Pilchard
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 3, 2011
- Messages
- 17,098
- Reaction score
- 6,345
The idea that the lower the rankings go the less reliable they are is completely sound.
The idea that there is not a general correlation between ranking groups (think stars) and skill level is not sound. Living at the long end of the tail is not a winning proposition generally.
The thought that we'd rather find diamonds in the rough than take higher ranked recruits is completely nuts. Show me some admitable 4-5 stars that wanted to sign with us but were refused.
The position that we cannot generally get 4-5 stars yet we have admirably closed the gap via a developmental platform is true.
Agree with most of this. Don't think anyone takes the position that WF makes a conscious decision to take lower rated recruits, that would be nuts. The position is that Clawson and staff don't GAF about recruiting rankings as their own evaluation decides who to offer and who not to, as the staff (as any staff should be) is far better at evaluating prospects and their fit within the program than the recruiting services that are trying to handicap 130 FBS programs and all 2500+ kids that sign during each recruiting cycle.
If a recruit camps at WF and shows well, WF will offer. Doesn't matter if the kid is rated #300 or #1300 by a recruiting service. FWIW, there is a long history of other Power V programs suddenly becoming interested in a recruit after WF offers. So, it appears that others "in the know" value our staff's player eval skills.
Last edited: