What kind of "fan" rips a recruiting class when the overall ranking is due entirely to the small class size and not talent level? I mean I hit the trifecta earlier today with TD, Souf and Poker with consecutive hater posts about recruiting. JP had already indicated a similar false narrative. I even started to doubt myself, so I went back and looked at the kids' offers and they were actually better than I thought- almost all had offers from at least one highly ranked power 5 program and all are 3 stars. I mean honestly, why do these folks follow the program if they have such a low opinion of it? I just don't understand the psychology.
Honest question for haters
- Thread starter FKA VITAL
- Start date
I mean, looking at other offers is just searching for justification when their star ranking sucks. You think fans at Alabama, Ohio State, Clemson, or any school with a staff that can recruit is looking at other offers as proof that their commit is good? I know Pitt isn’t in the same galaxy as those schools, but a 3 star is a 3 star. When it’s based on a 5 star system, 3 stars is just average. And it’s fine to have 3 star kids, but you want them to compliment the 4 and God willing, 5 star kids you have committed. The reality AND fact is that Pitt has the 60th ranked class in the country and Narduzzi and staff missed on a TON of good prospects that would have raised the ranking of the class with only 13 kids committed.
Finally, people don’t have to be cheerleaders all the time. If someone thinks the recruiting class sucks, they have the right to express that without being called a hater.
Poker is troll. TD is too i believe. Souf is the eternal pessimist.
the more I follow recruiting, the less I try and analyze these classes before they step foot on campus. this class may be great, may be terrible, ridiculous to say this class is solid or bad at this point.
The people saying this class is great deserve to be ignored just as much as people that say this class is terrible. with that said, you don't have to be an expert to realize we missed out on some local top end talent the last few years. I cant even watch a Michigan game and not feel sick thinking about "What if" with Hudson.
1. Alabama, Clemson, Miami, etc have numbers of 4 and 5 Star recruits committed. These folks believe we can’t compete on that level unless we land as many 4-5 stars as they do. Anything less than recruiting at the same level as a top ten team is unacceptable to them. So, they are unhappy with 3-stars.
2. Immediacy bias. We only have 13 commits at Thanksgiving. Other schools have larger numbers. The complainrts are convinced the class won’t be significantly larger or better when finalized on LOI day although past history says it will be both.
It comes down to 14-0 or whine while pounding a six pack of pbr in a wife beater t-shirt.....
by they way, you should have titled the post "question about haters" and not "question for haters". By responding I have now self identified as a hater..not that there is anything wrong or necessarily untrue about that.
you want to know why we were 5-7, go back and look at the '14 class. not so much the rankings but 9 players I counted that were gone, that did nothing. 9 out of 23, not good.. Surprisingly, the '15 class is small but im only counting 3 players gone. not too much "star power" though.
The success/failure of this program will be based on that '16 class though. Duzzi's first real recruiting class.. Dare I say, this class will be the foundation of our beloved panthers starting as soon as this fall. I count 4 players gone from that class, 4 out of 24, two for health reasons (Gilbert and Hill).. A couple more that haven't started out so great (i'll leave those names out of it to be nice) but really, a lot of names in that class that are starting to break thru..
too early to make any real judgements on the '17 class. '16 could go down as one of our greatest classes in the last 25 years. No real GREAT names but we could be looking at 17-18 names that are true starters/producers for this program..
The success/failure of this program will be based on that '16 class though. Duzzi's first real recruiting class.. Dare I say, this class will be the foundation of our beloved panthers starting as soon as this fall. I count 4 players gone from that class, 4 out of 24, two for health reasons (Gilbert and Hill).. A couple more that haven't started out so great (i'll leave those names out of it to be nice) but really, a lot of names in that class that are starting to break thru..
too early to make any real judgements on the '17 class. '16 could go down as one of our greatest classes in the last 25 years. No real GREAT names but we could be looking at 17-18 names that are true starters/producers for this program..
I don't know if I am as high on that class as you are. You are right that you need to consider that a few were derailed by injuries (including Hamlin) or position changes. What I liked most about that class was the infusion of D-line talent. That has paid off already as Camp, Watts and Weaver already are starters showing promise, if not consistency. Hopefully Wheeler can add another quality option to that rotation. What that class has not delivered - and it hurt dearly this year - are playmakers on offense. There were a few offensive players in that 2016 class that arrived with great expectations. To date however, you could argue that the best offensive weapon from that class is Kessman.
very defensively sided, I agree. offensively, it's looking bad, flowers and ffrench haven't done much at all, Mcvittie is maybe 3rd string qb, hill is out, moss is out, don't think Zach Williams ever made it to campus..
Screw the star system and rankings. We continue to see how bogus the star system is, yet so many on this board rely on it.
