Where does this recruiting adulation come from?

[Razorfox]

Ok, first of all this is not intended to be a negative post toward our coaches.  I'm merely trying to determine if people on here know what they're talking about when it comes to our recruiting or if they are just blowing smoke to justify our current predicament. 

There are SO MANY people on here that say that we have nothing to worry about in recruiting because Petrino is a great evaluator of talent and actually finds diamonds in the rough, yada, yada, yada.  Well, for the life of me I can't find any evidence to prove that he does this any more or better than anyone else does.  Let me explain:

Of the Petrino recruits so far, here is a list of those that have contributed the most and earliest and show the most likelihood of being superstars for us:

2008 class:
Joe Adams - 4*
Greg Childs - 3*
Elton Ford - 2*
Dennis Johnson - 3*
Jerico Nelson - 4*
Jarius Wright - 4*
Tenarius Wright - 3*
(Ryan Mallett) - 5*

2009 class:
Rudell Crim - 4*
Knile Davis - 4*
David Gordon - 3* (5.7)
Cobi Hamilton - 3* (5.7)
DeQuinta Jones - 4*
Anthony Leon - 4*
Ronnie Wingo - 4*
(Broderick Green) - 4*

By my count, most of the best players on our team right now that Petrino recruited are 4* and 5* players with a few almost 4* 5.7's in there.  There is ONE 2* guy in there that you would have to call a major diamond in the rough.

So, how is it that Petrino somehow is smarter than the recruiting services and conventional wisdom when choosing his players to recruit when their predictions and our results are very much the same as predicted by the conventional wisdom?  How is it that our best players from the Petrino era thus far are mostly superstars according to Rivals and yet you all want to discount Rivals this year because we don't have a bunch of 4* guys committed?

I think what's really happening here is that some people are in denial of what's going on, which is that our recruiting this year is not going well.  This does NOT mean that I think the class will suck on the field by the time they're juniors and seniors.  I think Petrino CAN "coach up" players with the best of them.

But let's cut the crap about him somehow having a superior system that goes against the conventional wisdom and proves to have superior results.  The proof simply isn't in the pudding. 

[Razorfox]

Sorry, I left out Zach Stadther who was a 3* recruit.  My apologies to him. 

[rljjr]

I think maybe the point is that he's getting the 4 stars who before probably would not have given us a sniff.

[Razorfox]

No, what most of the people on here that write that our class is great are saying is that our 3* recruits are as good or better than 4 and 5* recruits at other schools because Petrino doesn't care about stars and only looks at their personalities, measurables, etc. 

The truth, at least from what the data tells me, is that Petrino wants the same superstars that everyone else does (and Rivals typically picks correctly), but for some reason we're having a hard time closing the deal so far this year. 

[codeHog]

I think you did okay but left out the most important thing.

Most yahoos can see a 4 star and say "That guy is a player" but it takes more skill to look at the three star (say from a small school or late bloomer) and project them 4 years down the road.

I will wait and see if the Rasner, Calender, Swanson and J.Mitchell types turn out before I agree in total with you

[Hog on the Hill]

No, what most of the people on here that write that our class is great are saying is that our 3* recruits are as good or better than 4 and 5* recruits at other schools because Petrino doesn't care about stars and only looks at their personalities, measurables, etc. 

The truth, at least from what the data tells me, is that Petrino wants the same superstars that everyone else does (and Rivals typically picks correctly), but for some reason we're having a hard time closing the deal so far this year. 

I think we're having a hard time because it's much easier for Petrino to recruit offensive stars than defensive stars.  I think the tendency in high school is for the best athletes to primarily play offense, and so you tend to get more highly rated offensive players than defensive players.  Combine this fact with our currently weak defense, and you get a hard sell.  We have had to rebuild our defense from the ground up since we weren't left with anything when Nutt left, and it would have taken a miracle to instantly start signing a half dozen 4/5 star players on defense every year.  Unfortuantely we do not have the recruiting territory, the pipelines, or the staff to do it.  We have some very good recruiters but one just left for Illinois, and the rest are offensive coaches.  I think losing Lorenzo Ward hurt our defensive recruiting.

I think we are going to have to build up our defense with mostly 3-star players and the occasional 4-star.  I think we can achieve an average SEC defense which should lead to more wins, better bowl games, and ultimately an easier time recruiting.

If WR can't improve on this year, we will need to find a replacement.  But let's be real: he did improve our defense this year, despite what a lot of fans are saying.  A 16.7% reduction in scoring defense is pretty good.  We were not last in the SEC in defense as some say, we were 9th.

edit: How the heck did I get in this thread?  I was posting in another thread, hit reply, saw what I thought were new responses, and posted again.  But it turns out I got teleported to another thread.

My apologies if my post makes no sense in context of this read.  I'll read the OP and see what changes I need to make for my post to be comprehensible.

[Razorfox]

Rasner was a 3*, 5.6 rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no one at Rivals will be surprised.

Calender was a 3* 6'8" tall dude.  If he turns out to be good, they won't be all that surprised.

Swanson was a 3*, 5.6 rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no one at Rivals will be surprised.

J. Mitchell was a 3* rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no on at Rivals will be all that surprised.


Now, if J. Mitchell and/or Calender turn into all-SEC and future NFL guys, then it will show that the star system is not perfect (which we know already).  But there is no reason to expect that they can't be good players.  But will they be as good or better than the guys that Florida, Bama, etc are getting?  That's what matters. 

