PDA

View Full Version : Top Notch Recruiting vs. Player Development


Jericho@SC
07-09-2007, 01:35 AM
Would you rather have a coaching staff that was average at developing players but still hauled in elite recruiting classes (top 2 every year) with 5 star studs?

Or

a staff that only recruited classes annually in the 10-15 range but coached up 3 and 4 star players to eventually become All Americans and NFL draft picks?

Think somewhat along the lines of Ron Zook vs. Tommy Tuberville & Co. except more equal

With the recruiting coach staff, you'll likely have some superstar busts here and there, but more often than not you'll have can't miss recruits that dominate even without great coaching. You'll have very high expectations for winning.

With the development coaching staff you might sometimes never really challenge for the title game because sometimes the ceiling of your talent pool caps off at just a 10-2 season. But once in a while if you have a developed, senior laden team full of sleeper recruits, you can make a serious run at a NC. You also aren't expected to go undefeated every year.

simms2clayton
07-09-2007, 01:51 AM
I have two exhibits I would like to show the court that is NFLDC:

Exhibit A: The Ron Zook era at Florida. Top 5 recruiting classes every year. average teams.

Exhibit B: The current era at Boise State. I looked on rivals and 95% of the players are only 2 stars. They then go on to beat Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl last season.

Is it not obvious which situation is better....but the best scenario obviously would be current teams like USC or LSU.

Green Bay Scat
07-09-2007, 01:53 AM
Earl Bennett, Jonathan Goff and Chris Williams, who could all be first rounders were all 3 star athletes

Jericho@SC
07-09-2007, 01:55 AM
I have two exhibits I would like to show the court that is NFLDC:

Exhibit A: The Ron Zook era at Florida. Top 5 recruiting classes every year. average teams.

Exhibit B: The current era at Boise State. I looked on rivals and 95% of the players are only 2 stars. They then go on to beat Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl last season.

Is it not obvious which situation is better....but the best scenario obviously would be current teams like USC or LSU.

Good point. But I think the difference in schedules makes a difference. A Ron Zook Florida team could have run the table in the WAC and very well have beaten Oklahoma too. So it's hard to compare.

cardsalltheway
07-09-2007, 08:13 PM
Player development easily. I only have to look as far as my own favorite team to see why. IU's two best and most important players, Kellen Lewis and James Hardy, were not ranked on Rivals but thanks to great coaching and development by the late Terry Hoeppner, they've turned out to be top-notch players with NFL potential. The same rings true in every sport. Bob Knight never had great recruits but won three NC's. Mike Davis was a great recruiter and got ran out of Bloomington.

The classic example of recruiting with no development is obviously Zook and if Illinois is at the bottom of the barrel again this year the point will be even more emphatic.

keylime_5
07-09-2007, 08:23 PM
It's nice if you have both like Ohio State. No one wanted AJ Hawk, James Laurinaitis, Brian Robiskie, Nick Mangold, Malcolm Jenkins, etc. Those guys are all 3 star recruits offered by Ohio State and middle of the pack schools only pretty much. Mix them in with Donte Whitners, Ted Ginn Jrs, Orlando Paces and then you have a dominating squad yearly. Imagine if Boise could recruit like USC huh.

princefielder28
07-09-2007, 08:34 PM
developing by far

elway777
07-09-2007, 08:35 PM
Luckily for me SC has both.

Zyro_1014
07-10-2007, 01:48 AM
Luckily for me SC has both.

ah men buddy!

DLS42
07-10-2007, 11:28 AM
Luckily for me SC has both.

Unlucky for me Cal only has one. and heres a hint its not the recuiting.

HoopsDemon12
07-10-2007, 02:50 PM
Definatly the devolopment.. some of the best defensive players in the past couple of drafts were 4 stars and lower comign out... its getting the player to play to his potential

BUSTKUNTLAWL
07-10-2007, 03:02 PM
I figured Ron Zook's name would get mentioned in this thread.. lol.

The obvious answer is development..

CC
07-10-2007, 09:53 PM
I dunno, it depends on if you mean OSU or Iowa for the calibre of development.

mqtirishfan
07-11-2007, 09:31 PM
It's nice if you have both like Ohio State. No one wanted AJ Hawk, James Laurinaitis, Brian Robiskie, Nick Mangold, Malcolm Jenkins, etc. Those guys are all 3 star recruits offered by Ohio State and middle of the pack schools only pretty much. Mix them in with Donte Whitners, Ted Ginn Jrs, Orlando Paces and then you have a dominating squad yearly. Imagine if Boise could recruit like USC huh.

I have a small issue with the whole 3-stars aren't wanted part. 3 star prospects get offers from top programs all the time. It's not like you build a team of all 4 and 5 star players. You just get a guy who fits your system and your scout tells you can play at the college level.

TheMikey10
08-05-2007, 04:41 PM
Unlucky for me Cal only has one. and heres a hint its not the recuiting.


Don't worry, the recruiting is coming for Cal, signing Marshawn and Desean in the last several years were big-time coups

Jericho@SC
08-05-2007, 10:22 PM
Don't worry, the recruiting is coming for Cal, signing Marshawn and Desean in the last several years were big-time coups

I like Tedford, but I feel he takes a passive approach towards recruiting. It will catch up to him if he doesn't start taking action in getting recruits, now that the Bruins are turning up the heat.

BuckNaked
08-05-2007, 10:26 PM
Well, I'll always take productivity from a lesser known player than none from some big shot coming out of high school. This wasn't even really close at all for me to decide.

sodar21
08-05-2007, 10:38 PM
I have a small issue with the whole 3-stars aren't wanted part. 3 star prospects get offers from top programs all the time. It's not like you build a team of all 4 and 5 star players. You just get a guy who fits your system and your scout tells you can play at the college level.

A lot of 3 star guys are just ones that were missed by the scouting services but many major programs still pick up on them. AJ Hawk was a 3 star recruit mainly because he was injured his senior year in high school. If he had been healthy he would have most likely ended up as a 4 star player or better.

Sniper
08-05-2007, 11:03 PM
Luckily for me SC has both.

Yeah yeah no one likes you ;)

gstock05
08-06-2007, 12:27 AM
I'll throw in one more element, what about finding top notch players who are completely off the radar, but have 4-5 star talent?

Plenty of these guys just didnt get the pub in highschool due to where they played, who they played with, the system, the geographic location, hype, or even other elements such as injuries or moving across the country while still in highschool.

Sniper
08-06-2007, 12:29 AM
I'll throw in one more element, what about finding top notch players who are completely off the radar, but have 4-5 star talent?

Plenty of these guys just didnt get the pub in highschool due to where they played, who they played with, the system, the geographic location, hype, or even other elements such as injuries or moving across the country while still in highschool.

See Willis, Patrick.