2021 Recruiting Thread

Forum rules
"The opinions expressed on this board are property of the poster and do not reflect the opinion of EagleOutsider, Boston College or Boston College Athletics"

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby BrightonEagle on Sat Dec 19, 2020 11:36 am

Anything of note in globe article?
BrightonEagle
Carney Hall
 
Posts: 443
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 11:25 am
Karma: 51

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby eagle33 on Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:02 pm

BrightonEagle wrote:Anything of note in globe article?


Boston College added to its highest-rated recruiting class in more than a decade by bringing in the top recruit in Massachusetts.

Offensive lineman Drew Kendall, who starred at Noble and Greenough in Dedham, announced Friday on Twitter that he committed to BC.

Kendall had offers from Stanford, Michigan, Duke, Maryland, N.C. State, Penn State, Virginia, West Virginia, and Syracuse, but turned them down including to follow in the footsteps of his father Pete Kendall, who twice earned All-Big East honors for the Eagles in the 1990s before going on to play 13 seasons in the NFL.

In a statement via Twitter, Eagles coach Jeff Hafley said, “There is a reason Drew is ranked the top player in the state of Massachusetts. He is smart, tough, talented, and his potential is through the roof. Drew will be a force in the ACC and college football.”

The addition of Kendall gives the Eagles two ESPN 300 recruits in their 2021 class, alongside defensive back C.J. Burton.

Kendall was rated 13th among offensive lineman by ESPN.


Eagles offensive line coach Matt Applebaum said, “Drew is a quick-twitch athlete that plays with great intensity and physicality. His high football IQ and strong fundamentals give him a platform to launch his college career.”

Fresh off a 6-5 season in Hafley’s first year as head coach, the Eagles put together an impressive 2021 class ESPN ranked 38th in the nation, the best showing for BC since ESPN started its recruiting rankings in 2006.
eagle33
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1225
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2015 10:29 am
Karma: -221

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby RegalBCeagle on Sat Dec 19, 2020 2:56 pm

claver2010 wrote:kendall brings bc to the 32nd ranked class. apparently he joins a long list enrolling in 3 weeks.

just wait till hafley is able to get kids on campus.


Add in some high profile transfers and it seems he's wasting no time taking the talent level up significantly.
User avatar
RegalBCeagle
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2707
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:55 pm
Karma: 352

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Logitano on Sat Dec 19, 2020 5:41 pm

eagle33 wrote:
BrightonEagle wrote:Anything of note in globe article?


Boston College added to its highest-rated recruiting class in more than a decade by bringing in the top recruit in Massachusetts.

Offensive lineman Drew Kendall, who starred at Noble and Greenough in Dedham, announced Friday on Twitter that he committed to BC.

Kendall had offers from Stanford, Michigan, Duke, Maryland, N.C. State, Penn State, Virginia, West Virginia, and Syracuse, but turned them down including to follow in the footsteps of his father Pete Kendall, who twice earned All-Big East honors for the Eagles in the 1990s before going on to play 13 seasons in the NFL.

In a statement via Twitter, Eagles coach Jeff Hafley said, “There is a reason Drew is ranked the top player in the state of Massachusetts. He is smart, tough, talented, and his potential is through the roof. Drew will be a force in the ACC and college football.”

The addition of Kendall gives the Eagles two ESPN 300 recruits in their 2021 class, alongside defensive back C.J. Burton.

Kendall was rated 13th among offensive lineman by ESPN.


Eagles offensive line coach Matt Applebaum said, “Drew is a quick-twitch athlete that plays with great intensity and physicality. His high football IQ and strong fundamentals give him a platform to launch his college career.”

Fresh off a 6-5 season in Hafley’s first year as head coach, the Eagles put together an impressive 2021 class ESPN ranked 38th in the nation, the best showing for BC since ESPN started its recruiting rankings in 2006.


Nice quote from Coach Applebaum. Applebaum forever, 'moj and his anti-applebaum agenda never. :ace
Logitano
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2198
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:43 pm
Karma: 1022

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby innocentbystander on Sun Dec 20, 2020 10:56 pm

eagle33 wrote:
BrightonEagle wrote:Anything of note in globe article?


