Frankie Policelli to visit Friday

[RutgHoops]

I believe I saw a stat recently that in the past 15 years we have gotten fewer than 20 kids we recruited as freshmen to Senior Day.

We have recruited plenty of "Top 150" kids, we just get none of them to play as upperclassmen at Rutgers. Solve that problem and we'd be on our way to breaking our unfathomable NCAA drought

 

[RU_DIO]

it is a lot of words, but that's all people are fixated on is Top 150, but it's still 80 kids each recruiting class left for a total of 50-55 schools a year...how many of the remaining left 80 players should each of the 50-55 schools get a year??

It's easy to say 3 or 4 or you can't win, but there are more players outside the 150 that can play just as much as these remaining 80 kids...being disappointed in recruiting because a kid isn't in the Top 150, is not reality for the remaining 50 Power 5 schools and they seem to be doing OK.....because they mostly have good coaches, that's the difference.

Hawk,

You and I know there's a lot of good players outside the top 150. We both know that a lot of top 150 players fail to live up to their hype. I think we both know that the chances of having a successful team is to consistently recruit within the top 150. If you want to be a top 10 team, recruiting within the top 50 or so like you said would be required. RU has consistently stunk for 25 years. I believe more of our recruits have been outside the top 150 and that's one of the big reasons we've not been good for a long time. We seem to have a good coaching staff as they proved last year. Let's see them get some good Top 150 players and sprinkle in some less hyped players too. I don't think they could get it done with a majority of less hyped kids. There's a reason kids are ranked, talent being one of them.

 

[willisneverrana43]

. . .

We have recruited plenty of "Top 150" kids, we just get none of them to play as upperclassmen at Rutgers. Solve that problem and we'd be on our way to breaking our unfathomable NCAA drought

I think if you look more deeply you'll see reasons why they leave that suggest that it's not as simple as just trying harder to keep the ones we get. For instance, you'll likely see that some leave because the team isn't good enough--i.e., there aren't enough good players like them on the team--and they have other, better options. You'll likely see others who leave because of academic or other adjustment difficulties, the type that allowed RU to land them in the first place.

Player turnover, early departures, and coaching turnover are generally the result of a badly run program, and you can't just say let's stop those things and somehow think you've fixed the problem. You've got to get a good program in place and a coach who can attract talent and in real and sufficient numbers (no way RU has) and coach them. At times RU has had part of this, but never close to all of it--at least not in the last 25 years.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

I believe I saw a stat recently that in the past 15 years we have gotten fewer than 20 kids we recruited as freshmen to Senior Day.

We have recruited plenty of "Top 150" kids, we just get none of them to play as upperclassmen at Rutgers. Solve that problem and we'd be on our way to breaking our unfathomable NCAA drought

Those 2 variables are not independent.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

There are 50+ programs more attractive than RU who probably average 3.5 HS recruits per year.

50+ * 3.5 > 150

 

[bac2therac]

Id make that number more than 50

 

[ScarletLongIsland]

 

[higgins3]

View embedded media

From range....

Thanks for your post on the updates, SLI.