Pat Signal

[pittmeister]

Have you watched the film on any of these dudes or are you just yammering for the sake of disagreement? Film don't lie chief.

Of course not. That would take effort.

Do you know why I listed all Pitt's recruits and what the skinny was on each of them? Because I got sick of reading the same crap from the same posters on why this class sucks. I asked myself, why would the staff offer these players early on and accept their commitments? Fair question don't you think?

1. The previous staff already offered a lot of these kids. So they renewed the offers and started recruiting them.

2. I looked up some info on each of them to find out why they offered these guys in the first place. There is a lot of potential with most of these kids. So in most cases it makes sense. It mirrors their previous classes.

Am I concerned that the staff can't recruit to the level of the previous staff? Yes. But it's a little early right now. The staff is new and Pitt is coming off a 3-9 record. When you are schools like Pitt, that can never happen. That's why I was pissed that Narduzzi waited too long to make a change at QB. He threw away potential wins.

Let's see what happens. I think the previous two classes are going to pay dividends this year. I look for players like; Louis, Scott, Neal, Bass, Harrison, Brookins, Lovelace, Biles, Edwards, to break through this season, along with improvement from Yarnell & Davis as well.

 

[pierre93]

Of course not. That would take effort.

Do you know why I listed all Pitt's recruits and what the skinny was on each of them? Because I got sick of reading the same crap from the same posters on why this class sucks. I asked myself, why would the staff offer these players early on and accept their commitments? Fair question don't you think?

1. The previous staff already offered a lot of these kids. So they renewed the offers and started recruiting them.

2. I looked up some info on each of them to find out why they offered these guys in the first place. There is a lot of potential with most of these kids. So in most cases it makes sense. It mirrors their previous classes.

Am I concerned that the staff can't recruit to the level of the previous staff? Yes. But it's a little early right now. The staff is new and Pitt is coming off a 3-9 record. When you are schools like Pitt, that can never happen. That's why I was pissed that Narduzzi waited too long to make a change at QB. He threw away potential wins.

Let's see what happens. I think the previous two classes are going to pay dividends this year. I look for players like; Louis, Scott, Neal, Bass, Harrison, Brookins, Lovelace, Biles, Edwards, to break through this season, along with improvement from Yarnell & Davis as well.

Some current players told me that these new assistants on offense are like a breath of fresh air. Obviously these coaches want to make names for each other and do well so they can move up the ladder. If we get a few good years out of them I'm happy with it. Need young and innovative assistants, especially on offense. Hopefully it all works out. H2P!!!!

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

 

[Usuallyunusual-partdeux]

Some of you guys are just not that bright. The short fast and twitchy guys are extremely deadly if there is a coach that has an amazing scheme to get them the ball in space. Desmond Reid was playing for Western Carolina last year and he just about looked like the best back on the team during the spring game (IN THIS SCHEME!!). They aren't settling for theses dudes they prefer them in this scheme. Kade built his success around these overlooked skill guys who he can get the ball in space and watch them go. I'm not saying we will win the ACC this year, but we are recruiting swiss army knives with speed route running and wiggle. Also ...the guy who used a basketball analogy 🤣🤣🤣 Talk about comparing apples to oranges.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Some of you guys are just not that bright. The short fast and twitchy guys are extremely deadly if there is a coach that has an amazing scheme to get them the ball in space. Desmond Reid was playing for Western Carolina last year and he just about looked like the best back on the team during the spring game (IN THIS SCHEME!!). They aren't settling for theses dudes they prefer them in this scheme. Kade built his success around these overlooked skill guys who he can get the ball in space and watch them go. I'm not saying we will win the ACC this year, but we are recruiting swiss army knives with speed route running and wiggle. Also ...the guy who used a basketball analogy 🤣🤣🤣 Talk about comparing apples to oranges.

Maybe you should read what was written again. You've built up this fantasy where everyone who is short is somehow significantly twitchier/shiftier/faster than their taller counterparts, and that just isn't true. Is Che tearing it up at Pitt? Did Vincent Davis? Hey, remember Seneca Milledge, whose tape was absolutely fawned over when he visited Pitt... remind me of what he did at Virginia.

