Started By
Message
re: Breakdown of Classes - Elite/Very Good/Good/Average
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:22 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:22 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
it is really difficult to assess high school OL. That is why guys like Bert who have track records are really impressive
It helps when the recruiter is roughly the same weight as many of today's Oline. Hence, Bert's success.
This post was edited on 2/4/15 at 3:23 pm
1
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:22 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
Also, some positions are really hard to judge for 95% of folks who evaluate (including some elite coaches) like the offensive line
How would you break that down?
To me the easy to spot talent positions are: QB, DT, MLB and maybe CB
The positions hardest to evaluate are: WR, RB, Gs, and maybe Ks.
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:23 pm to SummerOfGeorge
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/17/21 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:23 pm to RB10
quote:
It helps when the coach is roughly the same weight as many of today's Oline. Hence, Bert's success.
If anyone knows good weight, bad weight and how much weight a frame can hold.............
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:25 pm to cardboardboxer
(no message)
This post was edited on 3/17/21 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:25 pm to SummerOfGeorge
I'm sure that considers our punter and #1 long snapper as "average"
otherwise, I'd agree LSU's class is somewhat top heavy. 6 guys were rated 5*'s by at leasy one publication
otherwise, I'd agree LSU's class is somewhat top heavy. 6 guys were rated 5*'s by at leasy one publication
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:25 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
How would you break that down?
To me the easy to spot talent positions are: QB, DT, MLB and maybe CB
The positions hardest to evaluate are: WR, RB, Gs, and maybe Ks.
Obviously I am far from some sort of talent guru, but just from watching college football for years and paying attention to lots of elite recruits over the years.......
Hardest : interior line and non-elite tackles, kickers
Easiest : physically gifted WR/RB, elite QB, elite rushers, safety
I would add that some coaches seem to have a great knack for seeing kids and being able to assess how they will be able to hold extra strength (ala a high school safety turning into a hybrid LB, etc). I also think finding a QB who has tools but hasn't had to compete or a QB who is smart enough to make up for talent deficiencies is a skill that certain coaches have and others don't.
It's a damn tough job.
This post was edited on 2/4/15 at 3:27 pm
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:26 pm to tigerbait2010
quote:
I'm sure that considers our punter and #1 long snapper as "average"
No, if they were #1 at their position they are in the elite category. The snapper is too, though that is probably kind of silly.
Like I said, elite punters aren't a dime a dozen and they are huge tools. They don't get enough attention, IMHO.
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:27 pm to cardboardboxer
quote:
To me the easy to spot talent positions are: QB, DT, MLB and maybe CB
You're crazy. QB is, without a doubt, the hardest position to scout. Just look at the number of 1st round busts in the NFL that are QB's. DT is the hardest to project from high school to college because of the difference in competition. In college, they can't get by on just being bigger and stronger anymore, which most DT's do in HS.
This post was edited on 2/4/15 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:29 pm to SummerOfGeorge
KSGamecock, come graph this
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:32 pm to Maximus
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:39 pm to graychef
quote:
As an LSU fan, QB is impossible to evaluate because LSU cannot get a good QB on the field regularly. To the A&M fan, QB is the easiest because of the successes the team has had at that position.
Great point, I didn't consider that. What I said was relative.
It is easy for us to project QB because we use the same system Texas High Schools use, and that system is college-level in high school because of the competition at that level. So if we see a kid do good at Texas HSs he will at least be decent at A&M. Usually leadership (the big QB intangible) is easy to spot.
But that might be why RBs are in my list because it is hard for us to identify which RBs (who at a high school level get every carry) will work given limited/split carries in our system.
Thanks for making me think.
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:40 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Interesting! Thanks!
Florida looks underrated on the graph to me, but I guess they did sign a lot of 3 stars.
Florida looks underrated on the graph to me, but I guess they did sign a lot of 3 stars.
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:43 pm to cardboardboxer
Yea, I agree with all of that.
Certain coaches have systems that make positions easier to assess than others.
Good stuff.
Certain coaches have systems that make positions easier to assess than others.
Good stuff.
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:44 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:
It's a damn tough job.
The tough part about it is that these are kids and not sensible adults.
With college educated adults you can make an argument completely on logical reasons- look at our depth chart, you will get more playing time, you are a good fit for our system.
But these are kids with basically millions riding on their decisions. They might choose to go to a program where their position is LOADED just because it sounds cool, and the result of that is some adult position coach gets fired because he didn't have the talent he needed to even try out his system.
It is pretty frustrating, and is why I am amazed when coaches backslide to the NCAA after the NFL. I would think that a NFL job is the golden ticket because at least then you get to deal with adults.
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:47 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Based on that picture of Bert, it appears that when he isn't lazily flashing the texas horns sign, he is lazily dangling a shocker out there.
The hustle just doesn't quit with this guy.
The hustle just doesn't quit with this guy.
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:52 pm to SummerOfGeorge
quote:And that's why this spreadsheet sucks.
They are grouped by ranking in position group (JuCo is its own group so some schools have more 'elite' that may not actually be 'elite' due to JuCos - State and South Carolina had quite a few JuCos).
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:53 pm to tigerbait2010
quote:No, that actually considered them "elite," considering it's based on position ranking.
I'm sure that considers our punter and #1 long snapper as "average"
Posted on 2/4/15 at 3:54 pm to SummerOfGeorge
what a strange comparison
Posted on 2/4/15 at 4:04 pm to SummerOfGeorge
BIG FOUR!
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News