Recruiting vs production

[vkj91]

Hopefully this can stay on point and doesn't get deleted within the hour. We can all agree that Flood's classes have lacked "star power" according to Rivals. We can all agree there were recruits we had no shot at as well as, recruits we felt we missed out on. I think the great divide is whether or not his classes can maintain some level of success going forward. I am in the camp that they can but I can also see the argument that they will struggle based on "stars". Recently the argument that the crap will hit the fan as early as 2016 has surfaced again based on the idea that this years senior class was the driving force behind an 8 win season. However, looking at the stats from last season we find:

Rushing: 4 top rushers all Flood recruits
Passing: obviously Nova and jury is out going forward but i you are a star gazer Rettig should make you excited.
Receiving: 3 of 5 were Flood recruits
Punt returns: all Flood recruits
KO returns: all Flood recruits
Interceptions: 2 of 3 Flood recruits
All purpose yards: 7 of 8 Flood recruits
Scoring: 2 of 3 were Flood recruits(did not include kicker)
total offense: 5 of 6 Flood recruits

Last year, we read often that the young guys who were contributing were only doing so because "someone has to play". Well play they did and the stats show it. Where am I wrong?

 

[Knight Shift]

I'll repost some stats for other teams on recruiting rankings and production related to W-L and rankings.

Brady Hoke started in 2011,
but let's look at the recruiting class rankings that preceded him and
he hauled in:

2008: #10
2009:#8
2010: #20
2011: #21
2012: #7
2013: #5

Record:
2012: 8-5; 6-2
2013: 7-6; 3-5
2014: 5-7; 3-5

By class rankings alone, Hoke should have dominated in 2012 and 13, when he had the
power of juniors and seniors from the #10 and #8 recruiting classes.
-----------------------------------------------------
Let's look at Texas too:
2006:#5
2007:#5
2008: #14
2009:#5
2010:#3
2011:#3
2012:#2
2013:#24

Let's look at their records, starting in 2010, with all that senior "talent"
2010: 5-7, 2-6
2011: 8-5; 4-5
2012: 9-4; 5-4
2013: 8-5; 7-2
2014: 6-7; 5-4
--------------------------

Now let's look at Oregon:

Class rankings:

2005:#28
2006: #49
2007:#11
2008:#19
2009:#32


Their record:
2009: 10-3; 8-1
2010: 12-1; 9-0
2011: 12-2; 8-1
2012: 12-1; 8-1
2013: 11-2; 13-2

By recruiting rankings alone, Oregon should have sucked in 2009 and 2010. Compare their record to Texas and Michigan.
----------------

TCU recruiting rankings :
2005:#54
2006:#60
2007:#81
2008:#97
2009:#46
2010:#46
2011: #26
2012: #37
2013: #30
---
2009: 12-1; 8-0; #6 final ranking
2010: 13-0; 8-0; #2 final ranking
2011: 11-2; 7-0; #13 final raking
2012: 7-6; 4-5 (first year in Big 12)
2013: 4-8; 2-7 (Classes were #46, #46, #26 and #37)
2014: 12-1; 8-1; Final Ranking: #3 (classes were #46; #26, #37)

Maybe with gradual improvements in recruiting classes, Rutgers will be on a TCU trajectory?

 

[vkj91]

TCU showed what a good OC can do for you. This year was their first with the OC we played against at Houston. Turns out he was secret to Levin's success and will be a big HC candidate sooner than later.

 

[ScarletRunner]

Originally posted by vkj91:
Hopefully this can stay on point and doesn't get deleted within the hour. We can all agree that Flood's classes have lacked "star power" according to Rivals. We can all agree there were recruits we had no shot at as well as, recruits we felt we missed out on. I think the great divide is whether or not his classes can maintain some level of success going forward. I am in the camp that they can but I can also see the argument that they will struggle based on "stars". Recently the argument that the crap will hit the fan as early as 2016 has surfaced again based on the idea that this years senior class was the driving force behind an 8 win season. However, looking at the stats from last season we find:

Rushing: 4 top rushers all Flood recruits
Passing: obviously Nova and jury is out going forward but i you are a star gazer Rettig should make you excited.
Receiving: 3 of 5 were Flood recruits
Punt returns: all Flood recruits
KO returns: all Flood recruits
Interceptions: 2 of 3 Flood recruits
All purpose yards: 7 of 8 Flood recruits
Scoring: 2 of 3 were Flood recruits(did not include kicker)
total offense: 5 of 6 Flood recruits

Last year, we read often that the young guys who were contributing were only doing so because "someone has to play". Well play they did and the stats show it. Where am I wrong?