No $hit the small guys who succeed are twitchy... they HAVE to be in order to make it at that size. You're, as usual, cherry picking the success stories and failing to realize that most guys who are undersized do not make it. That's why everyone always acts like it's a big deal when a smaller guy does work out.

You act like Pitt has stumbled upon this secret that no one else is privy to. "Hey, these smaller guys are faster than everyone else!"

As if the 40 times, etc. aren't available for everyone and these ranking sites/other coaches who decide to offer don't have access to them.

Marquis Williams was way stickier in coverage than MJ Devonshire. So why did Devonshire get drafted and Williams didn't? Cause all NFL teams are stupid, right? It's almost as if everyone you advance a level in competition, tangible such as height and weight are things that need to be projected... because they will affect whether or not one is able to play at that level.

 

[pittmeister]

View embedded media

Synkwan Smith APB – Rated 5.7 on Rivals. Offered by Archie Collins. Has 3 other P4 offers.

Last season, he racked up 24 carries for 285 yards (11.9 yards per carry) and four touchdowns and 32 receptions for 420 yards (13.1 yards per reception) and eight touchdowns. And he returned 10 kickoffs for 444 yards and a touchdown and 10 punts for 357 yards and four touchdowns. His blistering speed, combined with his vision as a returner and in space allows him to make great plays all over the field. He also does a great job breaking off tackles, extending plays consistently for extra yardage. He’s another track guy. His most recent 100m time of 10.56. That places him 3rd in the state at the moment. Smith is ultra-shifty on top of being one of the fastest players in the state.

Smith and Chester both hail from Georgia, as Pitt looks to build a recruiting pipeline in the southern state.

Four-star defensive back commit Elijah Dotson visited this weekend as well, likely playing a role in Smith, Sterling, Chester and Taylor joining him in the Class of 2025.

His film reminds me of Dion Lewis...

 

[pittmeister]

Maybe you should read what was written again. You've built up this fantasy where everyone who is short is somehow significantly twitchier/shiftier/faster than their taller counterparts, and that just isn't true. Is Che tearing it up at Pitt? Did Vincent Davis? Hey, remember Seneca Milledge, whose tape was absolutely fawned over when he visited Pitt... remind me of what he did at Virginia.

No $hit the small guys who succeed are twitchy... they HAVE to be in order to make it at that size. You're, as usual, cherry picking the success stories and failing to realize that most guys who are undersized do not make it. That's why everyone always acts like it's a big deal when a smaller guy does work out.

You act like Pitt has stumbled upon this secret that no one else is privy to. "Hey, these smaller guys are faster than everyone else!"

As if the 40 times, etc. aren't available for everyone and these ranking sites/other coaches who decide to offer don't have access to them.

Marquis Williams was way stickier in coverage than MJ Devonshire. So why did Devonshire get drafted and Williams didn't? Cause all NFL teams are stupid, right? It's almost as if everyone you advance a level in competition, tangible such as height and weight are things that need to be projected... because they will affect whether or not one is able to play at that level.

Smaller players with speed is only good for certain offenses like the one Pitt is going to run.

 

[Usuallyunusual-partdeux]

Maybe you should read what was written again. You've built up this fantasy where everyone who is short is somehow significantly twitchier/shiftier/faster than their taller counterparts, and that just isn't true. Is Che tearing it up at Pitt? Did Vincent Davis? Hey, remember Seneca Milledge, whose tape was absolutely fawned over when he visited Pitt... remind me of what he did at Virginia.

No $hit the small guys who succeed are twitchy... they HAVE to be in order to make it at that size. You're, as usual, cherry picking the success stories and failing to realize that most guys who are undersized do not make it. That's why everyone always acts like it's a big deal when a smaller guy does work out.

You act like Pitt has stumbled upon this secret that no one else is privy to. "Hey, these smaller guys are faster than everyone else!"

As if the 40 times, etc. aren't available for everyone and these ranking sites/other coaches who decide to offer don't have access to them.

Marquis Williams was way stickier in coverage than MJ Devonshire. So why did Devonshire get drafted and Williams didn't? Cause all NFL teams are stupid, right? It's almost as if everyone you advance a level in competition, tangible such as height and weight are things that need to be projected... because they will affect whether or not one is able to play at that level.

