glasses were predicting 7-9 wins. And rutgersal was predicting 14. Rutgers took a big step up in national perception last year, whether or not an element of the fanbase felt validated for rosier expectations than the rest of the country.
2. The better the talent, the better the team. This is true in the general sense - but teams have done well in this league without elite level talent sitting on the bench waiting for a chance to play. Michigan State had 13 4* and 1 5* player over the four years leading up to last year's 11-2 team (that's 3.5 per year). Going into the season, just 7 of those had cracked the 2-deep and none were listed as starters. Wisconsin had 13 4* players over the four years leading up to last year's 11-3 team (3.3 per year). Going into the season, just 7 of those had cracked the 2-deep, with 3 starters. So, on both of those teams, just 7 of 44 players on the two-deep going into the season had more than 3 stars. We do need (and certainly want) more top talent coming to Rutgers... but we don't need 10+ guys per year to compete in this conference.
1. It wasn't a few analysts predicting doom and gloom for our step up to the big leagues - it was basically all analysts. We were pretty resoundingly expected to be in the cellar in our first year for a host of reasons. Yes, a few guys on this board with scarlet-colored glasses were predicting 7-9 wins. And rutgersal was predicting 14. Rutgers took a big step up in national perception last year, whether or not an element of the fanbase felt validated for rosier expectations than the rest of the country.
2. The better the talent, the better the team. This is true in the general sense - but teams have done well in this league without elite level talent sitting on the bench waiting for a chance to play. Michigan State had 13 4* and 1 5* player over the four years leading up to last year's 11-2 team (that's 3.5 per year). Going into the season, just 7 of those had cracked the 2-deep and none were listed as starters. Wisconsin had 13 4* players over the four years leading up to last year's 11-3 team (3.3 per year). Going into the season, just 7 of those had cracked the 2-deep, with 3 starters. So, on both of those teams, just 7 of 44 players on the two-deep going into the season had more than 3 stars. We do need (and certainly want) more top talent coming to Rutgers... but we don't need 10+ guys per year to compete in this conference.
The board in general complained about media bias all the time,and last year when it clearly stared them right in the face w/ the big ten prediciton, they accepted it for fact. For years we trashed the Big Ten, knew aside from the top 2 teams it was at the same level as the Big East (some years the top of the big east was better..), and complained that ESPN was trying to break it apart. That's what happened. Then when we came in everyone got scared. We were on the money all those years. Don't forget it. It's only b/c now that the Big 10 conference is finally on the rise the future of the Rutgers success is in question, not the present.
I am 100% on board with being patient in regards to our Big10 standings and conference record, but the lackluster recruiting is not exactly encouraging. If Flood was in the ballpark of the 2009 and 2012 classes I would be fine, but man recruiting has regressed. We can talk about exceeding expectations all we want, but when you're a 7 point underdog against NAVY we damn well better exceed expectations. Hopefully we continue to build on those last 6 quarters of last season and grab people's attention.
This.
The last 6 Quarters of 2014 are like the Offense Highlight reel of the Year.
If we can start off anywhere near that level we will be fine.
and we BEAT navy, either complain about it or put some money on the dog and be rewarded for the error in perception.
Are you living in the past? Recruiting is improving, not regressing. Last I read, our class this year was ranked in the mid-30's nationally. That ranking includes four 2-star athletes who virtually nobody (maybe you) believes are two stars - Russo, Hayes, Morgan , and Johnson. If you want details, I will provide. That would appear to be a big jump in our recruiting ranking. The whisperings already are that last year's class was vastly under-rated., but this class will still probably be better.
Feel free also to ignore the fact that many of these low-rated recruits seem to be in line to be significant and talented contributors. Of course it is too early to tell, so that is all in the air. However the fact is that recruiting this year is in no way regressing.
Last edited:
I wish I could be right 100% of the time like you are.:weary:
I need a little guidance though. You have complained about how incompetent our coach is since the day he started, yet you were expecting him to somehow lead us to 8 or 9 victories last year.
I am missing the logic in this, especially when the general consensus of the "experts" was 4 or 5 victories.
Our defense was a sieve the year before, and not a lot of people here had confidence in Gary Nova's ability. With these issues did you just figure the team would bumble along to 8 or 9 victories in spite of his supposed incompetence? How many were you thinking they would win with a competent coach?
That's mostly due to the large quantity of commits we have. If you look at our average star rating we are 54th. I'd imagine we will move up a little bit because Johnson and Russo will probably get a star bump, but 33rd is a bit of a stretch. To give an example, last season we were 53rd nationally with a fairly large class and one 4 star player. It seems like we are in line for 1-2 four star guys so I imagine we will finish somewhere in that vicinity. We've finished #32 in 2011, #24 in 2012, #45 in 2013, #57 in 2014, #53 in 2015, and let's say #45 in 2016. At this juncture, I don't think its too much to ask for a recruiting class around 30-35 consistently
Schiano would have won 9 games while recruiting a top 25 class and capitalized on success by having a top 25 class this year. Frankly, and I said this before the season started, I believe any D1 coach with the talent we had would have won 8 games last year with potential for 9 (PSU or bowl game) . The fact is the "experts" saw we did poorly in AAC but did not know how good our two deep would be with our best two recruiting class ever poised to be the leaders of the team. Experts picked 4-5 wins because they THOUGHT Rutgers was such a lowly program that they could not hang with big programs even in their down years. MANY ON THIS BOARD KNEW BETTER.
My contention was a name coach or strong recruiter would better capitalize on the momentum we were sure to achieve last season. Instead it's a strong possibility we will remain stagnant b/c of Flood's inability to increase or even maintain thhe player talent level through recruiting. Now what I fear is after this season, when Schianos recruits are all gone, the momentum will go with it. Even worse, it's possible our easy cross over schedule will keep Flood at 6 wins following this years 8 wins season coming up, and the opportunity to move up the ladder will be gone. Because as many say "Flood will not be fired for going to bowls in the big ten" (paraphrasing). The next coach will come in with a depleted talent pool, his transition to success will not come as quickly, and he will have to out coach with worse talent, and sustain that success ala Schiano 06, in order to boost recruiting to a new level. It could have been achieved much earlier. Those coaches don't come around very often.
As we saw, it took til around 2011 before the 2006 season really boosted recruiting.
How about 15 where he kept the "bigger names" at bay. How about your boy Franklin begging to see some of our kids
"Schiano would have won 9 games while recruiting a top 25 class and capitalized on success by having a top 25 class this year. "
2006 Rutgers 11–2 5–2 T–2nd W Texas 12 12
2007 Rutgers 8–5 3–4 T–5th W International
2008 Rutgers 8–5 5–2 T–2nd W Papajohns.com
2009 Rutgers 9–4 3–4 T–4th W St. Petersburg
2010 Rutgers 4–8 1–6 8th
2011 Rutgers 9–4 4–3 T–4th W Pinstripe
2006 Rutgers 11–2 5–2 T–2nd W Texas 12 12
2007 Rutgers 8–5 3–4 T–5th W International
2008 Rutgers 8–5 5–2 T–2nd W Papajohns.com
2009 Rutgers 9–4 3–4 T–4th W St. Petersburg
2010 Rutgers 4–8 1–6 8th
2011 Rutgers 9–4 4–3 T–4th W Pinstripe