[Choctaw Hog]

No, what most of the people on here that write that our class is great are saying is that our 3* recruits are as good or better than 4 and 5* recruits at other schools because Petrino doesn't care about stars and only looks at their personalities, measurables, etc. 

The truth, at least from what the data tells me, is that Petrino wants the same superstars that everyone else does (and Rivals typically picks correctly), but for some reason we're having a hard time closing the deal so far this year. 

Don't you find it interesting how players all of a sudden jump in rankings based off what team has offered them.  That's disingenuous don't you think since the player did nothing to garner additional stars or ranking?  Real insight on these players.  LOL.  Rivals and the like are nothing more than money makers and add no value for college coaches whatsoever. 

In fact, I would venture to say that the majority of the recruiting "experts" from recruiting services never see the  players in person that they evaluate and are no more know knowledgeable about what makes a good football recruit than most studious football fans.  Their secret is that they get football expert wannabes to fork over money to read their "expert evaluations".   

I'll trust Petrino and coaches like him ANY day of the week over someone setting behind a desk watching a few minutes of film or listen to what a rank armature tells them about a player.

[codeHog]

well, we better hope two things

1. All these guys better be able to at least Hold Their Own when they hit the field

and

2. We have a better coach

[Hog on the Hill]

Rasner was a 3*, 5.6 rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no one at Rivals will be surprised.

Calender was a 3* 6'8" tall dude.  If he turns out to be good, they won't be all that surprised.

Swanson was a 3*, 5.6 rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no one at Rivals will be surprised.

J. Mitchell was a 3* rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no on at Rivals will be all that surprised.


Now, if J. Mitchell and/or Calender turn into all-SEC and future NFL guys, then it will show that the star system is not perfect (which we know already).  But there is no reason to expect that they can't be good players.  But will they be as good or better than the guys that Florida, Bama, etc are getting?  That's what matters. 

When you say "they won't be surprised," what do you mean?  Are you saying that 3* players have a good chance of being major contributors?  Just for clarification, I can't tell what you mean.

[Razorfox]

Yes, 3* players should be good college players.  But that doesn't mean that they'll be EXPECTED to be SEC superstars, but they can be positive contributors. 

[31to6]

Rasner was a 3*, 5.6 rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no one at Rivals will be surprised.
Calender was a 3* 6'8" tall dude.  If he turns out to be good, they won't be all that surprised.
Swanson was a 3*, 5.6 rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no one at Rivals will be surprised.
J. Mitchell was a 3* rated player.  If he turns out to be good, no on at Rivals will be all that surprised.

True. However what separates the men from the boys when it comes to 3-stars is the 'hit rate'. 

You are correct that we need to wait and see how many of these you list work out, but so far Petrino already seems to be hitting on a very high percentage of recruits, which is a huge improvement for the program.

[Hog on the Hill]

Yes, 3* players should be good college players.  But that doesn't mean that they'll be EXPECTED to be SEC superstars, but they can be positive contributors. 

I agree, they shouldn't expected to be SEC superstars, but I think that 3-stars in a well-run program can come together to make an average or above average SEC defense.  Their potential is certainly lower than a defense full of 4 and 5 stars but I'm convinced that we will be okay if all we can get this year is 3 stars.  Besides, I'm think some of our 3 stars are really 4 star in quality.  Chris Smith is a prime example.

3 star + RS year + Veltkamp + highly professional, focused, and efficient coaching staff = very solid contributor after a couple of years.  We'll be fine.

[jfan01]

I may be wrong, but don't we currently have a 4* and four 5.7 3* commits?

By your ratings, that is 5 of 15 that have star potential.  Looking at the class, I don't see any weak commits.  I think that is why a lot of people feel pretty good about this class considering we have a chance to land a few very strong commits before it's over.

[Hog on the Hill]

True. However what separates the men from the boys when it comes to 3-stars is the 'hit rate'. 

You are correct that we need to wait and see how many of these you list work out, but so far Petrino already seems to be hitting on a very high percentage of recruits, which is a huge improvement for the program.

That's another good point worth bearing out.  Even if there is a much smaller percentage of 3-stars who end up being major contributors (overall, in all of college football), that doesn't imply that every team with have the same percentage of hits and misses.  What could separate Arkansas recruiting from other teams is that, perhaps, our coaches are better than average at evaluating talent, and therefore have a higher percentage of hits and lower percentage of misses on 3-stars.  Thus, an Arkansas 3-star could be better than the average 3-star.

I think there are some good reasons to suspect this is true, but it's too early to say so with any certainty.  We simply haven't had a large enough sample size to make a determination.  After next season, when more of last year's recruits see the field, we will have a much better idea.

[Razorfox]

Hog on the Hill,

I agree that is probably what will happen.  And that will probably keep us winning about 7 games per year.  To move up to the 9 or 10 wins per year, however, I believe we need to have consistent classes like the 2009 class. 

jfan01,

Yes, if we can close out the last 4 or 5 spots with some serious defensive talent, then I'll be supremely happy with this class.  Two weeks ago I thought that was going to happen with some of the Hawaiin guys and the two that went to Texas Tech.  None of that happened.  Our possibilities seemed to have gone WAY down after that, especially when we started offering more offensive players.  Now I'm concerned until something else promising happens. 