Interesting post IMO.

The bottom line is everyone wants to see classes with higher-rated players and guys with more impressive offer lists. Flood has had some success with diamond-in-the rough types - Turay being the shining example, and rumors of other lightly-recruited guys that some say have similar upside like Cole, Bateky and a few others. Plus there are the guys he picked up early who later received other offers, like Seymour and the DB who was offered in the 11th hour by Michigan.

I personally think counting on "project" type players is a very dangerous strategy, and you need a pretty high success rate. You can say it's too early to see how many of these lightly-recruited guys develop; It's also too early to see how many washouts/total recruiting misses this strategy leads to.

I have to admit that Turay and positive feedback of some of the others have me drinking the kool aid a bit and hoping Manny Taylor, Donald Bledell, etc. pan out. Definitely will make for some interesting story lines over the next two seasons.

 

[Ru2bnj]

It isn't just the OC at TCU. Patterson is a very good HC (one of the best) and he knows how to target and develop players. They beat Wisky in the Rose Bowl after the 2010 season. Check out Rivals recruiting rankings for TCU in the years preceeding that. That should tell you all need to know about recruiting rankings....especially once you get outside the top 8-10 classes each year. It gets very dicey after the top few hundred players nationally. Approx 2,500 players sign with Div 1 teams each year.

 

[jmc11201]

Good post by the OP.

In general, I think that there is something to the idea that Flood is bringing in better players than the stars would suggest, but I am also in the camp that says that the more high-star players you bring in, on average the better your team will be.

To me, the question is often whether or not Flood (or any coach) misses out on their first group of offers. For example...a guy like Zach Heeman was offered early in the process, had few stars, wasn't well known, committed early, didn't play the recruiting game, and comes in as a 2-star guy. I think that is a way better situation than having to rush at the end to fill a recruiting class and filling it with 2-star guys that others have already had the chance to evaluate and passed on (as we saw with the 2014 class after all of the decommits). It is one thing to say Flood has an eye for talent (and I think he does), but then to assume that the second group of guys he offered in a given class is better than the first group of guys (again...Class of 2014) doesn't strike me as intellectually honest.

As always, the results will play out on the field, and there are signs of hope, but we can't just have his guys playing as someone needs to play, but they have to contribute at a high level and be competitive with the highly ranked guys that Ohio State, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Penn State are bringing in. I think Hicks and Martin have star potential, Patton is a nice player and if he continues to grow could mitigate the loss of Carroo after this season, Turay is clearly a stud, and the early reports from some of the recruits the last year or two sound encouraging (Cole, Wilkins, Miller, Austin, etc). The proof will be in the pudding, as they say, over the next few seasons...with the schedule getting much more accommodating after this season when Wisconsin and Nebraska drop off.

The last thing that I do think Flood deserves a ton of credit for is working the JUCO, 5th year, and transfer angle. Plugging holes with quality and established players goes a long way to supplementing recruiting.

 

[Knight Shift]

Originally posted by Ru2bnj:

It isn't just the OC at TCU. Patterson is a very good HC (one of the best) and he knows how to target and develop players. They beat Wisky in the Rose Bowl after the 2010 season. Check out Rivals recruiting rankings for TCU in the years preceeding that. That should tell you all need to know about recruiting rankings....especially once you get outside the top 8-10 classes each year. It gets very dicey after the top few hundred players nationally. Approx 2,500 players sign with Div 1 teams each year.

I posted them:

TCU recruiting rankings :
2005:#54
2006:#60
2007:#81
2008:#97
2009:#46

 

[RUBOB72]

I am convinced this staff has the ability to find those "under" the radar types however... the more highly rated ***** recruits you bring into your program the better chances for success...though we haven't seen it yet on a large scale this spring we are involved and being seen by many , many of that type...We need that impact ....buzz type guy and I don't give two craps who it is...The naysayers still believe we will strikeout with all of them...the odds say we will get a good share this year on signing day...

 

[yesrutgers01]

I had just posted this in the top 50 thread but deserves it's spot here...And throw in Flood picking up the likes of Dill, Tolar, Turzilli, Rettig

We have a pretty good idea how the heralded classes of 2011 and 2012 will shake out when all is said and done. Floods 2013/14 classes without the top NJ kids are only a year or two in the program...Add in some of the transfers Flood has gotten...His 2013/14 classes look like they will be at least as good as those "GREAT" Schiano classes. Two years in, there are a couple of kids that got away that I would love to have on the team and will be very good players but I am sorry to some of you that want to keep shouting how Floods classes are going to kill us, you are flat out wrong. You play the game on the field and I love the 2011/12 kids as I love every kid that plays for us, but there is nothing that says to me that our most recent classes are not as good or better players on the field. And, they have only started. Some still have to prove themselves and some may not work out but list number two looks pretty damn good if you don't look at star ratings.