You should change your handle to strawman king. Or maybe all or nothing thinker. I promise sometimes I seriously think random crackheads just make pages on the free board get real high and just have at it. Your whole argument ( not even sure why you are arguing) is flawed because I never once said the words EVERY, or NFL. Additionally, my whole comment was based on scheme fit of the guys they are taking. My comments weren't announcing every vertically challenged football player as athletically superior. You made that part up by yourself to have something to argue against 🤣. Not one of the gentlemen you mentioned played in this scheme so you haven't a clue how they will or would have done in it. Moreover, I'm talking about collegiate success which doesn't always translate to the NFL so I have no idea why you brought that up cause I sure didn't. You created your own fictional rendition of my post to argue against. One that was ridiculous I agree..... that's why I didn't make it.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

You should change your handle to strawman king. Or maybe all or nothing thinker. I promise sometimes I seriously think random crackheads just make pages on the free board get real high and just have at it. Your whole argument ( not even sure why you are arguing) is flawed because I never once said the words EVERY, or NFL. Additionally, my whole comment was based on scheme fit of the guys they are taking. My comments weren't announcing every vertically challenged football player as athletically superior. You made that part up by yourself to have something to argue against 🤣. Not one of the gentlemen you mentioned played in this scheme so you haven't a clue how they will or would have done in it. Moreover, I'm talking about collegiate success which doesn't always translate to the NFL so I have no idea why you brought that up cause I sure didn't. You created your own fictional rendition of my post to argue against. One that was ridiculous I agree..... that's why I didn't make it.

Weird, because the topic was about whether small dudes are inherently underrated in recruiting rankings, and you began the whole straw man tangent.

"Have you watched the tape?"

Lol, like you're some expert tape analyst.

I simply mentioned why size matters as it translates to sports, and that is something recruiting rankings must factor in as they assign their educated values.

I'm not commenting on specific players anymore because it's a tiresome argument on a fan board. If you rooted for any other team that recruited exactly as we'd do you'd be saying how their low 3 stars look good on tape, too. Just dumb to even go down that path on this board, so I didn't. But you seem to want to.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

Maybe you should read what was written again. You've built up this fantasy where everyone who is short is somehow significantly twitchier/shiftier/faster than their taller counterparts, and that just isn't true. Is Che tearing it up at Pitt? Did Vincent Davis? Hey, remember Seneca Milledge, whose tape was absolutely fawned over when he visited Pitt... remind me of what he did at Virginia.

No $hit the small guys who succeed are twitchy... they HAVE to be in order to make it at that size. You're, as usual, cherry picking the success stories and failing to realize that most guys who are undersized do not make it. That's why everyone always acts like it's a big deal when a smaller guy does work out.

You act like Pitt has stumbled upon this secret that no one else is privy to. "Hey, these smaller guys are faster than everyone else!"

As if the 40 times, etc. aren't available for everyone and these ranking sites/other coaches who decide to offer don't have access to them.

Marquis Williams was way stickier in coverage than MJ Devonshire. So why did Devonshire get drafted and Williams didn't? Cause all NFL teams are stupid, right? It's almost as if everyone you advance a level in competition, tangible such as height and weight are things that need to be projected... because they will affect whether or not one is able to play at that level.

Pitt needs to focus on guys who can produce at the college level and then hopefully move onto the NFL, but college production is priority number one. Getting a good football player who might not fit the ideal measureables for the big-time programs should be their focus in recruiting.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Pitt needs to focus on guys who can produce at the college level and then hopefully move onto the NFL, but the aforementioned is priority number one. Getting a good football player who might not fit the ideal measureables for the big-time programs should be their focus.

I was using college to pros as an example. But the same logic works as one goes from high school to college. What worked in high school might not work in college. Look at Devin Whitlock. Many were convinced he was a steal as a walk-on. But what he got away with in high school didn't translate to a field where everyone is bigger, stronger, and faster.