[Hog on the Hill]

Hog on the Hill,

I agree that is probably what will happen.  And that will probably keep us winning about 7 games per year.  To move up to the 9 or 10 wins per year, however, I believe we need to have consistent classes like the 2009 class. 

jfan01,

Yes, if we can close out the last 4 or 5 spots with some serious defensive talent, then I'll be supremely happy with this class.  Two weeks ago I thought that was going to happen with some of the Hawaiin guys and the two that went to Texas Tech.  None of that happened.  Our possibilities seemed to have gone WAY down after that, especially when we started offering more offensive players.  Now I'm concerned until something else promising happens. 

Well, I think that we will average 8 wins a year, especially with our schedule becoming much more favorable.  We have had absurdly hard schedules the last several years.  I see our defense continuing to improve as our younger players get more experience, learn the schemes, and are able to teach the upcoming players the scheme before they ever have to see the field.  I know a lot of people are tired of WR but I think they are expecting too much too soon from a defense that really did not have much talent to work with when he got here.

Our defensive recruiting is better than what it used to be so that is what gives me optimism.

Plus, our offense should continue trending upwards.  Even if Mallett leaves I don't think it will make a major difference in wins/losses.  We won the games we won by huge margins and lost by slim margins (with a couple of exceptions) so I don't think it would make too much of a difference.

I agree, if we can get a couple of defensive 4-stars in these last couple of months then this will turn out to be a great class.  Let's cross our fingers for Humphrey and Jones.  Those two, with a couple good DB's, would make this class very good for its size. 3-4 good DL, 3-4 good LB, 3-4 good DB.

[codeHog]

Austin Tate was a three star that SoCal called on late

Alvin Bailey should be ALL SEC as a three star

Brandon  Mitchell and Lance Ray are very talented young 3 star athletes.

Terrell Williams is a gifted three star guy that was offered by Tenn and Stanford

just saying 

[Gonzo]

No, what most of the people on here that write that our class is great are saying is that our 3* recruits are as good or better than 4 and 5* recruits at other schools because Petrino doesn't care about stars and only looks at their personalities, measurables, etc. 

The truth, at least from what the data tells me, is that Petrino wants the same superstars that everyone else does (and Rivals typically picks correctly), but for some reason we're having a hard time closing the deal so far this year. 

I don't think I've seen one person call this class great. However, I've seen plenty saying it sucks since it's not littered with all-stars. What I think most of responders to the naysayers are getting at is that while CBP certainly wants some of those higher rated kids (he offered them schollies so clearly he wanted them) he has shown a very good ability (better than most imo) to identify the kids just below that level who can still be very good DI players. Since the Hogs aren't at a point yet to just name which all-stars they want each year, it's great to have a coach who can do that since the they're going to have still fill out a class. As the record improves, so will the recruiting. Don't forget he's already going almost dead even on the field with some of those recruiting juggernauts y'all are worried about with a predominantly younger and less heralded squad. Sure seems to me the man appears to know what he's doing. Sure wish more "Hog fans" had the patience to let him do it.




Go Hogs! Beat E Carolina!

[Razorfox]

Gonzo,

Not being impatient, just making people back up what they say, which is in most cases just emotionally driven fluff, hopes, and dreams that has little to no facts in it. 

For example, your post says that as our record improves, so will recruiting.  That was the story last year and yet we had a better recruiting year after a 5-7 season than after a 7-5 season. 

I don't take away from the fact that the man is a genius or that he can coach.  This is totally about recruiting and the people on this board and their reactions to it. 

[tiber]

Gonzo,

Not being impatient, just making people back up what they say, which is in most cases just emotionally driven fluff, hopes, and dreams that has little to no facts in it. 

For example, your post says that as our record improves, so will recruiting.  That was the story last year and yet we had a better recruiting year after a 5-7 season than after a 7-5 season. 

I don't take away from the fact that the man is a genius or that he can coach.  This is totally about recruiting and the people on this board and their reactions to it. 

In regards to recruiting (only), answer this -

When compared with the previous staff's recruiting efforts and subsequent rankings (both initial rankings and those for players that actually contributed to the program once recruited), how do YOU feel about the efforts made by THIS staff so far?


You can look at it any way you like... perceived star value during the recruiting process, signability of said recruits, or contribution levels on the field.

Look at the hits and misses from the previous staff, look at the hits and misses from the current staff.  Factor in also the recruiting history of our HC while at Louisville... both initial rankings and (especially) re-rankings.  Don't forget the limited appeal of Louisville to recruits.



I think this research might have taken less time than what you spent typing out your initial post.  If after all that you don't get why people are happy with recruiting so far (especially when compared with the last 10 years prior), then you'll just have to take it on faith or take it somewhere else. 

[Choctaw Hog]

Some of you posters who are obsessed with recruiting rankings please answer the following.  The rankings referenced are four year averages for 2006-2009 and when I reference a class, its the 4 year ranking for each team.

How could the 25th rated class, Arkansas, thrash the following teams all which were rated ahead of them in recruiting?  Auburn (#13), South Carolina (#14) and Texas A & M (#24).

How could the 25th rated class, Arkansas, even compete with the #3 rated class, Florida, the #4 rated class, LSU and the #5 Rated class, Georgia?  And if you watched the game it was obvious that we were outmanned at every position.  I'm not sure why we even bothered to show up to play because we obviously had no chance to win the game.