2011/2012
Longa
Muller
Peele
Hamilton
Carroo
Federico
Peoples
JPO
Lambert
Q. Gause
K. Johnson
Snyder
Kroft
Lumpkin
Mera
Nova
Aiken
Kirksy

2013/2014
Barnwell
Cioffi
Goodwin
Grant
Joseph
Laviano
Patton
Nick Arch
Nash
Stephenson
Taylor
Tsimis
Turay
Waife
Applefield
Bedell
Boggs
Cole
Hicks
Martin
Lott
Daily
Hapton
Heeman
Hogan
Russell
Webb
Wharton
Wilkins

 

[JPhoboken]

Originally posted by jmc11201:

Good post by the OP.

In general, I think that there is something to the idea that Flood is bringing in better players than the stars would suggest, but I am also in the camp that says that the more high-star players you bring in, on average the better your team will be.

I agree. Looking at the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world prove this.

 

[RUchip]

This goes on point with as a fan how confident are you with the questions below. Even if we are able to land more 4 stars will it matter?

HC Flood developing players? Who weren't Schiano guys and not the freshmen class of 2012.
DC Rossi building a top 10 defense like we used to have each year
OC 1st year Ben McDaniels running a offense with either little (Laviano) or no experience (Rettig)

Talent is talent and can be coached up. It's going to be a year where McDaniels and Rossi need to prove themselves. Yes, this year because we can't afford to have a bad year in the recruiting world. Penn State will clean up NJ for the next 5 years and beyond.

 

[Knight Shift]

Originally posted by JPhoboken:

Originally posted by jmc11201:

Good post by the OP.

In general, I think that there is something to the idea that Flood is bringing in better players than the stars would suggest, but I am also in the camp that says that the more high-star players you bring in, on average the better your team will be.

I agree. Looking at the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world prove this.

I think you have a hard time finding someone who disagrees with this.

What amazes me is the complainers who think we should be competing with the Ohio States and Alabamas for recruits after we have been in the B1G for only one year. They will trot out the 2013 class (not in the B1G that year) or the 2014 class (first year in the B1G, coming off a really bad year in 2013 on the field and with all the media circuses) and simply say "Flood can't recruit.

Rome wasn't built in a day. Flood has done well given the hand he was dealt, and I see steady improvement in job performance and recruiting.

Do some of you complainers continually dwell on the worst years or events of your lives, or do you learn from them and move forward in a positive direction?

 

[RUTGERZ_R00LZ]

Originally posted by vkj91:
Hopefully this can stay on point and doesn't get deleted within the hour. We can all agree that Flood's classes have lacked "star power" according to Rivals. We can all agree there were recruits we had no shot at as well as, recruits we felt we missed out on. I think the great divide is whether or not his classes can maintain some level of success going forward. I am in the camp that they can but I can also see the argument that they will struggle based on "stars". Recently the argument that the crap will hit the fan as early as 2016 has surfaced again based on the idea that this years senior class was the driving force behind an 8 win season. However, looking at the stats from last season we find:

Rushing: 4 top rushers all Flood recruits
Passing: obviously Nova and jury is out going forward but i you are a star gazer Rettig should make you excited.
Receiving: 3 of 5 were Flood recruits
Punt returns: all Flood recruits
KO returns: all Flood recruits
Interceptions: 2 of 3 Flood recruits
All purpose yards: 7 of 8 Flood recruits
Scoring: 2 of 3 were Flood recruits(did not include kicker)
total offense: 5 of 6 Flood recruits

Last year, we read often that the young guys who were contributing were only doing so because "someone has to play". Well play they did and the stats show it. Where am I wrong?

I know, and I truly hope he succeeds big time. That said there was also:

OSU 56 RU 17
NEB 42 RU 24
Wisc 37 RU 0
MSU 45 RU 3

4 total annihilations in our first season really hurts. We at least have to be competitive even in our losses.

 

[jmc11201]

Originally posted by Knight Shift:

I think you have a hard time finding someone who disagrees with this.

What amazes me is the complainers who think we should be competing with the Ohio States and Alabamas for recruits after we have been in the B1G for only one year. They will trot out the 2013 class (not in the B1G that year) or the 2014 class (first year in the B1G, coming off a really bad year in 2013 on the field and with all the media circuses) and simply say "Flood can't recruit.