A 5'7" high school player could be way better than a 6'1" player. That doesn't mean he translates better to the next level.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

I was using college to pros as an example. But the same logic works as one goes from high school to college. What worked in high school might not work in college. Look at Devin Whitlock. Many were convinced he was a steal as a walk-on. But what he got away with in high school didn't translate to a field where everyone is bigger, stronger, and faster.

A walkon is a no lose situation, so that is a poor example. But this guy is a heck of lot faster and played against better competition.

 

[cashisking884]

Can anybody explain how the Pitt offense is so unique to other uptempo spreads that don’t play a ton of small WRs?

It can’t be “spacing” because that’s like every other offense in college football.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Can anybody explain how the Pitt offense is so unique to other uptempo spreads that don’t play a ton of small WRs?

It can’t be “spacing” because that’s like every other offense in college football.

Bru McCoy - 6'3"
Jalin Hyatt - 6'0"
Cedric Tillman - 6'3
Rarely Keyton - 6'3"

But I digress.

To be clear, I have no issue with taking flyers on some smaller guys. I'm simply speaking in generalizations. Size matters. Look how many times our corners got out-jumped in spite of being in good position. Pitt of all teams should know this.

Length matters. Providing a bigger target for your QB matters.

Do I think we're bringing in a bit too many undersized receivers? Yeah, probably. Again, not singling any one of them out. I'm sure a few will pan out. I was just saying that I don't think we have some cheat code the recruiting rankings aren't aware of.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

A walkon is a no lose situation, so that is a poor example. But this guy is a heck of lot faster and played against better competition.

No, it's actually a great example. Someone who did all that in high school - who this board swore was even better than Q. Martin - didn't even get a scholarship.

 

[cashisking884]

Bru McCoy - 6'3"
Jalin Hyatt - 6'0"
Cedric Tillman - 6'3
Rarely Keyton - 6'3"

But I digress.

To be clear, I have no issue with taking flyers on some smaller guys. I'm simply speaking in generalizations. Size matters. Look how many times our corners got out-jumped in spite of being in good position. Pitt of all teams should know this.

Length matters. Providing a bigger target for your QB matters.

Do I think we're bringing in a bit too many undersized receivers? Yeah, probably. Again, not singling any one of them out. I'm sure a few will pan out. I was just saying that I don't think we have some cheat code the recruiting rankings aren't aware of.

Exactly.
I’m not a scout, all these guys could be so much better than the people they get paid to watch film and recruit players, think they are.

But all of this, “short guys can’t have higher rankings because recruiting services hate them” and “this offense thrives with guys not tall enough to ride a roller coaster” seems like after the fact excuse making.

Plenty of short WRs have high rankings and are recruited by big time programs.

There is no short person offense in college football. There are offenses where maybe the slot or APB aren’t as exposed. But not the entire skill position depth chart.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

Bru McCoy - 6'3"
Jalin Hyatt - 6'0"
Cedric Tillman - 6'3
Rarely Keyton - 6'3"

But I digress.

To be clear, I have no issue with taking flyers on some smaller guys. I'm simply speaking in generalizations. Size matters. Look how many times our corners got out-jumped in spite of being in good position. Pitt of all teams should know this.

Length matters. Providing a bigger target for your QB matters.

Do I think we're bringing in a bit too many undersized receivers? Yeah, probably. Again, not singling any one of them out. I'm sure a few will pan out. I was just saying that I don't think we have some cheat code the recruiting rankings aren't aware of.

Pitt is not going to land guys who are 6-2 200lbs and run a legit 4.4 coming out of HS. Too much NIL $$$ is required. Finding a good football player who is a little shorter and smaller than the prototype that runs a legit 4.4 is possible.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Pitt is not going to land guys who are 6-2 200lbs and run a legit 4.4 coming out of HS. Too much NIL $$$ is required. Finding a good football player who is a little shorter and smaller than the prototype that runs a legit 4.4 is possible.

Ah, so no 4 star receivers for Pitt.

I mean Rutgers, Arizona State, Washington, SMU, Kentucky, and NC State, UNC, Liberty, Memphis, Wisconsin, BYU, Texas Tech, etc. all have at least one. Looks like I could find quite a few non blue bloods every year who get them, in fact. But Narduzzi has Pitt completely maxed out and recruiting to its exact ceiling with absolutely no room for improvement. Mmhmm.