How did the #1 rated class, USC, manage to lose 4 conference games to teams that were far inferior in talent?  At least according to the recruiting "experts".

How is it that the #8 rated class, Notre Dame, managed a 6-6 season?

How could the # 41 rated class, that's right the #41 rated class, Stanford, finish 2nd in the Pac 10 ahead of the #1 rated class, USC!

How could the #26 rated class, Oregon, win the Pac 10 over the #1 rated class, USC?

How could the # 40 ranked team, Georgia Tech, finish ahead of 4 teams ranked ahead of them in the ACC Coastal Division?  The Yellowjackets finished ahead of #12 Miami, #18 North Carolina, #22 Virginia Tech, and #38 Virginia. 

The bottom line is that recruiting ratings by the so-called experts are very flawed and mean little to coaches who actually know what they are doing.  For all you doom and gloomeres put you simple minds at ease. Petrino has us heading in the right direction and he knows what he is doing.  Period!

[regi]

Some of you posters who are obsessed with recruiting rankings please answer the following.  The rankings referenced are four year averages for 2006-2009 and when I reference a class, its the 4 year ranking for each team.

How could the 25th rated class, Arkansas, thrash the following teams all which were rated ahead of them in recruiting?  Auburn (#13), South Carolina (#14) and Texas A & M (#24).

How could the 25th rated class, Arkansas, even compete with the #3 rated class, Florida, the #4 rated class, LSU and the #5 Rated class, Georgia?  And if you watched the game it was obvious that we were outmanned at every position.  I’m not sure why we even bothered to show up to play because we obviously had no chance to win the game.

How did the #1 rated class, USC, manage to lose 4 conference games to teams that were far inferior in talent?  At least according to the recruiting “experts”.

How is it that the #8 rated class, Notre Dame, managed a 6-6 season?

How could the # 41 rated class, that’s right the #41 rated class, Stanford, finish 2nd in the Pac 10 ahead of the #1 rated class, USC!

How could the #26 rated class, Oregon, win the Pac 10 over the #1 rated class, USC?

How could the # 40 ranked team, Georgia Tech, finish ahead of 4 teams ranked ahead of them in the ACC Coastal Division?  The Yellowjackets finished ahead of #12 Miami, #18 North Carolina, #22 Virginia Tech, and #38 Virginia. 

The bottom line is that recruiting ratings by the so-called experts are very flawed and mean little to coaches who actually know what they are doing.  For all you doom and gloomeres put you simple minds at ease. Petrino has us heading in the right direction and he knows what he is doing.  Period!

How has Arkansas not won an SECC in 18 seasons, while the 6 teams that are always in the top 20 in Recruiting rankings have at least 1 SECC?

Rankings are not exact, but they are more right than wrong.

If our goal is 7-8 wins (way to many are ok with this btw) with a trip to Dallas from time to time, than by all means, pay no attention to recruiting or recruiting rankings, but if we want an SECC, history shows that recruiting rankings matter in this league.

[tiber]

How has Arkansas not won an SECC in 18 seasons, while the 6 teams that are always in the top 20 in Recruiting rankings have at least 1 SECC?

Rankings are not exact, but they are more right than wrong.

If our goal is 7-8 wins (way to many are ok with this btw) with a trip to Dallas from time to time, than by all means, pay no attention to recruiting or recruiting rankings, but if we want an SECC, history shows that recruiting rankings matter in this league.

I realize that you're no quoting my earlier post, but since we're here -


A simple question - are you happier with recruiting under Petrino than you were with recruiting under Nutt?  It really is that simple.  You're either getting better or you're not. 

The OP takes 'excitement' and puts a nice concern troll twist on it... proclaiming surprise at all the perceived 'adulation'.

[jfan01]

How has Arkansas not won an SECC in 18 seasons, while the 6 teams that are always in the top 20 in Recruiting rankings have at least 1 SECC?

Rankings are not exact, but they are more right than wrong.

If our goal is 7-8 wins (way to many are ok with this btw) with a trip to Dallas from time to time, than by all means, pay no attention to recruiting or recruiting rankings, but if we want an SECC, history shows that recruiting rankings matter in this league.

Petrino just got here.  He's got some work to do to clean up the mess that other guy left.  I think most people (and not just U of A fans) feel that Arkansas has a good chance to make some noise in the near future as far as the SECC and BCS are concerned.

[regi]

I realize that you're no quoting my earlier post, but since we're here -


A simple question - are you happier with recruiting under Petrino than you were with recruiting under Nutt?  It really is that simple.  You're either getting better or you're not. 

The OP takes 'excitement' and puts a nice concern troll twist on it... proclaiming surprise at all the perceived 'adulation'.

He cleaned up well for Nutt in 08, outstanding class in 09, this seasons recruting is not where I expected it to be after last season. Is he better than the monkey with the whistle was, yes. Is years class good enough to maintain the level we need to Beat AU, LSU and Bama? Not as of today. The goal, I thought, was not to only be better than Hootie (many could do that), but to win a National Championship (Per CBP himself).

[tiber]

 

He cleaned up well for Nutt in 08, outstanding class in 09, this seasons recruting is not where I expected it to be after last season. Is he better than the monkey with the whistle was, yes. Is years class good enough to maintain the level we need to Beat AU, LSU and Bama? Not as of today. The goal, I thought, was not to only be better than Hootie (many could do that), but to win a National Championship (Per CBP himself).