Boston College added to its highest-rated recruiting class in more than a decade by bringing in the top recruit in Massachusetts.

Offensive lineman Drew Kendall, who starred at Noble and Greenough in Dedham, announced Friday on Twitter that he committed to BC.

Kendall had offers from Stanford, Michigan, Duke, Maryland, N.C. State, Penn State, Virginia, West Virginia, and Syracuse, but turned them down including to follow in the footsteps of his father Pete Kendall, who twice earned All-Big East honors for the Eagles in the 1990s before going on to play 13 seasons in the NFL.

In a statement via Twitter, Eagles coach Jeff Hafley said, “There is a reason Drew is ranked the top player in the state of Massachusetts. He is smart, tough, talented, and his potential is through the roof. Drew will be a force in the ACC and college football.”

The addition of Kendall gives the Eagles two ESPN 300 recruits in their 2021 class, alongside defensive back C.J. Burton.

Kendall was rated 13th among offensive lineman by ESPN.


Eagles offensive line coach Matt Applebaum said, “Drew is a quick-twitch athlete that plays with great intensity and physicality. His high football IQ and strong fundamentals give him a platform to launch his college career.”


Outstanding. And I remember his dad at Arch Bishop Williams in Braintree Massachusetts. Pete Kendall was (at the time, December 1990) the #2 rated football player in the state of Massachusetts.

eagle33 wrote:Fresh off a 6-5 season in Hafley’s first year as head coach, the Eagles put together an impressive 2021 class ESPN ranked 38th in the nation, the best showing for BC since ESPN started its recruiting rankings in 2006.


Lets do math.

14 teams in the ACC. 14 teams in both the B1G-T(14)N and the SEC. That is 42. Plus 10 teams from the Big-XII and 12 from the Pac-12. 64 Power-5 conference teams plus Notre Dame, 65 Power 5 teams in total. 38th best is near the top of the lower half of the Power 5. 38th best in the nation is probably good enough to be (maybe) the 6th or 7th best in the ACC. This is the best class (on paper) since 2003.

The 2003 class (which included Matt Ryan) was the 31st rated class in the country, good enough to make it #2 ranked class in the Big East. But that was exceptionally impressive considering that Miami was still in the conference for one more year. I'd be very interested to see where an 8-1 Miami had its 2021 class rated this year.

The 2004 class was 38th or 39th in the country (about as highly rated as Hafley's 2021 class) and with Miami gone, that was the #1 rated class in the Big East. Finally, it took us 15 years, but we finally have a coach that can "close" again!
Feminism is Eve eats all the apples, gives God the middle finger when He asks her about it, and has the snake present Adam with a restraining order, ordering him to stay 500 yards away while still being forced to provide Eve food, clothing, and shelter.
User avatar
innocentbystander
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 18277
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:40 pm
Location: Pac-12 Hell
Karma: -1

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 8:35 am

This year's class is just bigger. That's 90% of the difference. It's literally "more of the same"
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby bceagles24 on Mon Dec 21, 2020 9:48 am

Final recap compared to previous classes:
P5 Offers for commits:
2014: 14/28
2015: 14/25
2016: 11/19
2017: 12/21
2018: 10/20
2019: 16/19
2020: 12/13
2021: 21/26

I’d also add that if you went through the amount of offers top to bottom this class would far outstrip the others as well. Fantastic first class for Hafley given the limitations on them this cycle and they aren’t done yet either. We’ll see how their coaching chops are with this class because there’s a ton of speed and raw ability in this group. Which makes me pretty excited about it because I think they have the coaching ability to bring the best out of them.
bceagles24
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:32 am
Karma: 220

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Lt. Dingleberry on Mon Dec 21, 2020 10:02 am

innocentbystander wrote: I'd be very interested to see where an 8-1 Miami had its 2021 class rated this year.