 

[steelcurtain55.]

No, it's actually a great example. Someone who did all that in high school - who this board swore was even better than Q. Martin - didn't even get a scholarship.

I don't remember reading anything that Devin was "better" then Quinton.

They play completely different positions with completely different roles. I don't know why there would have ever been a comparison.

During their time together (2 years), Devin was more important in that offense and it allowed Matt to do a lot of unique things with Quinton. But, Quinton was the better football player. Without even going into detail, Quinton played defense and did it at a pretty high level - coverage-wise.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

Ah, so no 4 star receivers for Pitt.

I mean Rutgers, Arizona State, Washington, SMU, Kentucky, and NC State, UNC, Liberty, Memphis, Wisconsin, BYU, Texas Tech, etc. all have at least one. Looks like I could find quite a few non blue bloods every year who get them, in fact. But Narduzzi has Pitt completely maxed out and recruiting to its exact ceiling with absolutely no room for improvement. Mmhmm.

If you want to land a Fr. WR that is 6-2 200lbs, runs a legit 4.4, and is wanted by big-time programs then stop whining on a message board and start putting money into NIL.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I don't remember reading anything that Devin was "better" then Quinton.

They play completely different positions with completely different roles. I don't know why there would have ever been a comparison.

During their time together (2 years), Devin was more important in that offense and it allowed Matt to do a lot of unique things with Quinton. But, Quinton was the better football player. Without even going into detail, Quinton played defense and did it at a pretty high level - coverage-wise.

Who cares if they play the same position? Guys from the same team are compared all the time, and I read multiple times on this board that he was BV's best player. Found a thread where you vouched pretty hard for him and TheSpecialSauce predicted he would have a fine career at Pitt. Shocker.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

If you want to land a Fr. WR that is 6-2 200lbs, runs a legit 4.4, and is wanted by big-time programs then stop whining on a message board and start putting money into NIL.

I put more money into NIL than 90% of this message board. Which is sad, because it's $20/month. Complain to the ones who don't donate and go to games, cause that isn't me.

 

[pittmeister]

Bru McCoy - 6'3"
Jalin Hyatt - 6'0"
Cedric Tillman - 6'3
Rarely Keyton - 6'3"

But I digress.

To be clear, I have no issue with taking flyers on some smaller guys. I'm simply speaking in generalizations. Size matters. Look how many times our corners got out-jumped in spite of being in good position. Pitt of all teams should know this.

Length matters. Providing a bigger target for your QB matters.

Do I think we're bringing in a bit too many undersized receivers? Yeah, probably. Again, not singling any one of them out. I'm sure a few will pan out. I was just saying that I don't think we have some cheat code the recruiting rankings aren't aware of.

Wolf:

What some of you are missing is we are no longer running a pro set offense. WR’s with length is not required. Speed and getting into space is what matters. They are looking for players like Skyy Moore ( 5”10 180lbs) You remember him? He’s the guy from Western Michigan who burned Pitt again and again and again.

The recruits on the defensive side of the ball has not change. Outside of Shawn Lee, they are all typical of what they have recruited in the past. Look at their offer sheets.

A pro set offense requires that you recruit players that have pro potential. That means you are competing with other schools like Ohio State, Alabama, for the same players. This is a move that needed to be done years ago.

 

[TheSpecialSauce]

I don't remember reading anything that Devin was "better" then Quinton.

They play completely different positions with completely different roles. I don't know why there would have ever been a comparison.

During their time together (2 years), Devin was more important in that offense and it allowed Matt to do a lot of unique things with Quinton. But, Quinton was the better football player. Without even going into detail, Quinton played defense and did it at a pretty high level - coverage-wise.

Nobody said Devin was a better college prospect. He is bored and is just moving the goalposts to try and fit his narrative.

 

[Gunga_Galunga]

Then one would expect more individual OL to be getting into the NFL, even if the OL as a whole performed poorly due to what was being asked of the group at a college level.

The guys they're left recruiting outside the top tier aren't high hit NFL guys. Another issue was the local guys weren't very good.