While you might be right, you are merely stating your opinion at this point.  No one yet can say where this year's class when combined with the pieces accumulated in the previous 2 years creates a team that will win those games in the future. 

As to the goal of winning a National Championship, do you feel that goal has somehow changed, or that CBP is not putting forth a best effort to that end?
Would you rather someone else be at the helm directing the recruiting efforts for Arkansas?
You mention AU, LSU, and Bama.  Out of those 3 programs, which of those 3 coaches would you rather have over our current one?  I can think of only one, and honestly that would be largely on perception value, not what I think of the man in terms of capability and knowledge.

Again - Would you rather someone else be at the helm directing the recruiting efforts for Arkansas?

[Razorfox]

In regards to recruiting (only), answer this -

When compared with the previous staff's recruiting efforts and subsequent rankings (both initial rankings and those for players that actually contributed to the program once recruited), how do YOU feel about the efforts made by THIS staff so far?


You can look at it any way you like... perceived star value during the recruiting process, signability of said recruits, or contribution levels on the field.

Look at the hits and misses from the previous staff, look at the hits and misses from the current staff.  Factor in also the recruiting history of our HC while at Louisville... both initial rankings and (especially) re-rankings.  Don't forget the limited appeal of Louisville to recruits.



I think this research might have taken less time than what you spent typing out your initial post.  If after all that you don't get why people are happy with recruiting so far (especially when compared with the last 10 years prior), then you'll just have to take it on faith or take it somewhere else. 

I don't know yet.  I mean this year, we lived off the backs of about 4 superstar players on offense (Mallett, Adams, Wright, and Childs) whereas when Nutt was here we did it with his 4 or 5 superstars (McFadden, Felix, Hillis, J. Anderson, and Chris Houston) on both offense and defense.  There were a few other good players sprinkled in and then a few stop-gap players the rest of the way.  That hasn't changed, just the way they played.

2009 was the best year of recruiting Arkansas has ever had, but 2010 isn't even close.  So, it's WAY too early to crown Petrino king of recruiting until we have more data.  But as far as this year, it's rough so far. 

[tiber]

I don't know yet.  I mean this year, we lived off the backs of about 4 superstar players on offense (Mallett, Adams, Wright, and Childs) whereas when Nutt was here we did it with his 4 or 5 superstars (McFadden, Felix, Hillis, J. Anderson, and Chris Houston) on both offense and defense.  There were a few other good players sprinkled in and then a few stop-gap players the rest of the way.  That hasn't changed, just the way they played.

2009 was the best year of recruiting Arkansas has ever had, but 2010 isn't even close.  So, it's WAY too early to crown Petrino king of recruiting until we have more data.  But as far as this year, it's rough so far. 

That's your attempt at validating concern for 'adulation'?

By stating the team has lived off the backs of 4 players, you completely ignore or are oblivious to the fact that the team on the field this year was one of the youngest in college football, therefore implying that a vast majority of Petrino's recruits are contributing, and furthermore they are contributing early.

[tiber]

So, it's WAY too early to crown Petrino king of recruiting until we have more data.  

Can you point out instances where people are proclaiming Petrino a 'king of recruiting'? 

People are 'happy' with the progress being made, and they're 'optimistic' with regards to recruiting and the statistical history of the HC in recruiting with the tools given to him.

Is that the 'adulation' you speak of?

[Hog on the Hill]

How has Arkansas not won an SECC in 18 seasons, while the 6 teams that are always in the top 20 in Recruiting rankings have at least 1 SECC?

Rankings are not exact, but they are more right than wrong.

If our goal is 7-8 wins (way to many are ok with this btw) with a trip to Dallas from time to time, than by all means, pay no attention to recruiting or recruiting rankings, but if we want an SECC, history shows that recruiting rankings matter in this league.

Looks like people forget who our head coach for most of those 18 years was, which leads them to completely miss the point: it's possible to get good talent even if your classes end up being in the 25-40 range, but only if the coaching staff is good at evaluating talent.  Petrino is good, Nutt was not.  Petrino has more hits than misses, Nutt was the opposite.

Some of you guys have such a myopic view of Arkansas recruiting.

[tbhogfan]

1) Verbal commitments are nonbinding.
2) As I have repeatedly said, this is a needs class.  Fortunately, our needs are not sexy this year.   We're set with young, quality depth at QB, RB, and WR.  What is left is what we actually need:  A PK, and help on the Defensive side of the ball.  That is what we have gone after. 

[Gonzo]

Gonzo,

Not being impatient, just making people back up what they say, which is in most cases just emotionally driven fluff, hopes, and dreams that has little to no facts in it. 

For example, your post says that as our record improves, so will recruiting.  That was the story last year and yet we had a better recruiting year after a 5-7 season than after a 7-5 season. 

I don't take away from the fact that the man is a genius or that he can coach.  This is totally about recruiting and the people on this board and their reactions to it. 

I'm referring to more than one season to the next. It's as much about the "track record" over several seasons as it is one particular year. The Hogs' track record over the last decade (just using numbers, not making this a previous coach debate) is a team that averages about 7 wins a year. That's not going to make many young kids swoon and yearn to be Hogs in and of itself.  It's going to require more selling of the program. Yes, last year the staff had more success doing that, this year not so much. As they start putting together multiple seasons of better results, which I have no doubt they will, their efforts will result in more successes in recruiting.  As with most things in life, one static snapshot of any moment in a process doesn't give a complete AND accurate assessment of what is occurring.