247sports has UM (the dingleberry alma mater) at 11 in the nation and 2 in the ACC, excluding ND. Fairly consistent trend over the last decade in the ACC
User avatar
Lt. Dingleberry
n00b
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2018 11:07 am
Karma: 17

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 10:37 am

As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby myles kennefick on Mon Dec 21, 2020 11:31 am

Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.


Beyond having far better other offers than most previous classes, this year's class is also the highest ranked by both average star and total points in at least the last ten years. Other than that I guess it's "typical"...
User avatar
myles kennefick
n00b
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:24 pm
Karma: 2

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby bceagles24 on Mon Dec 21, 2020 12:04 pm

Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.
bceagles24
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:32 am
Karma: 220

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby innocentbystander on Mon Dec 21, 2020 1:02 pm

bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.


This.

The 2003 class wasn't so outstanding simply because everyone in it was great. The 2003 class was outstanding because there were 10 or 12 outstanding players in it even if the other 6 or 8 or whatever it was, were worthless and never added value to the team. It is what you get in the top 10 of every class. And sometimes you have no idea who those top 10 ARE until they take the field. It will be two or three years (at least) before we know who in the 2021 class, matters.

Alabama recruits (what?) #1 in the country? All 20 of their recruits are not 5 stars. All 20 of their recruits are not NFL bound. But the top 10 of 20, yeah, they should be awesome, thinking professional football career. Now for BC's recruiting classes (2005 -> 2020) I would say that the top 2 (maybe 3) were outstanding and 1 or 2, NFL. Not 10. NFW.

Lets see how the 2021 class shakes out. But really the only way to determine how outstanding they are is if they perform in 2025 the way the 2003 class performed in 2007.
Feminism is Eve eats all the apples, gives God the middle finger when He asks her about it, and has the snake present Adam with a restraining order, ordering him to stay 500 yards away while still being forced to provide Eve food, clothing, and shelter.
User avatar
innocentbystander
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 18277
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:40 pm
Location: Pac-12 Hell
Karma: -1

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 2:45 pm

myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.


Beyond having far better other offers than most previous classes, this year's class is also the highest ranked by both average star and total points in at least the last ten years. Other than that I guess it's "typical"...


The absolute star rating inflates over time, it's a marketing ploy, the relative rankings are what matters. Total points are a function of quantity of players recruited. The "better offers" thing, as I have proven before, is highly unscientific and in all likelihood the combination of better infrastructure to maintain such lists and kids going out of their way to advertise their lists online.
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 2:49 pm

bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.


So why exactly would BC's recruits have progressed more than anyone else's recruits in the past year?

Why exactly wouldn't other schools have recruited guys who haven't publicized their offer lists?

Why are the recruiting rankings so uniquely terrible at capturing the recruiting success of Jeff Hafley? Why should Jeff Hafley be given the benefit of the doubt that his recruits are so much better than the numbers would indicate?
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby myles kennefick on Mon Dec 21, 2020 3:21 pm

Corporal Funishment wrote:
myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.


Beyond having far better other offers than most previous classes, this year's class is also the highest ranked by both average star and total points in at least the last ten years. Other than that I guess it's "typical"...


The absolute star rating inflates over time, it's a marketing ploy, the relative rankings are what matters. Total points are a function of quantity of players recruited. The "better offers" thing, as I have proven before, is highly unscientific and in all likelihood the combination of better infrastructure to maintain such lists and kids going out of their way to advertise their lists online.


You haven't proven shit. If you want to get your rocks off being the internet contrarian go ahead, but even using relative rankings, this year's class is BC's highest average star ranking relative to other ACC schools in the last 10 years.
User avatar
myles kennefick
n00b
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:24 pm
Karma: 2

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby HJS on Mon Dec 21, 2020 3:26 pm

myles kennefick wrote:This post was made by Corporal Funishment who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

Umm... you only have 71 posts, so consider this a PSA.
This post was made by Corporal Funishment who is currently on your ignore list.
User avatar
HJS
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15443
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 12:08 pm
Karma: 472

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby bceagles24 on Mon Dec 21, 2020 3:28 pm

Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.


