EagleOutsider.com

According to Twitter, Scooter Harrington has committed to Stanford. Wow this one is bad, all but gift wrapped and Addazio couldn't keep him

Well, this sucks.

I thought Addazio's redeeming quality was recruiting.

These last two classes suck and have 0 impact players especially on offense

Kid was a legacy too.

I am glad the Dublin presale didnt start yet.

DuchesneEast {l Wrote}:Kid was a legacy too.

Parents are big BC fans and supporters. They go to most to the games and park near Conte.

Are there any promising up and coming coaches in the MAC at the present time?

I'm pretty meh about decommits in general and particularly the ones who dropped from the 2016 Class (see Dalton, Daniel). However, this is the worst decommit we've had in a very long time. Kid is going to be excellent on the field, was a legacy from a supportive family and can handle the academics.

All that said, I don't begrudge any kid (BC legacy or not) who opts for Stanford, Harvard, Princeton or even Duke. I wouldn't tell my kids to pass on that opportunity in order to follow in their old man's footsteps. Nonetheless, this kid isn't looking around if Daz didn't suck at his job.

Cracker jack job, Steve.

We went thru this decommit phase at the end of the Spazz era too, it's a lot easier to decommit from a sinking ship than transfer so there should be more. It's all part of the football coach life cycle at BC.

Can't blame Harrington, Stanford TE is involved in the offense, TE has been a dead zone at BC for a long time.Ditto Dalton at Ped State. It certainly hurts losing two top notch TEs from NE, esp one being legacy but they probably would have been underutilized anyway.

I thought Harrington was ultimately slated to be a LT. Not that our LTs have been very involved in the offense either.

HJS {l Wrote}:I'm pretty meh about decommits in general and particularly the ones who dropped from the 2016 Class (see Dalton, Daniel). However, this is the worst decommit we've had in a very long time. Kid is going to be excellent on the field, was a legacy from a supportive family and can handle the academics.

All that said, I don't begrudge any kid (BC legacy or not) who opts for Stanford, Harvard, Princeton or even Duke. I wouldn't tell my kids to pass on that opportunity in order to follow in their old man's footsteps. Nonetheless, this kid isn't looking around if Daz didn't suck at his job.

this

HJS {l Wrote}:I thought Harrington was ultimately slated to be a LT. Not that our LTs have been very involved in the offense either.

This was very funny.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

HJS {l Wrote}:I thought Harrington was ultimately slated to be a LT. Not that our LTs have been very involved in the offense either.

This was very funny.

I second that emotion

John Bosa will have 2 sons playing to Ohio St next year, we could build a legacy all star team around Flutie

facilities, facilities, facilities.

the power 5 world has passed BC by.

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:facilities, facilities, facilities.

the power 5 world has passed BC by.

I think this is more about us sucking than where we practice.

31southst {l Wrote}:

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:facilities, facilities, facilities.

the power 5 world has passed BC by.

I think this is more about us sucking than where we practice.

Stanford was 1-11 in 2006. Hired a good coach, spent $30 million on a football only facility that opened in 2013 and now they are a force. There is really no reason BC couldn't do the same.

31southst {l Wrote}:

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:facilities, facilities, facilities.

the power 5 world has passed BC by.

I think this is more about us sucking than where we practice.

What if we suck because of where we practice ? Or have the coach we have because our pool is limited because of where we practice.

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:

31southst {l Wrote}:

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:facilities, facilities, facilities.

the power 5 world has passed BC by.

I think this is more about us sucking than where we practice.

Stanford was 1-11 in 2006. Hired a good coach, spent $30 million on a football only facility that opened in 2013 and now they are a force. There is really no reason BC couldn't do the same.

Step 1: hire a good coach

If you think he went to Stanford because of facilities you're a moron.

Stanford is good at football, we suck.

angrychicken {l Wrote}:

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:

31southst {l Wrote}:

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:facilities, facilities, facilities.

the power 5 world has passed BC by.

I think this is more about us sucking than where we practice.

Stanford was 1-11 in 2006. Hired a good coach, spent $30 million on a football only facility that opened in 2013 and now they are a force. There is really no reason BC couldn't do the same.

Step 1: hire a good coach

good coach could be step 2. I don't really care which step comes first, but both are needed.

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:If you think he went to Stanford because of facilities you're a moron.

Stanford is good at football, we suck.

I agree with Hep-C.

Get good, players come.

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:facilities, facilities, facilities.

the power 5 world has passed BC by.

if only tre the tyrant installed that countdown clock

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:

angrychicken {l Wrote}:

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:

31southst {l Wrote}:

2001Eagle {l Wrote}:facilities, facilities, facilities.

the power 5 world has passed BC by.

I think this is more about us sucking than where we practice.

Stanford was 1-11 in 2006. Hired a good coach, spent $30 million on a football only facility that opened in 2013 and now they are a force. There is really no reason BC couldn't do the same.

Step 1: hire a good coach

good coach could be step 2. I don't really care which step comes first, but both are needed.

I agree that both are needed, but making shiny new facilities the priority is just polishing a turd. Lipstick on a pig.

The facilities are a symptom not a cause. No one goes all in on fancy facilities and then goes cheap-o on coaches and everything else. When we do build new facilities at BC, they'll be closer to bare minimum acceptable than best in class. Schools build fancy facilities when spending money to compete is part of the athletic strategy - same with when they spend for a name coach.

angrychicken {l Wrote}:

eepstein0 {l Wrote}:If you think he went to Stanford because of facilities you're a moron.

Stanford is good at football, we suck.

I agree with Hep-C.

Get good, players come.

It's this. BC wins 8 games last year this thread wouldn't exist.

Addazio could've won at least 6 last year, but he chose not to put the best players on the field, thus we won 3 games

Someone on BCI claims more decommits are coming.

Yay

Corporal Funishment {l Wrote}:The facilities are a symptom not a cause. No one goes all in on fancy facilities and then goes cheap-o on coaches and everything else. When we do build new facilities at BC, they'll be closer to bare minimum acceptable than best in class. Schools build fancy facilities when spending money to compete is part of the athletic strategy - same with when they spend for a name coach.

BC pays more than Stanford.

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/

I wonder if our next AD will avoid hiring a mustachioed i-talian as head football coach and not commit career ?