I have no doubts whatsoever at this point in what CBP is doing. I think in the next couple of years he will convince most of the remaining doubters he knows what he's doing.



Go Hogs! Beat E Carolina!

[Razorfox]

Adulation, in many cases, and certainly in this case, is having great affection for something even if that affection is based on something that's not really there or false premises. 

Right now, everyone that is happy with this recruiting class is happy with an idea that they HOPE or WISH will come true; that the results on the field will directly contradict the conventional wisdom that's out there which says this class is very mediocre so far.  I hope this is the case as well and that Petrino proves everyone wrong.

But there is NOTHING objective that you can point to that says it will happen that way.  As my original post alluded, Petrino and the recruiiting evaluators agreed on almost all of our best players we currently have.  Did you all not understand why I put those players specifically in that post?  Do you just willfully go right by that data to make yourselves feel better?

[Hog on the Hill]

As my original post alluded, Petrino and the recruiiting evaluators agreed on almost all of our best players we currently have.  Did you all not understand why I put those players specifically in that post?  Do you just willfully go right by that data to make yourselves feel better?

Unfortunately for your thesis, those are players who have become major contributors as underclassmen.  What I think you have ignored is that lower ranked players can become major contributors with development.  The class we are recruiting now is mostly for depth, and the last class is full of lower-ranked players who should make major contributions next year (some of them have already been pointed out).

I think that is an important factor that you have missed.

[Razorfox]

I'm not missing that fact at all Hog on the Hill.  I just think it's slighly irrelevant since Arkansas does not exist in a vacuum.  The laws of high and low ranked players don't cease to exist only for us to make us feel better.  We will have those lesser ranked players that will be developed well to add depth while Florida and Bama will develop players at the level of our superstars to add depth to their rotations.  That line of thinking only makes the reality of the situation sound worse. 

If you've read my posts over the years, you would know that I'm NOT calling for Arkansas to have the top 2 or 3 recruiting classes in the country or even the conference.  BUT, I did expect last year's success (top 15 class) to be the new standard and for us (I'm sure you're included) to get where we want to go, (which is averaging 9 games or so with a 10 to 12 win season on occasion) we are going to have to be at that 2009 level consistently, not the 2010 level. 

[hogzz1]

How has Arkansas not won an SECC in 18 seasons, while the 6 teams that are always in the top 20 in Recruiting rankings have at least 1 SECC?

Rankings are not exact, but they are more right than wrong.

If our goal is 7-8 wins (way to many are ok with this btw) with a trip to Dallas from time to time, than by all means, pay no attention to recruiting or recruiting rankings, but if we want an SECC, history shows that recruiting rankings matter in this league.

How are they more right than wrong?  Are teams great because they recruited well according to Rivals.  Or is it that rivals has some accuracy because they always put the same usual suspects in the top 15 despite who they recruit?  Just as many teams don't reach expectations according to recruiting ranking than actually do.  According to some all you need to get a few top teams right to justify the results.  Not hard to do when the same 6-8 teams have been around for the last 25 years .  It just seems with out one bit of fact people are putting this class down.  I could understand if you seen the kids play.  I just don't know what the problem is.  Is it the ranking that is cause of all this concern or is this coming from personal evaluations? 
I am not sure where we will end up but Petrino has had success finding talent.  Reranking (See Louisville under Petrino) is way more factual than these premature rankings before a kid has played SEC ball.  Its nice to discuss but not at the point as if these ranking are set in stone and it correlates exactly to success.  To many teams failed to be considered accurate.  I've said it before but I could predict recruiting rankings 3 years into the future and get as accurate as Rivals will be.  Its just funny if you actually think these recruiting services are basing there rankings only on what they evaluate and see and not where they are going.  And what makes you think these recruits will not be better than ones we got in the past?  They seem bigger, maybe our lb's will be bigger than other teams safteys now.  3 OL and two TE's, not two positions that are easy to evaluate.  See NFL and all the small school lineman.  I'm not saying this will be the greatest class we ever had but who knows, they are kids that are still developing, and we have a coach that has had history of identifying talent.  That is fact

[Razorfox]

hogzz1,

That is ALL true to a certain extent, but in most instances where Arkansas and those top 15 schools agree (regardless of what Rivals says, even though they're right there 95% of the time too), we are not coming out on top this year. 

[tiber]

This thread clearly isn't complete without the following -

A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed to the one that the user's sockpuppet claims to hold. The concern troll posts in web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.[11]

For example, in 2006 Tad Furtado, a top staffer for then-Congressman Charlie Bass (R-NH), was caught posing as a "concerned" supporter of Bass's opponent, Democrat Paul Hodes, on several liberal New Hampshire blogs, using the pseudonyms "IndieNH" or "IndyNH." "IndyNH" expressed concern that Democrats might just be wasting their time or money on Hodes, because Bass was unbeatable.[12]

Although the term "concern troll" originated in discussions of online behavior, it now sees increasing use to describe similar behaviors that take place offline.