So why exactly would BC's recruits have progressed more than anyone else's recruits in the past year?

Why exactly wouldn't other schools have recruited guys who haven't publicized their offer lists?

Why are the recruiting rankings so uniquely terrible at capturing the recruiting success of Jeff Hafley? Why should Jeff Hafley be given the benefit of the doubt that his recruits are so much better than the numbers would indicate?


Nobody is saying other schools haven’t but I’m saying without getting eyes on a lot of these kids the early rankings mean little this cycle for everybody involved. This year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings outside of the top top kids that you’ll ever find. I also saw in the other post your continuing your fallacy about quantity making a difference. Once again the class rankings are done in a fashion where only the top commits really matter. BC has 26 commits taking the bottom 6-7 of them off the commit list would lose then about 2.5 points. Doesn’t drop them at all because high number of commits don’t matter. But keep preaching the wrong line of thinking.
bceagles24
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:32 am
Karma: 220

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 3:56 pm

bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.


So why exactly would BC's recruits have progressed more than anyone else's recruits in the past year?

Why exactly wouldn't other schools have recruited guys who haven't publicized their offer lists?

Why are the recruiting rankings so uniquely terrible at capturing the recruiting success of Jeff Hafley? Why should Jeff Hafley be given the benefit of the doubt that his recruits are so much better than the numbers would indicate?


Nobody is saying other schools haven’t but I’m saying without getting eyes on a lot of these kids the early rankings mean little this cycle for everybody involved. This year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings outside of the top top kids that you’ll ever find. I also saw in the other post your continuing your fallacy about quantity making a difference. Once again the class rankings are done in a fashion where only the top commits really matter. BC has 26 commits taking the bottom 6-7 of them off the commit list would lose then about 2.5 points. Doesn’t drop them at all because high number of commits don’t matter. But keep preaching the wrong line of thinking.


If this year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings we've ever had, shouldn't that lend itself to heightened scrutiny of supposed recruiting success? Is no one else seeing the disconnect here?

And BC has an 85.33 ranking with 26 recruits. Rutgers has a more normal-sized class of 21 commits, which has an 85.35 ranking. (We're being outrecruited by Rutgers - hooray.) We have 200.84 points, Rutgers has 190.93 points. Therefore the quantity effect of the abnormal class size is roughly 10 points, not 2.5. As Steven K Bannon sometimes says, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts!
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:05 pm

myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.


Beyond having far better other offers than most previous classes, this year's class is also the highest ranked by both average star and total points in at least the last ten years. Other than that I guess it's "typical"...


The absolute star rating inflates over time, it's a marketing ploy, the relative rankings are what matters. Total points are a function of quantity of players recruited. The "better offers" thing, as I have proven before, is highly unscientific and in all likelihood the combination of better infrastructure to maintain such lists and kids going out of their way to advertise their lists online.


You haven't proven shit. If you want to get your rocks off being the internet contrarian go ahead, but even using relative rankings, this year's class is BC's highest average star ranking relative to other ACC schools in the last 10 years.


it's 10th out of 14 (barely), WITH the first year coach recruiting bump, and 3 of the 4 programs we're ahead of have coaches who may be lame ducks
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby bceagles24 on Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:29 pm

Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.


So why exactly would BC's recruits have progressed more than anyone else's recruits in the past year?

Why exactly wouldn't other schools have recruited guys who haven't publicized their offer lists?

Why are the recruiting rankings so uniquely terrible at capturing the recruiting success of Jeff Hafley? Why should Jeff Hafley be given the benefit of the doubt that his recruits are so much better than the numbers would indicate?


Nobody is saying other schools haven’t but I’m saying without getting eyes on a lot of these kids the early rankings mean little this cycle for everybody involved. This year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings outside of the top top kids that you’ll ever find. I also saw in the other post your continuing your fallacy about quantity making a difference. Once again the class rankings are done in a fashion where only the top commits really matter. BC has 26 commits taking the bottom 6-7 of them off the commit list would lose then about 2.5 points. Doesn’t drop them at all because high number of commits don’t matter. But keep preaching the wrong line of thinking.


