Realistic Coaching Hires with the AD

Rike Miley said:
That is literally what coaching is. Motivating, teaching and developing your players to be the best they could possibly be. Getting the most out of them every practice and every game and then putting them into positions to succeed on game day. No reason a good coach cant take top 20 talent and make them too 10-15 talent in 4 years. Who knows if Frost can be that guy or not. 
Click to expand...
I realize that this is "literally what coaching is," Rike. 

We don't usually get Top 20 classes. We usually get classes in the #20 - #30 rank range. What if we had a coach that could consistently get Top 20 classes?

Do we think that getting such a coach and staff that can recruit this well is feasible, or are we resigning ourselves to believing that it's not possible?

 
Isle of View said:
Could Tulsa and UCF meet in a conference championship game?
Click to expand...
If it was last year  - yes,  not this year.  A better chance that UCF will have a rematch wt either Navy or Memphis. Tulsa could win 3 of their last 5.  UConn, Temple, SMU and lose to Memphis and USF.

  AAC Football Standings


School


Conf


Overall


West


Navy


3-1


5-1


Memphis


2-1


5-1


Houston


2-1


4-2


SMU


1-1


4-2


Tulane


1-1


3-3


Tulsa


1-2


2-5


East


USF


3-0


6-0


UCF


3-0


5-0


Temple


1-3


3-4


UConn


1-3


2-4


ECU


1-3


1-6


Cincinnati


0-3


2-5

 
Undone said:
I realize that this is "literally what coaching is," Rike. 

We don't usually get Top 20 classes. We usually get classes in the #20 - #30 rank range. What if we had a coach that could consistently get Top 20 classes?

Do we think that getting such a coach and staff that can recruit this well is feasible, or are we resigning ourselves to believing that it's not possible?
Click to expand...


We definitely saw what recruiting top classes did for Bo Pelini's first few years thanks to Billy C. Mark coached up all that talent. I agree, we just need a HC that can put two and two together for sure and get the most out of his players and we're certainly not seeing that under Mike Riley.

 
unlfan said:
Yes, but Oregon (along with Wisconsin I would say) was the poster child for having a specific system and recruiting to that very specific system. They only looked at one thing: speed on offensive skill players. If you had that one trait they went after you hard. I think they even literally converted some track guys into wide outs. So they had a very good combination of (1) getting some fairly high rated recruits that (2) were very specifically recruited because they possessed the exact skill set they were looking for.

Unless you are Ohio State, Alabama, etc. and get get you pick of the litter of 5 star guys, you need to go this route. Go one level "lower" in star rankings, but be very specific on your identity / playing style.
Click to expand...




I really like like this post.

It's not that these recruiting rankings are bunk or highly inaccurate as much as we need to understand what they're doing. We sometimes see them as ubiquitous pools of talent or a straight rating of whose "better" (whatever that means). It's easier to think of them as baseball players ... this guy is a five tool guy, this one has 2 pitches and that one has 4 pitches. Sometimes that 2 pitch guy has 2 really good pitches, you just don't want him going through the order 3 times. 

The thing I'd add to this excellent post is the third criteria: the person. If you can find not just the right measurable a but the right person with those measurables, you have a big leg up. That's really hard to do with 17 and 18 year olds, though, and looks can be really deceiving. Sometimes that kid with the rap sheet is the one you're actually after. 

 
brophog said:
I really like like this post.

It's not that these recruiting rankings are bunk or highly inaccurate as much as we need to understand what they're doing. We sometimes see them as ubiquitous pools of talent or a straight rating of whose "better" (whatever that means). It's easier to think of them as baseball players ... this guy is a five tool guy, this one has 2 pitches and that one has 4 pitches. Sometimes that 2 pitch guy has 2 really good pitches, you just don't want him going through the order 3 times. 

The thing I'd add to this excellent post is the third criteria: the person. If you can find not just the right measurable a but the right person with those measurables, you have a big leg up. That's really hard to do with 17 and 18 year olds, though, and looks can be really deceiving. Sometimes that kid with the rap sheet is the one you're actually after. 
Click to expand...
David Shaw gave an interesting Ted Talk about this. Basically, they (Stanford) recruit character more than athletes, and try to instill values like commitment and drive to positively affect the world. I would be okay with Shaw on our sideline, coaching our shade of red.

 
Jeremy said:
David Shaw gave an interesting Ted Talk about this. Basically, they (Stanford) recruit character more than athletes, and try to instill values like commitment and drive to positively affect the world. I would be okay with Shaw on our sideline, coaching our shade of red.
Click to expand...


Ditto, but it's nothing more than a pipe dream.  The only way I see Shaw leaving Stanford is for the NFL, and I doubt it happens. 

 
Jeremy said:
David Shaw gave an interesting Ted Talk about this. Basically, they (Stanford) recruit character more than athletes, and try to instill values like commitment and drive to positively affect the world. I would be okay with Shaw on our sideline, coaching our shade of red.
Click to expand...
Ted Talks are cool and all, but...

Stanford's national recruiting rankings the past six years:

-2017 = 14th
-2016 = 16th

-2015 = 24th

-2014 = 13th

-2013 = 52nd

-2012 = 7th

Three of those years are Top 15 and one of those is Top 10. 

I wish we did that.

 
junior4949 said:
Ditto, but it's nothing more than a pipe dream.  The only way I see Shaw leaving Stanford is for the NFL, and I doubt it happens. 
Click to expand...


Stanford said the same thing about Harbaugh but since it's Shaw's alma mater could be their Tom Osborne guy.

 
Undone said:
Ted Talks are cool and all, but...

Stanford's national recruiting rankings the past six years:

-2017 = 14th
-2016 = 16th

-2015 = 24th

-2014 = 13th

-2013 = 52nd

-2012 = 7th

Three of those years are Top 15 and one of those is Top 10. 

I wish we did that.
Click to expand...


That's what you get for being a drive away from pipeline areas/states. We have to win and beat the Wisconsin's and the Ohio State's if we want to keep our in-state talent and get a leg up on recruiting and that starts obviously with coaching.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top