Rome wasn't built in a day. Flood has done well given the hand he was dealt, and I see steady improvement in job performance and recruiting.

Do some of you complainers continually dwell on the worst years or events of your lives, or do you learn from them and move forward in a positive direction?

I generally am not a complainer, but to say that there weren't legitimate reasons to have concerns about Flood during the disaster of a 2013 season (AAC year, blow-outs to mediocre teams, recruiting implosion, Ian Thomas, Tyree/Cohen) isn't fair either.

To Flood's credit, he seems to be growing into the role. His coaching seems better, his recruiting seems better, his coaching staff and staff cohesion seem better, etc. Even under ideal circumstances, we weren't closing the gap with two of the most traditional programs anytime soon, but all things considered, Flood seems like he is on the right path.

If he continues to grow, and there is no reason to think he won't, then that contract extension he signed is going to seem like a great deal for Rutgers...although my hope is that Flood is smart enough to know that earning a few dollars less than he can, to the extent that he can use those 'saved' dollars on his staff, is a wise investment.

 

[HeyHuey]

I have 5 words to add....Ke Mo Ko Tu Ray. Excellent post...excellent thread.

 

[imbazza]

As big thing missing in all the star systems out there is the fight in the dog and a kid's desire to prove the world is wrong. In the Pros that is not a big factor but with 17-22 year old kids. DESIRE/emotion is a bigger factor then Lemming and his stars can see as They just look at film, Flood reads the heart and soul of the kid sitting across the desk from him. Trust our coach to pick hungry wanna be players. Big stars as fun to brag about. But as soon as they reach college field they are all 1star players until they prove it.
The line between a 3 and a 4 star is fine We all believe our LSU QB is some great play and no one has seen him in action yet and yet our home grown Rutgers QB is doing just as well or better as he is still the started, with better stats from the first scrimmage to boot. Not here to argue who will start at QB but understand we all have some prodigious view that he is better just because he went to LSU and had 4 stars Remember Johnson was a LSU QB too and he ended up as a TE.

Yes we all want Jersey kids to stay home but for last 50 no make it 55years (from my eyes) all the top jersey player have gone elsewhere but Rutgers. We will grow but state penn can only take ~25 kids in a class. Eastern PA NYC and Jersey and DE have more then 25 good players to go around and Rutgers are get more and more of these kids who are groomed into Men of Character by Flood and company. Give me 3 stars with Character then 4/5 stars with entitlement/attitude

 

[urbanecane]

If we want a seat at the adult table we need recruiting to be respectful (30s) and an exceptional HC or OC (not ruling Flood out). Last season was nice, but this team was two coin flip games away from being 6-6 with 4 blowouts. We're going to need improvements if we want to leave middle of the BIG.

 

[vkj91]

Originally posted by urbanecane:
If we want a seat at the adult table we need recruiting to be respectful (30s) and an exceptional HC or OC (not ruling Flood out). Last season was nice, but this team was two coin flip games away from being 6-6 with 4 blowouts. We're going to need improvements if we want to leave middle of the BIG.

and a poor DB decision away from winning 9 games. cuts both ways

 

[ScarletKnightRider]

Originally posted by vkj91:
and a poor DB decision away from winning 9 games. cuts both ways

Ugh... the thought of watching him try and go for the strip still kills me

 

[vkj91]

forget it

This post was edited on 4/14 7:19 AM by vkj91

 

[Yeah Baby]

Originally posted by JPhoboken:

Originally posted by jmc11201:

Good post by the OP.

In general, I think that there is something to the idea that Flood is bringing in better players than the stars would suggest, but I am also in the camp that says that the more high-star players you bring in, on average the better your team will be.

I agree. Looking at the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world prove this.

I get what you guys are saying and agree but how can you make the comment that OSU and Bama PROVE this when examples already given PROVE otherwise?

I certainly am always happy to see 4 stars sign on here. But our production over the years has come from 2 and 3 stars and some 4 stars. Same with Oregon and same with TCU.

Regarding the OP, it is the trenches that Flood wants to win games and I like who he has brought in to date. We lacked some depth when we played the better teams last year up front and that to me is an area we can improve on going forward.

 

[jmc11201]

Originally posted by Yeah Baby:

Originally posted by JPhoboken:

Originally posted by jmc11201:

Good post by the OP.