If this year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings we've ever had, shouldn't that lend itself to heightened scrutiny of supposed recruiting success? Is no one else seeing the disconnect here?

And BC has an 85.33 ranking with 26 recruits. Rutgers has a more normal-sized class of 21 commits, which has an 85.35 ranking. (We're being outrecruited by Rutgers - hooray.) We have 200.84 points, Rutgers has 190.93 points. Therefore the quantity effect of the abnormal class size is roughly 10 points, not 2.5. As Steven K Bannon sometimes says, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts!


Yes which is why I’ve said the entire time look at offers not the rankings. As for the points total there’s this wonderful little tool on 247 called the class calculator it’ll even show you the entire breakdown of how many points the recruits were worth. So why don’t you go and tell me if those 5 recruits on the bottom to get to this magical 21 number of RU and see if they take off 10 points. Just a little hint they won’t. And that’s a fact because it’s all laid out not an opinion. Should probably check it out before you comment.
bceagles24
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:32 am
Karma: 220

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby StratEagle on Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:35 pm

We've beat out blue bloods for a ton of these kids and flipped multiple kids from SEC schools, how often does that happen? We quickly lost 3 of the best players in the class in Wallace, Porter, and Martin and then went on to immediately bounce back with Steele, Asbury, and Kendall. The staff's ability to evaluate and get in early on relatively unknown players this year was super impressive - Wallace, Daymon David, Okpala, etc. Currently have 2 of the top 7 all time commits signed by composite. All this and they're not even done.

I do think the pandemic can work in our favor in some ways though. Young staff that can adapt to Zoom quickly, hides relative game day deficiencies vs schools like Michigan, impressive handling of keeping players safe, more difficult for bagmen, etc. Not that Hafley doesn't deserve credit there too.
StratEagle
McGuinn Hall
 
Posts: 906
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:04 pm
Karma: 193

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby innocentbystander on Mon Dec 21, 2020 4:57 pm

StratEagle wrote:We've beat out blue bloods for a ton of these kids and flipped multiple kids from SEC schools, how often does that happen? We quickly lost 3 of the best players in the class in Wallace, Porter, and Martin and then went on to immediately bounce back with Steele, Asbury, and Kendall. The staff's ability to evaluate and get in early on relatively unknown players this year was super impressive - Wallace, Daymon David, Okpala, etc. Currently have 2 of the top 7 all time commits signed by composite. All this and they're not even done.

I do think the pandemic can work in our favor in some ways though. Young staff that can adapt to Zoom quickly, hides relative game day deficiencies vs schools like Michigan, impressive handling of keeping players safe, more difficult for bagmen, etc. Not that Hafley doesn't deserve credit there too.


It has been 16 years since I have been happy with BC's recruiting class. Even if BC is ranked 10th out of 14 ACC teams with this class, I can assure you, that makes me very happy. And why? We are not 13 or 14 which is where Spaz and Meathead had us year after year.
Feminism is Eve eats all the apples, gives God the middle finger when He asks her about it, and has the snake present Adam with a restraining order, ordering him to stay 500 yards away while still being forced to provide Eve food, clothing, and shelter.
User avatar
innocentbystander
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 18277
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 9:40 pm
Location: Pac-12 Hell
Karma: -1

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:08 pm

bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.


So why exactly would BC's recruits have progressed more than anyone else's recruits in the past year?

Why exactly wouldn't other schools have recruited guys who haven't publicized their offer lists?

Why are the recruiting rankings so uniquely terrible at capturing the recruiting success of Jeff Hafley? Why should Jeff Hafley be given the benefit of the doubt that his recruits are so much better than the numbers would indicate?


Nobody is saying other schools haven’t but I’m saying without getting eyes on a lot of these kids the early rankings mean little this cycle for everybody involved. This year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings outside of the top top kids that you’ll ever find. I also saw in the other post your continuing your fallacy about quantity making a difference. Once again the class rankings are done in a fashion where only the top commits really matter. BC has 26 commits taking the bottom 6-7 of them off the commit list would lose then about 2.5 points. Doesn’t drop them at all because high number of commits don’t matter. But keep preaching the wrong line of thinking.