They have four OL in the league that I know of; Goncalves, Morrissey, Warren, and O'Neill. While O'Neill was a Chryst recruit, Narduzzi moved him to OL. Don't know who had a cup of coffee in the league, or how this compares to other schools.

 

[Gunga_Galunga]

View embedded media

This kid is pretty electric.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Wolf:

What some of you are missing is we are no longer running a pro set offense. WR’s with length is not required. Speed and getting into space is what matters. They are looking for players like Skyy Moore ( 5”10 180lbs) You remember him? He’s the guy from Western Michigan who burned Pitt again and again and again.

The recruits on the defensive side of the ball has not change. Outside of Shawn Lee, they are all typical of what they have recruited in the past. Look at their offer sheets.

A pro set offense requires that you recruit players that have pro potential. That means you are competing with other schools like Ohio State, Alabama, for the same players. This is a move that needed to be done years ago.

Those guys I named were the receiving corps for Tennessee's 2022 offense, which ran spread and tempo. They also had a 5'10" guy, in all fairness, but I think it proves that you don't need smurfs just to run a spread offense. Alabama and Ohio State are also currently running some form of the spread; I don't know how many college teams are doing "traditional" pro style anymore, but I imagine not many.

I'm not saying a 5'9" 165-pound receiver can't get be good, but we sure seem to have brought in a lot of guys within that range lately. Hopefully this staff's calculations prove to be correct.

I think we'll be getting a 4 star corner this week, which is why it drives me crazy when TheSpecialSauce says we *can't* recruit big time players. We absolutely can; we just need to do better at it. Especially on offense.

On the whole, my expectations for Pitt recruiting are fairly reasonable. I want to strive to be around 30-40. I think that is pretty fair. I know these rankings could never be exact, but I do look at them as being pretty reliable probability indicators.

Offensive playmakers have been a huge concern under Narduzzi, and it's no coincidence that we had them in his best seasons. That's a big concern of mine. Seems like the highest-rated players in these classes seldom play wide receiver or quarterback. The recruiting at those positions has mostly sucked.

 

[cruzer]

Exactly.
I’m not a scout, all these guys could be so much better than the people they get paid to watch film and recruit players, think they are.

But all of this, “short guys can’t have higher rankings because recruiting services hate them” and “this offense thrives with guys not tall enough to ride a roller coaster” seems like after the fact excuse making.

Plenty of short WRs have high rankings and are recruited by big time programs.

There is no short person offense in college football. There are offenses where maybe the slot or APB aren’t as exposed. But not the entire skill position depth chart.

I laughed out loud at the the "guys not tall enough to ride a roller coaster".

 

[Islanderpanther]

Offers are not the best judge of a recruit in 2024. Programs are throwing out hundreds of offers per year starting when players are freshmen in high school.

Better barometer than stars…,school are more selective than you suggest.

 

[cashisking884]

Better barometer than stars…,school are more selective than you suggest.

Except what constitutes an offer? When was the offer given? Are the kids being truthful? Etc.

At least with stars, which are plenty accurate enough, there is no guess work. We don’t have to ask ourselves what does a .978 rating mean in this context? The ranking is what it is. And we know that’s what 247 gave him.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Except what constitutes an offer? When was the offer given? Are the kids being truthful? Etc.

At least with stars, which are plenty accurate enough, there is no guess work. We don’t have to ask ourselves what does a .978 rating mean in this context? The ranking is what it is. And we know that’s what 247 gave him.

Yeah, it's not uncommon for a dude who was getting recruited by Alabama as a freshman to end up at a G5 school by the time it's all said and done. It's not like Rivals goes back and takes the Alabama offer off their profile.

 

[lilspainishflea]

Emmanuel Taylor LB – Great athlete. Last season, he made 130 tackles, 28 tackles for loss and eight sacks last season at linebacker, while also putting in work at wideout and in the wildcat as quarterback. He is also great in track and field, running 15.58 seconds in the 110-meter hurdles as a sophomore. He also ran the 300-meter hurdles in 43.08 seconds and the 100-meter reps in 11.79 seconds. 247Sports rates Taylor as the 100th-ranked athlete and 24th-ranked recruit from Virginia. VT wanted him badly.

