VoyForums

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 12345678910 ]
Subject: Re: Two new Columbia commits


Author:
spainy
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 18:29:36 12/28/16 Wed
In reply to: spainy 's message, "Re: Two new Columbia commits" on 15:18:18 12/28/16 Wed

Thanx much for response. Can I ask if that source is a not-to-be named CU coach or is it someone else supposedly close to the program? Forgive me for asking but have seen some of this stuff on other posts and often it's a dad or alumni who's opinion is great but maybe not meaningful or accurate.

Can't say I agree with assessment on rankings but value the opine. Most of the kids starting or playing a lot as frosh around the league this year were ranked kids and think this was also true for CU. Also have found that most fans have no clue how rankings work or what they actually measure so opinions understandingly vary. Good topic for another discussion thread but I'd rather avoid right now. So, in this spirit a better question may be how many of these kids had key offers from other Ivy's or real FBS offers?

Statement about this class being better doesn't quite jive with films and publicly known ranking or offer information, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. But to buy into this class is better (at this point) assumes CU found significantly more "diamonds-in-the-rough" than most other schools in this round, or there's information not yet public on MOST of these kids. Not really a high probability but nice to hear from a reputable source if it is the case.

Having said all this, a couple of late "gets" do look like good additions that will plug some 2016 holes, and although the overall class doesn't seem to come close to matching size/depth/quality of 2016 it doesn't have to match to be a huge win. So the final question is, according to your source who are the standouts.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
[> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Two new Columbia commits


Author:
LionFan
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:28:18 12/28/16 Wed

Rankings are created by formulas generated from inputing measurables and recruiting interest/offer. Both things easily exaggerated by overly ambitious coaches or more then likely fathers. Distorted Ht, 40yd dash or overstated "offers" from a BCS school will create a rating that does not accurately reflect the caliber of player. Many fathers get very involved and political about these rankings thinking they are the key to sons getting opportunities they deserve or don't quite deserve. With highly ranked players the criteria is much more apparent and easy to validate. The bottom of the barrel is much larger and easily distorted.

the source is close to someone on the team. The word is staff is very excited about this class and its quality top to bottom. No specifics but supposedly one of the December visits was loaded with "difference maker" athletes

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Two new Columbia commits


Author:
spainy
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 20:49:22 12/28/16 Wed

Thanx much for you info and insight. At the end of the day, the only thing that much matters is how the kids plays when they get to the next level. Everything falls into the educated guess till then so it all has to be take with grain-of-salt.

There's been some worry about the LB position in these posts. What the scoop on all the talent on roster. Looks like there are plenty of kids returning. Been a bit more worried about DB and RB positions so what's scoop there?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Two new Columbia commits


Author:
LionFan
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 21:00:34 12/28/16 Wed

Columbia's class of 2016 will prove to be outstanding. We all hope that rumors are close to true and that this class rivals or surpasses last year... if so, the future is very bright.

That being said, the 2016 class was ranked on the basis of six 3 star prospects. If you look through the 2 Deeps for this season, names like Milstein, Coogan, Everett, Smith, Wainwright, Delorenzi and Lunsford all show up and were not "ranked" players.

Look a little deeper and you find out Yale's top ranked class shows only one of their 4 top 100 incoming freshman played in 2016. In a year of Yale playing all their Fr their highest ranked players did not play.

These theories are very easy things to research and validate. Wanting something to be true does not make it so.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Two new Columbia commits


Author:
spainy
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 22:27:56 12/28/16 Wed

Well, I'll bow to this point if the same is true in 2-3 seasons. In many cases, frosh need luck to get on the field, like no depth at position or older players getting hurt so first year stats can be misleading.

Related, the bigger players often have a harder path to field early on because of size, age and durability. No big uglies played consistently this season (mostly those who did were dedicated pass-rush situations) unless the guy ahead of them got hurt.

Which brings in another point, namely that the Ivy are stocked with 5/6yr HS students for more academic issues than athletic reasons. So is 3star 18yr old gonna play before a 20yr old Choate kid? Maybe not the first year, but likely the ranked one will have the better career simply because so many of these 5/6yr HS kids need the maturity to stick out because they lack the athleticism.

Finally, at least two of the players you listed were ranked (although one lost the rank when he got hurt). So, being strict on the numbers, more ranked players traveled than not as frosh and more will emerge as full time players. But many others who aren't ranked will have big impact, and they must, because there are so few ranked players. So not sure this is a worthy argument.

Don't want to argue this anymore mostly because I agree ranking is only and indicator of size and athletic ability and on a slow field anyone can keep up or be a star. But for less athletic teams (like all the Ivy's) it's nice to see ranked kids go for the education and it's a good hint that a team is improving. I see many FCS teams that kill it in their conference, and then implode in the playoffs SOLEY because they don't have the athletes to keep up - or, fewer ranked players. FBS is a totally different bird. Not ranked, 90% chance not big enough or fast enough to play!

But honestly, much more interested in your insight on other issues specific to CU. Not a big CU fan, but really think a turnaround is good for Ivy and FCS football overall so looking hard at them and hoping!!!

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]


VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
* Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:


Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2016 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.