If this year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings we've ever had, shouldn't that lend itself to heightened scrutiny of supposed recruiting success? Is no one else seeing the disconnect here?

And BC has an 85.33 ranking with 26 recruits. Rutgers has a more normal-sized class of 21 commits, which has an 85.35 ranking. (We're being outrecruited by Rutgers - hooray.) We have 200.84 points, Rutgers has 190.93 points. Therefore the quantity effect of the abnormal class size is roughly 10 points, not 2.5. As Steven K Bannon sometimes says, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts!


Yes which is why I’ve said the entire time look at offers not the rankings. As for the points total there’s this wonderful little tool on 247 called the class calculator it’ll even show you the entire breakdown of how many points the recruits were worth. So why don’t you go and tell me if those 5 recruits on the bottom to get to this magical 21 number of RU and see if they take off 10 points. Just a little hint they won’t. And that’s a fact because it’s all laid out not an opinion. Should probably check it out before you comment.


You're cherry picking it by removing the BOTTOM 5 kids, which raises the average ranking of the class. You could just as easily remove the top 5 recruits and tell me what happens. It's more intellectually honest to maintain the average ranking and extrapolate the score with a lower number of recruits. Was it Statistics with Father McGowan you failed, or Ethics with Father Madigan?
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby myles kennefick on Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:22 pm

Corporal Funishment wrote:
myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.


Beyond having far better other offers than most previous classes, this year's class is also the highest ranked by both average star and total points in at least the last ten years. Other than that I guess it's "typical"...


The absolute star rating inflates over time, it's a marketing ploy, the relative rankings are what matters. Total points are a function of quantity of players recruited. The "better offers" thing, as I have proven before, is highly unscientific and in all likelihood the combination of better infrastructure to maintain such lists and kids going out of their way to advertise their lists online.


You haven't proven shit. If you want to get your rocks off being the internet contrarian go ahead, but even using relative rankings, this year's class is BC's highest average star ranking relative to other ACC schools in the last 10 years.


it's 10th out of 14 (barely), WITH the first year coach recruiting bump, and 3 of the 4 programs we're ahead of have coaches who may be lame ducks


Qualify it now all you want, but it clearly wasn't a typical BC class even using your chosen metric.
User avatar
myles kennefick
n00b
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:24 pm
Karma: 2

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby myles kennefick on Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:22 pm

HJS wrote:
myles kennefick wrote:This post was made by Corporal Funishment who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

Umm... you only have 71 posts, so consider this a PSA.

Haha thanks
User avatar
myles kennefick
n00b
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:24 pm
Karma: 2

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:47 pm

myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
myles kennefick wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.


Beyond having far better other offers than most previous classes, this year's class is also the highest ranked by both average star and total points in at least the last ten years. Other than that I guess it's "typical"...


The absolute star rating inflates over time, it's a marketing ploy, the relative rankings are what matters. Total points are a function of quantity of players recruited. The "better offers" thing, as I have proven before, is highly unscientific and in all likelihood the combination of better infrastructure to maintain such lists and kids going out of their way to advertise their lists online.


You haven't proven shit. If you want to get your rocks off being the internet contrarian go ahead, but even using relative rankings, this year's class is BC's highest average star ranking relative to other ACC schools in the last 10 years.


it's 10th out of 14 (barely), WITH the first year coach recruiting bump, and 3 of the 4 programs we're ahead of have coaches who may be lame ducks


Qualify it now all you want, but it clearly wasn't a typical BC class even using your chosen metric.


Correct. It's bigger.
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby bceagles24 on Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:57 pm

Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.


So why exactly would BC's recruits have progressed more than anyone else's recruits in the past year?

Why exactly wouldn't other schools have recruited guys who haven't publicized their offer lists?