11.79 100m is pretty fast for a LB.

 

[lilspainishflea]

Synkwan Smith APB – Rated 5.7 on Rivals. Offered by Archie Collins. Has 3 other P4 offers.

Last season, he racked up 24 carries for 285 yards (11.9 yards per carry) and four touchdowns and 32 receptions for 420 yards (13.1 yards per reception) and eight touchdowns. And he returned 10 kickoffs for 444 yards and a touchdown and 10 punts for 357 yards and four touchdowns. His blistering speed, combined with his vision as a returner and in space allows him to make great plays all over the field. He also does a great job breaking off tackles, extending plays consistently for extra yardage. He’s another track guy. His most recent 100m time of 10.56. That places him 3rd in the state at the moment. Smith is ultra-shifty on top of being one of the fastest players in the state.

Smith and Chester both hail from Georgia, as Pitt looks to build a recruiting pipeline in the southern state.

Four-star defensive back commit Elijah Dotson visited this weekend as well, likely playing a role in Smith, Sterling, Chester and Taylor joining him in the Class of 2025.

His film reminds me of Dion Lewis...

Roswell High School plays in the highest competition level in GA and recently produced two NFL players: Xaviery McKinney (2nd round Safety from Alabama) and Malik Willis.

Bill Yoast, the DC from Remember the Titans, also coached there prior to moving to Virginia.

 

[lilspainishflea]

Except what constitutes an offer? When was the offer given? Are the kids being truthful? Etc.

At least with stars, which are plenty accurate enough, there is no guess work. We don’t have to ask ourselves what does a .978 rating mean in this context? The ranking is what it is. And we know that’s what 247 gave him.

I think that you can kind of plausibly extrapolate which offers might not be real based on the overall information on a player.

Like I'm willing to believe that a 3-star has offers from Georgia Tech, Kansas, and Pitt, along with Georgia State, and Arkansas State. But I have a hard time believing that many - and maybe not any - 3-star players committing to Georgia Tech, Kansas, and Pitt had a committable offer to Alabama except in extremely unique circumstances.

 

[Usuallyunusual-partdeux]

Weird, because the topic was about whether small dudes are inherently underrated in recruiting rankings, and you began the whole straw man tangent.

"Have you watched the tape?"

Lol, like you're some expert tape analyst.

I simply mentioned why size matters as it translates to sports, and that is something recruiting rankings must factor in as they assign their educated values.

I'm not commenting on specific players anymore because it's a tiresome argument on a fan board. If you rooted for any other team that recruited exactly as we'd do you'd be saying how their low 3 stars look good on tape, too. Just dumb to even go down that path on this board, so I didn't. But you seem to want to.

I don't think you have any idea who I am. Furthermore the conversation and the entire thread was the players who were committing...hence the title Pat Signal. My comment was directed at the pessimistic attitudes towards the kids stature and offer sheets. As I already said my comments were in defense of these kids and the coaches who thought they fit the vision on offense. You took up a cause even though I never mentioned you or quoted your posts. You felt a need to vindicate yourself because you thought my comments pointed at you...wonder why. I guess you thought the shoe fit. This is however always been your schtick on here. Take a pessimistic approach and argue with people who disagree. You must be a real gem on X. Have a blessed day sir...or madam whatever you are.

 

[steelcurtain55.]

Who cares if they play the same position? Guys from the same team are compared all the time, and I read multiple times on this board that he was BV's best player.

He was probably BVA's MVP, meaning if you take him out of the lineup they have a very hard time replacing him and what he could do for that offense. In that sense, he was probably BVA's best "player" but not BVA's best "prospect."

There is a huge difference between comparing players for what they mean to their team and what their potential is at the next level.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

There is a huge difference between comparing players for what they mean to their team and what their potential is at the next level.