In general, I think that there is something to the idea that Flood is bringing in better players than the stars would suggest, but I am also in the camp that says that the more high-star players you bring in, on average the better your team will be.

I agree. Looking at the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world prove this.

I get what you guys are saying and agree but how can you make the comment that OSU and Bama PROVE this when examples already given PROVE otherwise?

I certainly am always happy to see 4 stars sign on here. But our production over the years has come from 2 and 3 stars and some 4 stars. Same with Oregon and same with TCU.

Regarding the OP, it is the trenches that Flood wants to win games and I like who he has brought in to date. We lacked some depth when we played the better teams last year up front and that to me is an area we can improve on going forward.

While you absolutely can win with 2 & 3 star guys, on average, you are better off with 4 & 5 star guys. The teams that recruit at a high level, on average, win at a high level. There are always exceptions, but given the choice, you take the higher ranked players.

My view is that 4 & 5 star guys are rated that way for a reason...they have been evaluated and people (who are admittedly imperfect) have some basis for thinking that a particular kid has a higher than average chance of success...due to either above average athleticism, above average skillset, above average potential, etc. Not all of them will pan out, but they aren't 4 & 5 star kids for no reason. As for 2 & 3 star kids, to the extent that a kid isn't evaluated because he plays at a small school, or doesn't attend camps, doesn't play the recruiting game, etc...there is definitely a reasonable chance that he is better than his ranking would indicate. Others that are evaluated and get 2 & 3 stars may develop physically in college, or their work ethic may be 5-star and that may be under-evaluated by the experts, or a kid may end up in the right offense or defense and allowed to shine, etc. There are reasons lower ranked kids succeed, but it is still about playing the averages.

 

[vkj91]

Everybody would love to recruit like bama, Tennessee and Olé miss. You gonna hire all the parents? You wanna play the bag man role? Own a car dealership?

 

[RCTrooper]

How did Flood's recruiting stack up against the teams that had winning conference records in the BiG?

That is the metric that matters because it will tell you if RU is recruiting a talent level that allows you to win in the BiG. Remember, that is the goal.

OSU: L 17-56
Nebraska: L[/B] 24-42
Wisconsin: L[/B] 0-37
Michigan St: L[/B] 3-45

 

[Knight Shift]

Originally posted by jmc11201:

Originally posted by Yeah Baby:

Originally posted by JPhoboken:

Originally posted by jmc11201:

Good post by the OP.

In general, I think that there is something to the idea that Flood is bringing in better players than the stars would suggest, but I am also in the camp that says that the more high-star players you bring in, on average the better your team will be.

I agree. Looking at the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world prove this.

I get what you guys are saying and agree but how can you make the comment that OSU and Bama PROVE this when examples already given PROVE otherwise?

I certainly am always happy to see 4 stars sign on here. But our production over the years has come from 2 and 3 stars and some 4 stars. Same with Oregon and same with TCU.

Regarding the OP, it is the trenches that Flood wants to win games and I like who he has brought in to date. We lacked some depth when we played the better teams last year up front and that to me is an area we can improve on going forward.

While you absolutely can win with 2 & 3 star guys, on average, you are better off with 4 & 5 star guys. The teams that recruit at a high level, on average, win at a high level. There are always exceptions, but given the choice, you take the higher ranked players.

My view is that 4 & 5 star guys are rated that way for a reason...they have been evaluated and people (who are admittedly imperfect) have some basis for thinking that a particular kid has a higher than average chance of success...due to either above average athleticism, above average skillset, above average potential, etc. Not all of them will pan out, but they aren't 4 & 5 star kids for no reason. As for 2 & 3 star kids, to the extent that a kid isn't evaluated because he plays at a small school, or doesn't attend camps, doesn't play the recruiting game, etc...there is definitely a reasonable chance that he is better than his ranking would indicate. Others that are evaluated and get 2 & 3 stars may develop physically in college, or their work ethic may be 5-star and that may be under-evaluated by the experts, or a kid may end up in the right offense or defense and allowed to shine, etc. There are reasons lower ranked kids succeed, but it is still about playing the averages.

I don't think anybody is going to debate this point. I will not. I have been called "clueless" and accused of making stuff up, but the reality is Rutgers is NOT getting these players right now. We rehashed the myriad of reasons why this happened in the past few classes--some of which were Flood's fault, and many of which were out of his control. So what are we going to do, sit and complain about the past forever? We just completed our first year in the B1G, and things appear to be moving in a positive direction.

But now you guys are complaining about 2016, and only 4 or 5 of the top 50 players have made verbal commitments.How about giving it a rest and giving it some time?