For example, James Wolcott of Vanity Fair accused a conservative New York Daily News columnist of "concern troll" behavior in his efforts to downplay the Mark Foley scandal. Wolcott links what he calls concern trolls to Saul Alinsky's "Do-Nothings," giving a long quote from Alinsky on the Do-Nothing's method and effects:
"    These Do-Nothings profess a commitment to social change for ideals of justice, equality, and opportunity, and then abstain from and discourage all effective action for change. They are known by their brand, 'I agree with your ends but not your means.'[13]    "

In a more recent example, The Hill published an op-ed piece by Markos Moulitsas of the liberal blog Daily Kos titled "Dems: Ignore 'Concern Trolls'." Again, the concern trolls in question were not Internet participants; they were Republicans offering public advice and warnings to the Democrats. The author defines "concern trolling" as "offering a poisoned apple in the form of advice to political opponents that, if taken, would harm the recipient."

[Hog on the Hill]

I'm not missing that fact at all Hog on the Hill.  I just think it's slighly irrelevant since Arkansas does not exist in a vacuum.  The laws of high and low ranked players don't cease to exist only for us to make us feel better.  We will have those lesser ranked players that will be developed well to add depth while Florida and Bama will develop players at the level of our superstars to add depth to their rotations.  That line of thinking only makes the reality of the situation sound worse. 

If you've read my posts over the years, you would know that I'm NOT calling for Arkansas to have the top 2 or 3 recruiting classes in the country or even the conference.  BUT, I did expect last year's success (top 15 class) to be the new standard and for us (I'm sure you're included) to get where we want to go, (which is averaging 9 games or so with a 10 to 12 win season on occasion) we are going to have to be at that 2009 level consistently, not the 2010 level. 

My point is that not all 3 stars are created equal (let's quit bringing up 2 stars because Petrino has signed very few of those; most came from 2008 when Petrino only had about a month to recruit and three of them turned out to be Elton Ford, Chris Gragg, and Anthony Oden).  A coach that can identify very good, possibly underrated 3 stars can have a great deal of success and compete with schools that gets lots of higher rated talent.  I know that all coaches do their own evaluating, but some coaches are better than others.

My argument is that Petrino is an above average evaluator who often identifies and recruits players who are vastly underrated or totally unrated by recruiting services.  This is why I am optimistic about our recruiting even though we have loaded up with 3 stars.  I do think Petrino feels like he has missed on several 4 stars but I still consider this to be a solid class.  Most of them will not be expected to contribute immediately, giving them time to gain strength, size, and speed, learn the schemes, and get better at their positions before they ever have to see the field during a game.

Again, only time will truly tell, but I feel I have good reason to be optimistic.  We may have to agree to disagree.

[Pork Twain]

Where were you guys when HDN was here destroying our Hogs? 

I look at the results I see from BP on the field and with the players he has gotten and I am more than confident that in time we will be in the running for more 4/5*'s than we currently are.  These things do take time but BP is doing a great job with what he has gotten to the Hill.  What he needs to do is show every high school player in America that he is going to be at Arkansas for a long time and continue to win with what he gets and then things will continue to turn around.

[Razorfox]

So, a concern troll is kind of like a variation on "devil's advocate"?  Interesting, but who is it in this scanario that you are saying is the concern troll?

[Razorfox]

Hog on the Hill,

I agree that most of this class doesn't need to contribute immediately and that's why up until now I have been happy with it.  However, I do believe that in order for next year to be what we all hope it can be, we need a few immediate impact players on defense.  They are at least one of two DEs and at least one Safety.  I thought we were going to get at least one of those DEs in Smith, but he decided to go to Texas Tech.  That was a HUGE hit.


BeoPig,

I was right here when HDN was sucking the life out of the program.  Go back in my history and you'll see that.  But you're also assuming that I am not supporting BP, which is totally not true.  I think the guy rocks. 

[Choctaw Hog]

How has Arkansas not won an SECC in 18 seasons, while the 6 teams that are always in the top 20 in Recruiting rankings have at least 1 SECC?

Rankings are not exact, but they are more right than wrong.

If our goal is 7-8 wins (way to many are ok with this btw) with a trip to Dallas from time to time, than by all means, pay no attention to recruiting or recruiting rankings, but if we want an SECC, history shows that recruiting rankings matter in this league.

Just answer each question, if you can.

[Choctaw Hog]

How has Arkansas not won an SECC in 18 seasons, while the 6 teams that are always in the top 20 in Recruiting rankings have at least 1 SECC?

Rankings are not exact, but they are more right than wrong.

If our goal is 7-8 wins (way to many are ok with this btw) with a trip to Dallas from time to time, than by all means, pay no attention to recruiting or recruiting rankings, but if we want an SECC, history shows that recruiting rankings matter in this league.

Do you really not know the answer to your question?  Yet you post on here like you are some sort of football talent expert evaluator.  Here is a hint.  It starts with a c, ends with a g , and has 8 letters.  Try real hard and you might just figure it out. 

[tiber]

Good luck getting either concern troll to answer the questions posed to them in this thread.

You may actually get a response, but it won't answer the question.

It's a shame threads like these are at the top of this particular forum.  Left unchecked they imply that things are seriously wrong (not the case), and that's clearly their intention.

[bphi11ips]

It's a shame threads like these are at the top of this particular forum.  Left unchecked they imply that things are seriously wrong (not the case), and that's clearly their intention.

Maybe there's no implication or intent at all.  Maybe the OP is just an honest question posed with the intent to spur honest debate.