Why are the recruiting rankings so uniquely terrible at capturing the recruiting success of Jeff Hafley? Why should Jeff Hafley be given the benefit of the doubt that his recruits are so much better than the numbers would indicate?


Nobody is saying other schools haven’t but I’m saying without getting eyes on a lot of these kids the early rankings mean little this cycle for everybody involved. This year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings outside of the top top kids that you’ll ever find. I also saw in the other post your continuing your fallacy about quantity making a difference. Once again the class rankings are done in a fashion where only the top commits really matter. BC has 26 commits taking the bottom 6-7 of them off the commit list would lose then about 2.5 points. Doesn’t drop them at all because high number of commits don’t matter. But keep preaching the wrong line of thinking.


If this year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings we've ever had, shouldn't that lend itself to heightened scrutiny of supposed recruiting success? Is no one else seeing the disconnect here?

And BC has an 85.33 ranking with 26 recruits. Rutgers has a more normal-sized class of 21 commits, which has an 85.35 ranking. (We're being outrecruited by Rutgers - hooray.) We have 200.84 points, Rutgers has 190.93 points. Therefore the quantity effect of the abnormal class size is roughly 10 points, not 2.5. As Steven K Bannon sometimes says, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts!


Yes which is why I’ve said the entire time look at offers not the rankings. As for the points total there’s this wonderful little tool on 247 called the class calculator it’ll even show you the entire breakdown of how many points the recruits were worth. So why don’t you go and tell me if those 5 recruits on the bottom to get to this magical 21 number of RU and see if they take off 10 points. Just a little hint they won’t. And that’s a fact because it’s all laid out not an opinion. Should probably check it out before you comment.


You're cherry picking it by removing the BOTTOM 5 kids, which raises the average ranking of the class. You could just as easily remove the top 5 recruits and tell me what happens. It's more intellectually honest to maintain the average ranking and extrapolate the score with a lower number of recruits. Was it Statistics with Father McGowan you failed, or Ethics with Father Madigan?

That’s not the point but your missing it again. My point is the extra numbers did nothing to put BC above RU or whoever else you’d like to compare them too that is behind them in the rankings. RU has 21 commits. BCs top 21 commits would be higher then RU so comparing them to RU because they had more space and took some fliers they like is intellectually dishonest. But you’ve got your agenda and that’s fine. We’ll see what this class looks like in a couple years.
bceagles24
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1049
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:32 am
Karma: 220

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby Corporal Funishment on Mon Dec 21, 2020 6:02 pm

bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:
bceagles24 wrote:
Corporal Funishment wrote:As much as certain people don't like it when you speak ill of their golden boy, this year's class currently ranks 10th in the ACC by average player rank, and 53rd in the country. It's a huge class, but rating-wise it's typical BC recruiting with a slight boost for the first year coach bump. Some of you are talking yourself into believing fairy tales.

As I’ve said before this is the class to look at offers versus rankings more then any other. A lot of kids haven’t had an opportunity to boost their rankings in over a year now. If you think there’s no possible progression from kids I’m sure what to say to that. And the offer lists are better then what paper shows too because I know of atleast 3 commits that got offers after their commitments and never publicized them. Probably not guys you’d guess either. But again we’ll see where the class stacks up in 3 years but there’s zero doubt this is the best class on paper in quite a long time. It’s really not even close. Also I’d add that the formula that 247 uses doesn’t really give much of an advantage to having more commits. The bottom of the class being basically no value past a certain number. You put say the last 6-7 guys in the class out and they drop one place in the rankings so that line of thought is also wrong.


So why exactly would BC's recruits have progressed more than anyone else's recruits in the past year?

Why exactly wouldn't other schools have recruited guys who haven't publicized their offer lists?

Why are the recruiting rankings so uniquely terrible at capturing the recruiting success of Jeff Hafley? Why should Jeff Hafley be given the benefit of the doubt that his recruits are so much better than the numbers would indicate?