 

[ag67]

When I look down the list of our 2014 recruits, I count 18 guys who we have heard some good things about during this first year - some of them guys who I never expected to be contributors based on the evaluations beforehand.

Some of them are already big contributors, some seem on the cusp, and others seem like they might work their way into the rotations in a year or two. All of them are freshman.

I don't expect all of them to work out, but the fact that so many have made a positive impression already tells me our staff is probably talented at picking out prospects with the potential, desire, and work ethic needed to develop into contributing members of the team.

By all accounts, the 2015 class will turn out the same way.

I realize it is far too early to know for sure, but the trend right now seems to be strongly in this positive direction IMO.

So I am looking at it a little differently. Right now the staff is battling with the big boys for the highly sought after recruits. I am hoping they are still keeping in mind the criteria they used during the past 2 years to ID the guys with the right intangibles. The guys who have signed on seem to have those, and I will be happy to see these kinds of players sign on. no matter how many stars they have when all is said and done.

This post was edited on 4/14 4:36 PM by ag67

 

[RUskoolie]

It's too early to judge Flood's classes on production.

I appreciate trying to start a discussion but I don't think it's a great argument. Just saying that kids Flood recruited are leading our team in stats doesn't mean they have blossomed into good players. Every team, regardless of record, has a rushing leader, INT leader, leading tackler, etc. That kind of supports the argument that "someone has to play". Let's compare those stats to the rest of the B1G, then you will have a clearer argument of whether or not those kids were difference makers/good players. The difference makers/good players are the guys who lead the conference in multiple stats, break RU records, become AAs, All-Conference or start 40-50 games. I can't think of any Flood recruit outside of Turay who got accolades like that right now, but that's mostly because it's still early. Maybe Grant got All-Conference STs in the AAC, I can't remember...

As for people we are losing who were difference makers from last year. Quickly, off the top of my head:

Kroft (former All-Conference)
KJ (started 50 games, former All-Conference)
Betim (started 40+ games)
Burton (started 40+ games)
You could make an argument for Nova

Now in another year or 2 you'll have a clearer picture on this...

 

[Knight Shift]

Originally posted by RCTrooper:
How did Flood's recruiting stack up against the teams that had winning conference records in the BiG?

That is the metric that matters because it will tell you if RU is recruiting a talent level that allows you to win in the BiG. Remember, that is the goal.

OSU: L 17-56
Nebraska: L[/B] 24-42
Wisconsin: L[/B] 0-37
Michigan St: L[/B] 3-45

Weren't the large majority of players in these games Schiano recruits?

 

[RU#1fan]

Originally posted by Knight Shift:

Originally posted by JPhoboken:Originally posted by jmc11201

Good post by the OP.

In general, I think that there is something to the idea that Flood is bringing in better players than the stars would suggest, but I am also in the camp that says that the more high-star players you bring in, on average the better your team will be.
I agree. Looking at the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world prove this.

I think you have a hard time finding someone who disagrees with this.
What amazes me is the complainers who think we should be competing with the Ohio States and Alabamas for recruits after we have been in the B1G for only one year. They will trot out the 2013 class (not in the B1G that year) or the 2014 class (first year in the B1G, coming off a really bad year in 2013 on the field and with all the media circuses) and simply say "Flood can't recruit.
Rome wasn't built in a day. Flood has done well given the hand he was dealt, and I see steady improvement in job performance and recruiting.
Do some of you complainers continually dwell on the worst years or events of your lives, or do you learn from them and move forward in a positive direction?

Recruiting ....steady improvement ? Rankings : 2012 = #21, 2013= #52 , 2014= #53 , 2015 = # 56. What was the hand he was dealt ? First year in the periennial CFB Conference in the Country .

 

[Knight Shift]

Originally posted by RU#1fan:

Originally posted by Knight Shift:

Originally posted by JPhoboken:Originally posted by jmc11201

Good post by the OP.

In general, I think that there is something to the idea that Flood is bringing in better players than the stars would suggest, but I am also in the camp that says that the more high-star players you bring in, on average the better your team will be.
I agree. Looking at the Ohio States and Alabamas of the world prove this.

I think you have a hard time finding someone who disagrees with this.
What amazes me is the complainers who think we should be competing with the Ohio States and Alabamas for recruits after we have been in the B1G for only one year. They will trot out the 2013 class (not in the B1G that year) or the 2014 class (first year in the B1G, coming off a really bad year in 2013 on the field and with all the media circuses) and simply say "Flood can't recruit.
Rome wasn't built in a day. Flood has done well given the hand he was dealt, and I see steady improvement in job performance and recruiting.
Do some of you complainers continually dwell on the worst years or events of your lives, or do you learn from them and move forward in a positive direction?

