During this down time in recruiting I just wanted to solicit some thoughts on recruiting philosophy. According to the Rivals database, we currently have 236 offers out to 2016 recruits in 23 states (including D.C.). The following 2 lists contain the number of recruits by state.
OH – 27
PA – 25 (10 from Pittsburgh)
NJ – 23
VA – 17
MD – 15
DC – 7
NY – 5
Total - 119
FL - 52
NC - 10
MI - 9
GA - 8
CT, IL, TX - 6
TN – 4
IN, CA – 3
LA, MN, MA, AL -2
MO, SC – 1
Total - 117
Questions I have on this distribution of offers are:
Are we better served only targeting specific recruits outside of our prime recruiting area (such as a Zack Gilbert from NC) rather than casting a much wider net with 10 offers in NC and 52 offers in FL. One half of our offers are outside of our area of recruiting strength. I don’t know how much time we spend making 52 offers to FL recruits but if it is anything more than 15 minutes of watching tape on each and then calling the recruit’s HS coach with an offer then is that time well spent or are we better served on closer, more realistic options. And if it is only 15 minutes and a phone call, why bother. If the recruit doesn’t have a Pitt link, all we are doing is padding his offer sheet with no real chance of getting a commitment because an offer without an effort to set Pitt apart from closer and/or more currently accomplished programs is pointless. Are we better served limiting the out-of-area offers to only those that have at least a moderate chance of a commitment and spending the additional time on an all-out effort trying to secure a Cameron Brown or a Johncarlo Valentin. And if we are going to swing for the fences, would it make more sense on reaching for a Rashan Gary (who is a NJ recruit we have offered but have likely not spent much time on)?
2017 recruiting is currently more skewed to local recruits but still, nearly 40% of those recruits are out-of-area with the following distribution.
PA – 12 (8 from Pittsburgh)
VA – 3
NJ, MD, DC – 2
OH, DE, WV – 1
Total - 24
FL – 7
MI – 4
GA – 2
MA, TN – 1
Total -15
Until we have more to offer a geographically improbable recruit, which I truly believe is sooner than some on this board think, why not focus our efforts on securing the high probability recruits and raising chances on the reaches. My point is not that we are not spending enough time on the high probability recruits now but rather if we have more time left in the day because we limited our focus, spend that additional time sending that extra text or researching a recruit’s stats or finding his likes and dislikes to not only secure his commitment but also impress his teammate and coaches on how we went the extra yard. I believe the staff is doing a great job in a short amount of time but I was just wondering if a narrower focus might prove beneficial.
Like I said, it’s a slow period with not much to talk about so I’m throwing this out…you might want to do the same.
OH – 27
PA – 25 (10 from Pittsburgh)
NJ – 23
VA – 17
MD – 15
DC – 7
NY – 5
Total - 119
FL - 52
NC - 10
MI - 9
GA - 8
CT, IL, TX - 6
TN – 4
IN, CA – 3
LA, MN, MA, AL -2
MO, SC – 1
Total - 117
Questions I have on this distribution of offers are:
Are we better served only targeting specific recruits outside of our prime recruiting area (such as a Zack Gilbert from NC) rather than casting a much wider net with 10 offers in NC and 52 offers in FL. One half of our offers are outside of our area of recruiting strength. I don’t know how much time we spend making 52 offers to FL recruits but if it is anything more than 15 minutes of watching tape on each and then calling the recruit’s HS coach with an offer then is that time well spent or are we better served on closer, more realistic options. And if it is only 15 minutes and a phone call, why bother. If the recruit doesn’t have a Pitt link, all we are doing is padding his offer sheet with no real chance of getting a commitment because an offer without an effort to set Pitt apart from closer and/or more currently accomplished programs is pointless. Are we better served limiting the out-of-area offers to only those that have at least a moderate chance of a commitment and spending the additional time on an all-out effort trying to secure a Cameron Brown or a Johncarlo Valentin. And if we are going to swing for the fences, would it make more sense on reaching for a Rashan Gary (who is a NJ recruit we have offered but have likely not spent much time on)?
2017 recruiting is currently more skewed to local recruits but still, nearly 40% of those recruits are out-of-area with the following distribution.
PA – 12 (8 from Pittsburgh)
VA – 3
NJ, MD, DC – 2
OH, DE, WV – 1
Total - 24
FL – 7
MI – 4
GA – 2
MA, TN – 1
Total -15
Until we have more to offer a geographically improbable recruit, which I truly believe is sooner than some on this board think, why not focus our efforts on securing the high probability recruits and raising chances on the reaches. My point is not that we are not spending enough time on the high probability recruits now but rather if we have more time left in the day because we limited our focus, spend that additional time sending that extra text or researching a recruit’s stats or finding his likes and dislikes to not only secure his commitment but also impress his teammate and coaches on how we went the extra yard. I believe the staff is doing a great job in a short amount of time but I was just wondering if a narrower focus might prove beneficial.
Like I said, it’s a slow period with not much to talk about so I’m throwing this out…you might want to do the same.
