2017 Recruiting Thread

by **TobaccoRoadEagle** on Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:39 pm

BCSUPERFAN22 {l Wrote}:... a poster named Dr Honeydew ...

that's gotta be eagle9903 with a name that tips his cap to his love of donahue/beeker

by **twballgame9** on Wed Jan 18, 2017 4:52 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
BCSUPERFAN22 {l Wrote}:... a poster named Dr Honeydew ...

that's gotta be eagle9903 with a name that tips his cap to his love of donahue/beeker

He could have been more subtle and gone with Dr. Teeth.

by **DavidGordonsFoot** on Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:54 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
BCSUPERFAN22 {l Wrote}:... a poster named Dr Honeydew ...

that's gotta be eagle9903 with a name that tips his cap to his love of donahue/beeker

He could have been more subtle and gone with Dr. Teeth.

It is 100% the Philly Intern.

by **TobaccoRoadEagle** on Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:25 pm

DavidGordonsFoot {l Wrote}:
twballgame9 {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
BCSUPERFAN22 {l Wrote}:... a poster named Dr Honeydew ...

that's gotta be eagle9903 with a name that tips his cap to his love of donahue/beeker

He could have been more subtle and gone with Dr. Teeth.

It is 100% the Philly Intern.

did you talk about it in the hot tub or something? "ahhhh pooothhh aathh hwuhneegnu awn eeeyay"

by **ILikeBC** on Wed Jan 18, 2017 7:09 pm

His EA username is DrBrunsonHoneyDew. His real name is Jared Tokarz, or @NFLDraftInsider.

He actually knows things. He knew the Dillon news from Dillon personally. As you can see on the watermark from Dillon's commitment tweet, he made the graphic himself. He knew CJ Lewis as well.

https://twitter.com/ajdillon7/status/809061255826800644

So while Eagles28 might be bullshit, DrBHD is pretty accurate.

by **claver2010** on Thu Jan 19, 2017 12:22 pm

uconn is getting some outstanding pub of late

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/c ... 738ba6ba63

http://highschoolsports.nj.com/news/art ... j-recruit/

http://deadspin.com/report-uconn-dicks- ... 1791288449

by **HJS** on Thu Jan 19, 2017 3:55 pm

claver2010 {l Wrote}:uconn is getting some outstanding pub of late

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/c ... 738ba6ba63

http://highschoolsports.nj.com/news/art ... j-recruit/

http://deadspin.com/report-uconn-dicks- ... 1791288449

In fairness... Harbaugh and pretty much everyone in the SEC does this on a regular basis. They don't get raked over the coals because they are semipro teams trying to win a National Championship and kids should be in buyers beware mode. SImilarly, the media doesn't freak out about the "commitment" from someone like Pinnock who was "committed" to BC until he wasn't. UConn is an easy target of fake outrage because they suck and will continue to suck regardless if they have a terrible recruit on the roster or not. But, the real problem here is not what HCRE did... but the media selectivity of a terrible media.

by **BCSUPERFAN22** on Thu Jan 19, 2017 4:41 pm

HJS {l Wrote}:
claver2010 {l Wrote}:uconn is getting some outstanding pub of late

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/c ... 738ba6ba63

http://highschoolsports.nj.com/news/art ... j-recruit/

http://deadspin.com/report-uconn-dicks- ... 1791288449

In fairness... Harbaugh and pretty much everyone in the SEC does this on a regular basis. They don't get raked over the coals because they are semipro teams trying to win a National Championship and kids should be in buyers beware mode. SImilarly, the media doesn't freak out about the "commitment" from someone like Pinnock who was "committed" to BC until he wasn't. UConn is an easy target of fake outrage because they suck and will continue to suck regardless if they have a terrible recruit on the roster or not. But, the real problem here is not what HCRE did... but the media selectivity of a terrible media.

Im not terribly close to this so i dont know all the details, but I think the real issue here is that Edsall told him that he was all set around the New Year/being hired and then pulled the scholarship leaving him in a bad situation. They also pulled an offer from Jordan Scott from St. Joes Regional in NJ but he was not a commit, so it has largely been swept under the rug (and would have gone completely unnoticed had this stuff with Ryan Dickens not surfaced, because its Connecticut and nobody really cares). One of those articles quoted a bunch of NJHS coaches in re: to how this will effect yukon in the future in NJ, but the reality is it wont.