Recruiting ....steady improvement ? Rankings : 2012 = #21, 2013= #52 , 2014= #53 , 2015 = # 56. What was the hand he was dealt ? First year in the periennial CFB Conference in the Country .

How many times does it have to be explained? I'll give a short synopsis. You do realize 52, 53, 56, are statistically insignificant, don't you?
The hand:
1. Schiano bails, takes all coaches and others with him. Flood is named head coach, and given peanuts to hire coordinators and it shows. 2012 season ends with a slide and move to AAC--not an exciting conference to recruit and entice players for the 2013 class.
2. 2013 is a media circus with Rice-gate, firing of Pernetti, hiring of Julie with multiple dramas, bad year on the field (part of that is on Flood), and a terrible end of year slide. This hurts 2014 recruiting.
3. 2014-respectable first year in B1G, but damage from 2013 season has not been fully undone.
4. 2015- We have yet to see how 2015 will impact 2016 recruiting class. There are positive signs, but we will not know until national signing day.

Don't know what kind of results you are expecting from a guy learning on the job, but seems to be improving in many areas. Do you really expect Rutgers to be in the top quarter of recruiting after a single year in the B1G?

You must be a blast to live with, harping on the negatives only. Are you sure you are the #1 fan of Rutgers?

 

[WhiteBus]

Forget the star ranking if you want. However you can't ignore how many players Rutgers wanted desperately that went elsewhere. This staff has to improve in getting the top quality players they want.

The Sleeping Giant crap is a myth until players actually stay in NJ and play for Rutgers.

 

[vkj91]

Originally posted by RUskoolie:
It's too early to judge Flood's classes on production.

I appreciate trying to start a discussion but I don't think it's a great argument. Just saying that kids Flood recruited are leading our team in stats doesn't mean they have blossomed into good players. Every team, regardless of record, has a rushing leader, INT leader, leading tackler, etc. That kind of supports the argument that "someone has to play". Let's compare those stats to the rest of the B1G, then you will have a clearer argument of whether or not those kids were difference makers/good players. The difference makers/good players are the guys who lead the conference in multiple stats, break RU records, become AAs, All-Conference or start 40-50 games. I can't think of any Flood recruit outside of Turay who got accolades like that right now, but that's mostly because it's still early. Maybe Grant got All-Conference STs in the AAC, I can't remember...

As for people we are losing who were difference makers from last year. Quickly, off the top of my head:

Kroft (former All-Conference)
KJ (started 50 games, former All-Conference)
Betim (started 40+ games)
Burton (started 40+ games)
You could make an argument for Nova

Now in another year or 2 you'll have a clearer picture on this...

So to be clear it's perfectly acceptable to bash his classes but to early to give them credit? When you win 8 games and your statistical leaders are his recruits that's more than just playing to play someone... No? Now we are judging kids on whether they become all Americans or make 50 starts as opposed to winning games? Kaleb doesn't make 50 starts if out o line didn't blow under schiano bc he shouldn't have been needed as a TF.



This post was edited on 4/14 1:47 PM by vkj91

 

[Knight Shift]

With fans like these, I can't understand why recruits are not pounding down Rutgers' doors.

 

[WhiteBus]

Originally posted by Knight Shift:
With fans like these, I can't understand why recruits are not pounding down Rutgers' doors.

LOL. Of course it's never Flood's or the rest of the coaching staffs fault. They do a tremendous job recruiting. It's the anonymous fan base on Rivals that keeps Rutgers down.

 

[RUskoolie]

[/QUOTE]Many on this board loves to spike the ball at the 15 yard line and try to create inflated achievements by coach Flood for some reason. Whether it's "we have a top 30 recruiting class in June", "being 5-1 heading into OSU and talking about BCS games" or "we're going to get the big 3 recruits for 2016". I don't understand it.

You are also spinning stats to fit a narrative and it's not a good argument. "3 of 5 top guys in receiving were Flood recruits." Yeah, great. Carroo accounts for 75% of it and 3 other guys account for 20% of it and you are seeing that as justification for recruits panning out? "2 of the top 3 guys who led in INTs were Flood recruits". Yeah great, I think I can count on my hand how many INTs we had last season, etc, etc. Like I said, "someone has to play" and a freshman/sophomore leading our team in a category doesn't mean he is a good player. Look at our basketball team. We have plenty of Eddie Jordan recruits that probably led the team in statistical categories...most couldn't play on another B1G squad.