The elephant in the room is why so few highly ranked offerees chose the Hogs this year.  The chief answer is that if you don't understand we have God himself as our coach then you are obviously a complete idiot.  Or an armchair talent evaluator.  The expert talent evaluators on this Board understand the diamonds we have signed and also understand why the 4 and 5 star players other schools sign are overrated or have character or academic issues.

I am enjoying the creative arguments rationalizing the reasons we are currently ranked 58 on Rivals, by far the worst ranking ever for a Razorbacks class.  It ain't over til the fat lady sings, but she's warming up.

The truth is that a couple of things have hurt this class.  One is that it is, as many correctly point out, a "needs" class.  (The argument that there are more highly ranked offensive players is a myth.  I counted them myself.) One could question the wisdom of trying to fill needs only, since every year could then become a "needs" year.  However, it is pretty clear that Petrrino had an opportnuity to score heavily with receivers and skill players last year with the running back spot opening up and with Mallett set to hit the scene.  He also had an in-state 5 star legacy a CB.  So he took what he could while he could, and that is understandable.  The second thing, and the real thing, that is hurting this class is that he has a no-name DC who's only two college defensive units have ranked last in the SEC.  WR defenders point to inherited personnel issues or "red-zone" defense rankings.  Detractors point to the disorganized appearance of the defense and multiple busted assignments per game.  It really doesn't matter.  There is no magnet on campus on the defensive side of the ball and won't be until Petrino replaces WR.

Now get back to your rationalization and man-love here on Petrinoville.net.

[tiber]

Maybe there's no implication or intent at all.  Maybe the OP is just an honest question posed with the intent to spur honest debate.

The elephant in the room is why so few highly ranked offerees chose the Hogs this year.  The chief answer is that if you don't understand we have God himself as our coach then you are obviously a complete idiot.  Or an armchair talent evaluator.  The expert talent evaluators on this Board understand the diamonds we have signed and also understand why the 4 and 5 star players other schools sign are overrated or have character or academic issues.

I am enjoying the creative arguments rationalizing the reasons we are currently ranked 58 on Rivals, by far the worst ranking ever for a Razorbacks class.  It ain't over til the fat lady sings, but she's warming up.

The truth is that a couple of things have hurt this class.  One is that it is, as many correctly point out, a "needs" class.  (The argument that there are more highly ranked offensive players is a myth.  I counted them myself.) One could question the wisdom of trying to fill needs only, since every year could then become a "needs" year.  However, it is pretty clear that Petrrino had an opportnuity to score heavily with receivers and skill players last year with the running back spot opening up and with Mallett set to hit the scene.  He also had an in-state 5 star legacy a CB.  So he took what he could while he could, and that is understandable.  The second thing, and the real thing, that is hurting this class is that he has a no-name DC who's only two college defensive units have ranked last in the SEC.  WR defenders point to inherited personnel issues or "red-zone" defense rankings.  Detractors point to the disorganized appearance of the defense and multiple busted assignments per game.  It really doesn't matter.  There is no magnet on campus on the defensive side of the ball and won't be until Petrino replaces WR.

Now get back to your rationalization and man-love here on Petrinoville.net.

Who said anything about honest debate?  The topic of this thread implies mass outbursts of 'adulation' over our coach and recruits.  Since you've decided to wade in, maybe you'll feel inclined to point out the 'man-love' as you so put it.  That's a load of crap.

It really boils down to this -
1. Who would you rather have at the helm of the Razorback recruiting program than who we currently have? 

2. Are the current recruiting efforts a distinct improvement over the previous regime's efforts, or not?

No one is jumping for joy. 

No one is wallowing in adulation. 




This thread had loaded intent from the beginning. 

[regi]

Do you really not know the answer to your question?  Yet you post on here like you are some sort of football talent expert evaluator.  Here is a hint.  It starts with a c, ends with a g , and has 8 letters.  Try real hard and you might just figure it out. 

You figure this out. You, like others, are all in type of guys. What ever Petrino does, you are all in, don't question, just shake your palm palms and cheer. I have stated many times, the guy is a great offensive mind and a decided upgrade from Hootie, but to think he is a better talent evaluator than Saban, Miles, Richt, Brooks and Meyer is a stretch. You have ZERO evidence to back this up. Our current class is not what Petrino drew up in July and August after Spring and Summer evals. The question is why the guys we wanted said no. Depth chart? Defensive staff? what ever they said no.

What are your credintials oh wise one? Head cheerleader?

[tiber]

You figure this out. You, like others, are all in type of guys. What ever Petrino does, you are all in, don't question, just shake your palm palms and cheer. I have stated many times, the guy is a great offensive mind and a decided upgrade from Hootie, but to think he is a better talent evaluator than Saban, Miles, Richt, Brooks and Meyer is a stretch. You have ZERO evidence to back this up. Our current class is not what Petrion drew up in July and August after Spring and Summer evals. The question is why the guys we wanted said no. Depth chart? Defensive staff? what ever they said no.

What are you credintials oh wise one? Head cheerleader?

I'm not the one you're calling an 'all in' kind of guy, but I imagine you would throw me in that category as well.  I'm not, but who cares.

Where do you see someone saying that Petrino is a better talent evaluator than Saban?  Can you point that out?

Who would you rather have at the helm of the Razorbacks right now?  Is there someone available we should be looking at for an upgrade?
Throw up a name and help us all out.