Nobody is saying other schools haven’t but I’m saying without getting eyes on a lot of these kids the early rankings mean little this cycle for everybody involved. This year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings outside of the top top kids that you’ll ever find. I also saw in the other post your continuing your fallacy about quantity making a difference. Once again the class rankings are done in a fashion where only the top commits really matter. BC has 26 commits taking the bottom 6-7 of them off the commit list would lose then about 2.5 points. Doesn’t drop them at all because high number of commits don’t matter. But keep preaching the wrong line of thinking.


If this year is the biggest crapshoot for rankings we've ever had, shouldn't that lend itself to heightened scrutiny of supposed recruiting success? Is no one else seeing the disconnect here?

And BC has an 85.33 ranking with 26 recruits. Rutgers has a more normal-sized class of 21 commits, which has an 85.35 ranking. (We're being outrecruited by Rutgers - hooray.) We have 200.84 points, Rutgers has 190.93 points. Therefore the quantity effect of the abnormal class size is roughly 10 points, not 2.5. As Steven K Bannon sometimes says, you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts!


Yes which is why I’ve said the entire time look at offers not the rankings. As for the points total there’s this wonderful little tool on 247 called the class calculator it’ll even show you the entire breakdown of how many points the recruits were worth. So why don’t you go and tell me if those 5 recruits on the bottom to get to this magical 21 number of RU and see if they take off 10 points. Just a little hint they won’t. And that’s a fact because it’s all laid out not an opinion. Should probably check it out before you comment.


You're cherry picking it by removing the BOTTOM 5 kids, which raises the average ranking of the class. You could just as easily remove the top 5 recruits and tell me what happens. It's more intellectually honest to maintain the average ranking and extrapolate the score with a lower number of recruits. Was it Statistics with Father McGowan you failed, or Ethics with Father Madigan?

That’s not the point but your missing it again. My point is the extra numbers did nothing to put BC above RU or whoever else you’d like to compare them too that is behind them in the rankings. RU has 21 commits. BCs top 21 commits would be higher then RU so comparing them to RU because they had more space and took some fliers they like is intellectually dishonest. But you’ve got your agenda and that’s fine. We’ll see what this class looks like in a couple years.


You're shrinking BC's class for the sake of the comparison by removing only the outliers on the bottom. I'm saying, either remove the outliers on both sides or fix the average ranking and extrapolate where the class would lie with less players.

Your argument is that the top 80% of BC's class is better (on average) than the entire class at Rutgers. Who cares? The top 80% of their class beats (on average) our entire class.

We will see what it looks like in a couple of years.
"The above is so fraught with stupid I don’t even know where to begin." - eepstein0

Eagle Outsider "Worst Poster" award winner, '17
User avatar
Corporal Funishment
Cushing Hall
 
Posts: 2744
Joined: Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:10 pm
Karma: 27

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby DomingoOrtiz on Mon Dec 21, 2020 6:40 pm

STOP!
GetIn
DomingoOrtiz
Lyons Hall
 
Posts: 8943
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:39 am
Location: El Barrio
Karma: 189

Re: 2021 Recruiting Thread

Postby MF73-Eleazar on Mon Dec 21, 2020 6:53 pm

StratEagle wrote:We've beat out blue bloods for a ton of these kids and flipped multiple kids from SEC schools, how often does that happen? We quickly lost 3 of the best players in the class in Wallace, Porter, and Martin and then went on to immediately bounce back with Steele, Asbury, and Kendall. The staff's ability to evaluate and get in early on relatively unknown players this year was super impressive - Wallace, Daymon David, Okpala, etc. Currently have 2 of the top 7 all time commits signed by composite. All this and they're not even done.


This is where I am at as well. I get it that Hafley lost some commits, but bounced back with other commits. That's just life at this level. We're not gonna win every recruiting battle, obvs.
On a carpeted Senate floor
We heard a loud voice wailing:
"Ashli they have taken ye away!"
cuz when you hit the Senate floor
Your complaints heard never more
Now Ashli lies there dying on the floooor

LOWWWWWWWW LIEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
User avatar
MF73-Eleazar
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:10 am
Location: New York City
Karma: -353

PreviousNext

Return to Alumni Stadium

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

Untitled document