I've said that multiple times in this thread, and that is why size matters. Other things matter, too, but size is not some meaningless factoid.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I don't think you have any idea who I am. Furthermore the conversation and the entire thread was the players who were committing...hence the title Pat Signal. My comment was directed at the pessimistic attitudes towards the kids stature and offer sheets. As I already said my comments were in defense of these kids and the coaches who thought they fit the vision on offense. You took up a cause even though I never mentioned you or quoted your posts. You felt a need to vindicate yourself because you thought my comments pointed at you...wonder why. I guess you thought the shoe fit. This is however always been your schtick on here. Take a pessimistic approach and argue with people who disagree. You must be a real gem on X. Have a blessed day sir...or madam whatever you are.

Ah, right. You just said "the guy who used a basketball analogy"... which was me. So if I mention "the guy who speaks like Ron Burgundy and asks people on an internet message board if they have any idea who is he" then you're not allowed to assume I'm talking about you.

 

[steelcurtain55.]

I've said that multiple times in this thread, and that is why size matters. Other things matter, too, but size is not some meaningless factoid.

I agree.

My take on it is this and has always been this - 99% of college coaches want the biggest, fastest, most athletic players they can recruit. They don't choose lesser measurables over greater ones. PITT isn't targeting sub 6' receivers for the sake of landing shorter players. They're recruiting these guys because: 1. they think they can play. 2. they can't land the larger version of that player.

Have I seen an offense of smaller skill players dominate - yes. WVU under RR - Slaton, Reynaud, Sanders, Devine. The other example would be some of Leach's offenses have featured plenty of sub 6' skill players. The only other example of where you see this is the academies running flexbone.

If you can play, size isn't an issue for any scheme at the skill positions. I don't care if you're running a 2 back 1 TE Frank Cignetti offense or a wide open Josh Heupel offense. Frank had a damn good offense with a 5'8 tailback and 225lb TE. You just have to know how to utilize them. The Steelers have redefined some things over the years with me with pro-style schemes and smaller receivers. I was always and still am a fan of big WR's in a 2 back offense. However, I watched Hines, Santonio, AB, etc dominate in that scheme. The one place where having smaller skill players is an issue is the red zone. You better execute down in that area with smaller players because it's much harder winning 50/50 balls at 5'9 then 6'3.

We'll find out in 2-3 years if these shorter WR's can play or not.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

I agree.

My take on it is this and has always been this - 99% of college coaches want the biggest, fastest, most athletic players they can recruit. They don't choose lesser measurables over greater ones. PITT isn't targeting sub 6' receivers for the sake of landing shorter players. They're recruiting these guys because: 1. they think they can play. 2. they can't land the larger version of that player.

Have I seen an offense of smaller skill players dominate - yes. WVU under RR - Slaton, Reynaud, Sanders, Devine. The other example would be some of Leach's offenses have featured plenty of sub 6' skill players. The only other example of where you see this is the academies running flexbone.

If you can play, size isn't an issue for any scheme at the skill positions. I don't care if you're running a 2 back 1 TE Frank Cignetti offense or a wide open Josh Heupel offense. Frank had a damn good offense with a 5'8 tailback and 225lb TE. You just have to know how to utilize them. The Steelers have redefined some things over the years with me with pro-style schemes and smaller receivers. I was always and still am a fan of big WR's in a 2 back offense. However, I watched Hines, Santonio, AB, etc dominate in that scheme. The one place where having smaller skill players is an issue is the red zone. You better execute down in that area with smaller players because it's much harder winning 50/50 balls at 5'9 then 6'3.

We'll find out in 2-3 years if these shorter WR's can play or not.

Yeah, I don't disagree with any of that. I do think that - assuming speed, agility, route running, etc. are the same - the guy who is 5'9" is almost certainly starting behind the 8-ball in comparison to the guy who is 6'1" just because of the laws of physics. The latter guy has a bigger catch radius and can likely high-point/box out better.

In Pitt's case, if indeed we're not able to get the "complete" receivers, or whatever one wants to call the highly-rated guys who have both size and skills, then we had better at least diversify a bit so that we can at least have guys who accommodate certain situations... the red zone not being the least of which.

I do remember Hines Ward being a weapon in the red zone, but a lot of that was contingent on him being built like a LB and having a QB who could fire a 200 mph dart into a tight window while he boxed the DB out. Not sure that's something we should count on at Pitt.