The kids that they get from NJ dont have options. They weren't going to CT with other legit 1A options and they still wont, regardless. Kids from NJ that are deciding between playing at CT and Monmouth will go to Storz regardless of how they treated 1 recruit this year.

by **BCSUPERFAN22** on Thu Jan 19, 2017 4:51 pm

Tate Haynes just tweeted that he is headed to campus for an official, hopefully they can hang on to him, cant really afford another drop in the def backfield with Pinnock out.

by **MF73-Eleazar** on Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:40 pm

ILikeBC {l Wrote}:Look out for a potential flip from 3* OL Andrew Stueber, currently committed to Michigan.

He might not, from what I was told.

by **HJS** on Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:18 pm

MF73-Eleazar {l Wrote}:
ILikeBC {l Wrote}:Look out for a potential flip from 3* OL Andrew Stueber, currently committed to Michigan.

He might not, from what I was told.

Sounds like either the latest scion of EA either (a) is only as good as eagle28 or (b) jumped the gun and really just gave Michigan a head's up about the waffling two days before Don Brown and Jim Harbaugh made an in-home visit. Good job EA. Money well spent.

by **NaturalLight** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:03 am

Downgrades of AJ Dillon have begun. 247 Composite has him as a 3 star now. Looks like Scout dropped him to a 3 star.

by **HJS** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:31 am

NaturalLight {l Wrote}:Downgrades of AJ Dillon have begun. 247 Composite has him as a 3 star now. Looks like Scout dropped him to a 3 star.

About as shocking as Kwity Paye jumping 600 spots in their rankings pre- and post- Michigan commitment. When Rivals was pretty much the only shop around, they seemed to do the rankings in a considered/deliberate manner. As competition crept into the space, it is now nothing but an exercise in Facebook "likes" and appeasing the fanbases most willing to pay for information.

by **twballgame9** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:27 am

Star rankings never meant anything other than the phenomenon that you are observing. The number one indicator of talent for those sites is who is looking at that talent. The observe by observing the observers and interpreting the results. It's certainly a decent means of measuring talent for the top guys and a lazy way to do it to some semblance of accuracy for everyone else, but it has always been transparent. It actually worked in our favor when Skinner was here, after a while anyone he looked at got upgraded.

by **innocentbystander** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:40 am

HJS {l Wrote}:
NaturalLight {l Wrote}:Downgrades of AJ Dillon have begun. 247 Composite has him as a 3 star now. Looks like Scout dropped him to a 3 star.

About as shocking as Kwity Paye jumping 600 spots in their rankings pre- and post- Michigan commitment. When Rivals was pretty much the only shop around, they seemed to do the rankings in a considered/deliberate manner. As competition crept into the space, it is now nothing but an exercise in Facebook "likes" and appeasing the fanbases most willing to pay for information.

perfectly worded HJS, +5

it frustrates me that these ratings agencies (that hand out stars) are as unaccountable as Moody's and Standard and Poor's when they hand out their bond ratings for MBS. They are a just a "ratings shop", giving ratings based on who is paying them the most money. These rankings should be based on entirely objective measurements of math, statistics, and spreadsheets, not subjective rankings based on popularity and money. But it is what it is....

by **BCSUPERFAN22** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 11:45 am

Article mentioning BC as a possible landing spot for Bryce Watts from NJ. I think most are expecting him to commit to VT, but this says he could make a visit next week

http://www.scout.com/college/football/recruiting/story/1747549-nsd-countdown-which-school-light-watts

by **TobaccoRoadEagle** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:15 pm

innocentbystander {l Wrote}:
HJS {l Wrote}:
NaturalLight {l Wrote}:Downgrades of AJ Dillon have begun. 247 Composite has him as a 3 star now. Looks like Scout dropped him to a 3 star.

About as shocking as Kwity Paye jumping 600 spots in their rankings pre- and post- Michigan commitment. When Rivals was pretty much the only shop around, they seemed to do the rankings in a considered/deliberate manner. As competition crept into the space, it is now nothing but an exercise in Facebook "likes" and appeasing the fanbases most willing to pay for information.

perfectly worded HJS, +5

it frustrates me that these ratings agencies (that hand out stars) are as unaccountable as Moody's and Standard and Poor's when they hand out their bond ratings for MBS. They are a just a "ratings shop", giving ratings based on who is paying them the most money. These rankings should be based on entirely objective measurements of math, statistics, and spreadsheets, not subjective rankings based on popularity and money. But it is what it is....

no one should be surprised that your knowledge of the rating process is horribly simplified an wrong. stick to pork chops, ic (impacted colon)

by **innocentbystander** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:34 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
innocentbystander {l Wrote}:
HJS {l Wrote}:
NaturalLight {l Wrote}:Downgrades of AJ Dillon have begun. 247 Composite has him as a 3 star now. Looks like Scout dropped him to a 3 star.