So again, let's see who becomes All-Conference, who is a multi-year starter and a difference maker, who is AA, etc. Declaring Flood not such a bad recruiter because we had a a young WR with a few good games or a freshman RB rush for 100 yards in a couple games is too early my man. Go look at the record book of Rutgers RBs with 100 yard games. There are people there from the past 10 years that transferred before their senior year, got recruited over, didn't pan out, etc.If you want, I'd be happy to list them and discuss what happened.

That doesn't mean I'm not excited about some of these guys, because I definitely am.

My point: this is a silly debate and the way you are framing the stats don't help. Let's Revisit in 2016.

 

[vkj91]

No problem, then I shouldn't expect to see anymore posts from you about Flood not being a good recruiter or guys not being BCS worthy since it's still to early?

 

[vkj91]

Also, I'm not spiking the ball at the 15. My OP stated recruiting could and should be better but it's doesn't discount the fact his recruits were leaders on a team that won 8 games. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't you predict
3 or 4 wins?
We'd lose to UNC?
He'd set us back 10 years?
We wouldn't win a B1G game?

Pretty sure I read many of your "I stand by my prediction" threads.......

 

[rutgersdave]

Why did you start this thread? No one was complaining recently unless it was discussed on the paid site.

I accept our fate just like Indiana, Illinois, Purdue, Maryland and Iowa fans. Why don't the rest of the fans accept our situation? The other teams don't get excited whether they win or lose. We might beat Penn State or Michigan this year but we will be considered heavy underdog. With Michigan already having 3 4 star QB recuits and most recruits being 4 stars. I don't expect to beat them in the future. Ihope we can stay with Penn State but unlikely unless there coach really sucks. We will battle Maryland for fifth place in the Big Ten East in most years. It is what it is.

If we get lucky, with some major changes we might be able to change things just like Duke becoming a winner or Texas A& M becoming a winner recently in 7-15 years.

This post was edited on 4/14 2:05 PM by rutgersdave

 

[ScarletRunner]

Originally posted by ag67:
When I look down the list of our 2014 recruits, I count 18 guys who we have heard some good things about during this first year - some of them guys who I never expected to be contributors based on the evaluations beforehand.

Some of them are already big contributors, some seem on the cusp, and others seem like they might work their way into the rotations in a year or two. All of them are freshman.

I don't expect all of them to work out, but the fact that so many have made a positive impression already tells me our staff is probably talented at picking out prospects with the potential, desire, and work ethic needed to develop into contributing members of the team.

By all accounts, the 2015 class will turn out the same way.

I realize it is far too early to know for sure, but the trend right now seems to be strongly in this positive direction IMO.

So I am looking at it a little differently. Right now the staff is battling with the big boys for the highly sought after recruits. I am hoping they are still keeping in mind the criteria they used during the past 2 years to ID the guys with the tight intangibles. The guys who have signed on seem to have those, and I will be happy to see these kinds of players sign on. no matter how many stars they have when all is said and done.

I have had similar thoughts... Of course it would be great to be able to land some of more highly sought-after recruits and have to deal with this kind of uptown problem.

In the meantime, let's hope more guys turn out like Turay, Hicks, Martin and fewer guys washout. I believe outright recruiting misses are just as harmful for a program as hitting on a four-star guy are helpful.

 

[RUTGERZ_R00LZ]

Originally posted by Knight Shift:

Originally posted by RCTrooper:
How did Flood's recruiting stack up against the teams that had winning conference records in the BiG?

That is the metric that matters because it will tell you if RU is recruiting a talent level that allows you to win in the BiG. Remember, that is the goal.

OSU: L 17-56
Nebraska: L[/B] 24-42
Wisconsin: L[/B] 0-37
Michigan St: L[/B] 3-45

Weren't the large majority of players in these games Schiano recruits?

I don't thinks so. Anyway in my post which had those scores, I was responding to the OP's listing of the Flood recruits that will return for this year -- those same recruits who allowed those beatdowns. Here's the OPs list.

Rushing: 4 top rushers all Flood recruits
Passing: obviously Nova and jury is out going forward but i you are a star gazer Rettig should make you excited.
Receiving: 3 of 5 were Flood recruits
Punt returns: all Flood recruits
KO returns: all Flood recruits
Interceptions: 2 of 3 Flood recruits
All purpose yards: 7 of 8 Flood recruits
Scoring: 2 of 3 were Flood recruits(did not include kicker)
total offense: 5 of 6 Flood recruits