So many pros and joes can’t even evaluate college talent to the NFL. Yet, people think any scouting service can accurately compare a WR at a class-a school in VA against one at a quad-a school in OH?
So many pros and joes can’t even evaluate college talent to the NFL. Yet, people think any scouting service can accurately compare a WR at a class-a school in VA against one at a quad-a school in OH?
Cool story. But it still doesn’t explain how Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State are consistently the teams with the best recruits using that “flawed” system and produce the best on-field results.
This is the oldest debate on these boards.
1. Stars "matter" enough on the "can't miss" players that yeah, Bama and Ohio State are almost always going to be in the mix as long as they grab these players. At the aggregate, even going down the line and putting it into a chart, there is a fairly strong relationship between average stars per player and wins.
2. However, some schools do outperform their recruiting average star level and some underperform them. The dots don't go on a line graph perfectly! Wisconsin is an example of a notable exception this year. Sure, they had an easy schedule, but even if they were "only" 11-2 with a tougher schedule, we still would envy that around here and they did almost entirely with 3 star recruits. Texas A&M is a classic example of the opposite, where they grab these great recruiting classes but then the players transfer or fail and it doesn't matter.
Both things can be true.
If there are still message boards in 10 years we'll still be talking about it then.
1. Stars "matter" enough on the "can't miss" players that yeah, Bama and Ohio State are almost always going to be in the mix as long as they grab these players. At the aggregate, even going down the line and putting it into a chart, there is a fairly strong relationship between average stars per player and wins.
2. However, some schools do outperform their recruiting average star level and some underperform them. The dots don't go on a line graph perfectly! Wisconsin is an example of a notable exception this year. Sure, they had an easy schedule, but even if they were "only" 11-2 with a tougher schedule, we still would envy that around here and they did almost entirely with 3 star recruits. Texas A&M is a classic example of the opposite, where they grab these great recruiting classes but then the players transfer or fail and it doesn't matter.
Both things can be true.
If there are still message boards in 10 years we'll still be talking about it then.
Sure, but Clark will still probably be a two or three year starter, where almost half of our 3 star players will not see the field in any meaningful down.
As for the fanbase we/Pitt is all alone ranked in the high 100's !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Last edited:
You’re exactly right. But, the question then becomes why? Why did Chryst have so much trouble here, but seemingly has so much success at Wisconsin? He was 6-7 here, 11-1 or 12-0 there
we have 15 RSFR with significant pt this year not counting a true FR at QB. Most of which are 3 stars.
clark was a backup to Matt Flanagan, who I don't think even had a rating on rivals at least.
So yeah, there goes that argument.
It is easy to pick the best of the best. Guys that Alabama, Ohio State get jump out on tape, but at some point when you watch enough high school athletes, they all share the same quality and the people rating them are just throwing darts.
1. Infastructure. Alvarez; 85,000 fans doing jump around; stability; the major college in the state; larger yearly revenue and budget.
2. Non conference schedule had zero power five teams.
3. Conference schedule was very weak as well.
4. Assistant coaches. Has Bob Bostad and Jim Leonhard, neither of whom were at Pitt. Leonhard is already so much more impressive than Matt House.
We lack splash players and talented depth.
And we don’t seem to be restocking.
The oline is a worry.
Linebacker is a worry
Safety a worry.
Want to know why I’m worried about recruiting?
How many games this season and next when you think pitt has a talent advantage by position?
How many times are we less talented?
Chryst stocked the shelves at oline-but those players are moving on, and mostly gone by next year.
And we don’t seem to be restocking.
The oline is a worry.
Linebacker is a worry
Safety a worry.
Want to know why I’m worried about recruiting?
How many games this season and next when you think pitt has a talent advantage by position?
How many times are we less talented?
Chryst stocked the shelves at oline-but those players are moving on, and mostly gone by next year.
Wisconsin has had Barry Alvarez as a coach or athletic director since 1990. He's figured out how to get the most of out that program. We don't have that sort of figure here, as coach or athletic director (at least not yet.) And we aren't THE program of the entire state the way Wisconsin essentially is.
Alvarez had four 10 win sesaons
Bielma had four.
Chryst has three already.
Pitt has had one since 1981.
That sort of institutional PROGRAM is more important than whether the coach was motivated or not. I'm pretty sure Chryst tried to win here -- if he didn't, he never would have gotten another head coaching job. If he was 4-8, 3-9, 5-7 do you think Alvarez would have hired him back? He was learning on the job here, which was always one of the two problems with hiring him (the other as you implied was his heart was in Wisconsin so he was going to leave as soon as he could.)
Latest posts
-
Article Narduzzi speaks ahead of GameAbove Sports Bowl- Latest: PittEngineer12
-
-
-
-