About as shocking as Kwity Paye jumping 600 spots in their rankings pre- and post- Michigan commitment. When Rivals was pretty much the only shop around, they seemed to do the rankings in a considered/deliberate manner. As competition crept into the space, it is now nothing but an exercise in Facebook "likes" and appeasing the fanbases most willing to pay for information.

perfectly worded HJS, +5

it frustrates me that these ratings agencies (that hand out stars) are as unaccountable as Moody's and Standard and Poor's when they hand out their bond ratings for MBS. They are a just a "ratings shop", giving ratings based on who is paying them the most money. These rankings should be based on entirely objective measurements of math, statistics, and spreadsheets, not subjective rankings based on popularity and money. But it is what it is....

no one should be surprised that your knowledge of the rating process is horribly simplified an wrong. stick to pork chops, ic (impacted colon)

why can't you just stick with ib? (irritable bowel?)

I am just agreeing with homojs. if you think my agreement with his assessment of the ratings process is wrong... take it up with him. :shrug

by **TobaccoRoadEagle** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:39 pm

you added moodys/s&p, ic. that's what I was referencing

by **innocentbystander** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 2:55 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:you added moodys/s&p, ic. that's what I was referencing

so that scene at S&P in The Big Short was a lie? That was just a total lie? Things like that didn't happen with the ratings agencies? All the quotes that I could pull from Richard Michalek and Gary Witt to the FCIC, all lies on their part?

i'll defer to your expertise on this tre. if you say that Richard and Gary and Michael Lewis are ALL wrong and here is why, and if what you said makes sense.... I'll believe you. Just explain it for me in simplistic terms. I am a computer scientist, not a financial planner or economist.

by **TobaccoRoadEagle** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:05 pm

innocentbystander {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:you added moodys/s&p, ic. that's what I was referencing

so that scene at S&P in The Big Short was a lie? That was just a total lie? Things like that didn't happen with the ratings agencies? All the quotes that I could pull from Richard Michalek and Gary Witt to the FCIC, all lies on their part?

movie quotes? really?

news flash, a tornado does not carry you to oz

by **innocentbystander** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:08 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:
innocentbystander {l Wrote}:
TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:you added moodys/s&p, ic. that's what I was referencing

so that scene at S&P in The Big Short was a lie? That was just a total lie? Things like that didn't happen with the ratings agencies? All the quotes that I could pull from Richard Michalek and Gary Witt to the FCIC, all lies on their part?

movie quotes? really?

news flash, a tornado does not carry you to oz

news flash, Wizard of Oz was fiction. The Big Short actually... happened.

on edit....

i'll defer to your expertise on this tre. I am sure you know way more about this than I do. but I am pretty smart. if you say that Richard and Gary and Michael Lewis are ALL wrong about ratings agencies and the conflict of interest that they have, and here is why, and if what you said makes sense.... I'll believe you. Just explain it for me in simplistic terms. I am a computer scientist, not a financial planner or economist. I understand data and math and "motive."

by **TobaccoRoadEagle** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:48 pm

"Based on a true story" means fiction as well. the fact that you don't understand this means you aren't as smrt as you think you are

by **twballgame9** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:58 pm

I love how impacted colon completely misunderstood the nature of hjs' comment, applied an ill-fitting analogy, and then just ran with it with reckless abandon.

TRE, do me a favor a write a check to bump Dillon back to a 4*. Thanks in advance.

by **innocentbystander** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:02 pm

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:"Based on a true story" means fiction as well. the fact that you don't understand this means you aren't as smrt as you think you are

how smrt is that? how smrt do you think I think I am?

its alright, so you don't have an answer for me for my original question. I was deferring to you but.... that's fine. its all good

by **angrychicken** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:52 pm

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:I love how impacted colon completely misunderstood the nature of hjs' comment, applied an ill-fitting analogy, and then just ran with it with reckless abandon.

TRE, do me a favor a write a check to bump Dillon back to a 4*. Thanks in advance.

Almost as good was his Costco-esque solution to the star system.

These rankings should be based on entirely objective measurements of math, statistics, and spreadsheets...

by **DavidGordonsFoot** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:18 pm

innocentbystander {l Wrote}:These rankings should be based on entirely objective measurements of math, statistics, and spreadsheets, not subjective rankings based on popularity and money.

Human beings are not machines. They do not behave predictably from one to another. When are you going to realize this?

I'm a CS guy, too, and life would be a hell of a lot easier (and a lot more boring) if there was a Turing machine for "human," but that ain't life.

by **innocentbystander** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:26 pm

DavidGordonsFoot {l Wrote}:
innocentbystander {l Wrote}:These rankings should be based on entirely objective measurements of math, statistics, and spreadsheets, not subjective rankings based on popularity and money.

Human beings are not machines. They do not behave predictably from one to another. When are you going to realize this?

I'm a CS guy, too, and life would be a hell of a lot easier (and a lot more boring) if there was a Turing machine for "human," but that ain't life.

Human beings ARE machines. Yes you are right, they do not behave predictably from one to another. That is because the machines are not all the same, do not think the same, and do not all operate (consistently) the same. That is why they bother to rate the players, to discriminate one from another. When are you going to realize this?

I don't want life to be a Turing machine, but if you are going to bother to rate things (kind of like giving a student a grade) if you don't do it based on mathematics and some objective measurement, then what the hell are you doing? You are doing no different than what s&p, Fitch, and Moody's did.

by **twballgame9** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 5:41 pm

innocentbystander {l Wrote}:
DavidGordonsFoot {l Wrote}:
innocentbystander {l Wrote}:These rankings should be based on entirely objective measurements of math, statistics, and spreadsheets, not subjective rankings based on popularity and money.

Human beings are not machines. They do not behave predictably from one to another. When are you going to realize this?

I'm a CS guy, too, and life would be a hell of a lot easier (and a lot more boring) if there was a Turing machine for "human," but that ain't life.

Human beings ARE machines. Yes you are right, they do not behave predictably from one to another. That is because the machines are not all the same, do not think the same, and do not all operate (consistently) the same. That is why they bother to rate the players, to discriminate one from another. When are you going to realize this?

I don't want life to be a Turing machine, but if you are going to bother to rate things (kind of like giving a student a grade) if you don't do it based on mathematics and some objective measurement, then what the hell are you doing? You are doing no different than what s&p, Fitch, and Moody's did.

stop with the moody's thing, your knowledge is based on a movie with Steve Carrell in it based on a book by the king of all over-simplifiers, Michael Lewis. Next thing you will be telling us that the Greek God of walks is on his way to the hall of fame.

A better analogy would be to the valuing of FX options - so many variables that the thing is a scientific crap shoot even if you figure out an objective measurement for things like "growth potential" and "quality of competition". But some dumb fuck in his mom's basement is not going to come up with the Black Scholes model for valuing high school athletes.

by **TontoKowalski** on Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:04 pm

innocentbystander {l Wrote}:
DavidGordonsFoot {l Wrote}:
innocentbystander {l Wrote}:These rankings should be based on entirely objective measurements of math, statistics, and spreadsheets, not subjective rankings based on popularity and money.

Human beings are not machines. They do not behave predictably from one to another. When are you going to realize this?

I'm a CS guy, too, and life would be a hell of a lot easier (and a lot more boring) if there was a Turing machine for "human," but that ain't life.

Human beings ARE machines. Yes you are right, they do not behave predictably from one to another. That is because the machines are not all the same, do not think the same, and do not all operate (consistently) the same. That is why they bother to rate the players, to discriminate one from another. When are you going to realize this?

I don't want life to be a Turing machine, but if you are going to bother to rate things (kind of like giving a student a grade) if you don't do it based on mathematics and some objective measurement, then what the hell are you doing? You are doing no different than what s&p, Fitch, and Moody's did.

Human beings are NOT machines. You're stating that all human consciousness that has ever been and ever will be is universally deterministic. I appreciate that your own may be, but others are not. Creativity is a real phenomenon. Look at my Wesley Willis song about hansen - I am a brilliant creative mind. While you admittedly could never either conceive of so brilliant an idea nor could you execute so perfectly, seizing the zeitgeist of the moment, standing on the shoulders of another creative giant, and telling hansen to shut the fuck up, the fact is, I could and did. Non-deterministic creativity works this way. Your mind must be SO boring.

The ratings agencies didn't understand what they were rating and they rated it wrong - trying to produce valuations, returns, or an interpretation of risk on that kind of securities portfolio is a Hell of a thing and none of them did it well, right, or even at all. Recruiting rankings are stupid for a different reason - systems work in college, and players are not equivalent between systems. Players right for one place are not right for another. Further, men at that age have not fully realized their physical or athletic potential - so you're making the same mistake the climate academics make - plotting the future from an insufficiently small amount of data. Recruiting services apply broad rankings in a space where applicability is everything, and they apply it to a wildly volatile temporal domain. Terrible. And they don't spell their objectives properly on their resumes, either.

The NFL combine is a perfect example of "scientific" measureables failing to describe a player's impact at the next level.

This is dumb and I wash my hands of it.

2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Re: 2017 Recruiting Thread

Who is online