Rivals isn't really up to date on our class. Scout has at least looked at some of our commits. Getting Nick Dillon and Branden Johnson was impressive for CC. A couple guys with other MAC offers that should bolster the D-line.

Some of the commits don't seem very impressive, but really we have no clue yet. A few of the best players in the MAC over the last 10 years were 2-star recruits with one offer. I'm happy that Creighton is emphasizing defense, especially the line. English didn't do that enough.

(09-27-2014 07:02 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(09-27-2014 06:44 AM)Bob Wickersham Wrote:  Steve, I don't think anyone thought Eastern was going to be good this year from a W-L standpoint. But the utter confusion, the lack of fundementals and execution are huge red flags for me.

Our players underachieved last season and I thought they would show more this year.

I remember posting scenarios where EMU had a big lead going into the 4th quarter versus Morgan State.

I have to admit that I (!) thought that we'd get more out of our players' abilities and that new coaching would be the reason.


Well, I think we were all encouraged by English's last three recruiting classes, these again were ranked higher than those under Genyk and included a higher percentage of players who had received multiple MAC offers as I recall. Just goes to show how fickle recruiting ratings really are. If everyone is right about how poor our facilities really are we should be doing hand flips that CC is getting the results he is getting so far.

(09-29-2014 09:24 AM)EagleSam Wrote:  Rivals isn't really up to date on our class. Scout has at least looked at some of our commits. Getting Nick Dillon and Branden Johnson was impressive for CC. A couple guys with other MAC offers that should bolster the D-line.

Some of the commits don't seem very impressive, but really we have no clue yet. A few of the best players in the MAC over the last 10 years were 2-star recruits with one offer. I'm happy that Creighton is emphasizing defense, especially the line. English didn't do that enough.

I think Alsobrooks and some of the others are moving up the charts, take a look at Kemp the te and you'll see Iowa has invited him to their campus. That's just one example. In most MAC recruiting classes there are going to be guys where the only offer was from that MAC school.

(09-29-2014 09:34 AM)emu79 Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 09:24 AM)EagleSam Wrote:  Rivals isn't really up to date on our class. Scout has at least looked at some of our commits. Getting Nick Dillon and Branden Johnson was impressive for CC. A couple guys with other MAC offers that should bolster the D-line.

Some of the commits don't seem very impressive, but really we have no clue yet. A few of the best players in the MAC over the last 10 years were 2-star recruits with one offer. I'm happy that Creighton is emphasizing defense, especially the line. English didn't do that enough.

I think Alsobrooks and some of the others are moving up the charts, take a look at Kemp the te and you'll see Iowa has invited him to their campus. That's just one example. In most MAC recruiting classes there are going to be guys where the only offer was from that MAC school.

I still maintain that given where we are at, small steps forward isn't enough...

If we recruit say 10th best recruiting class in the MAC and are the 11th or 12 best team (this year) what does that say about our future????

We've lost a lot of ground and still losing it to schools in the MAC West.

Not only do we have to compete with NIU and UT, but we can now add WMU as a rising power in the MAC WEST. I'm convinced that by next year they will join NIU and UT as the top tier MAC West teams.

https://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruit...ichigan-56

So they had maybe the 'best recruiting class in MAC history' and now another very good class. Lot of 3-star recruits.

Even though CMU isn't a great team, they did beat Purdue this year so that means we are far behind them, also.

I continue to be optimistic about our hoops (men and women) but I do not see the 'green shoots' yet in football. (it is O/T but our women's basketball recruiting is very good.)

(09-29-2014 09:45 AM)emu steve Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 09:34 AM)emu79 Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 09:24 AM)EagleSam Wrote:  Rivals isn't really up to date on our class. Scout has at least looked at some of our commits. Getting Nick Dillon and Branden Johnson was impressive for CC. A couple guys with other MAC offers that should bolster the D-line.

Some of the commits don't seem very impressive, but really we have no clue yet. A few of the best players in the MAC over the last 10 years were 2-star recruits with one offer. I'm happy that Creighton is emphasizing defense, especially the line. English didn't do that enough.

I think Alsobrooks and some of the others are moving up the charts, take a look at Kemp the te and you'll see Iowa has invited him to their campus. That's just one example. In most MAC recruiting classes there are going to be guys where the only offer was from that MAC school.

Not only do we have to compete with NIU and UT, but we can now I still maintain that given where we are at, small steps forward isn't enough...

If we recruit say 10th best recruiting class in the MAC and are the 11th or 12 best team (this year) what does that say about our future????

We've lost a lot of ground and still losing it to schools in the MAC West.

add WMU as a rising power in the MAC WEST. I'm convinced that by next year they will join NIU and UT as the top tier MAC West teams.

https://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruit...ichigan-56

So they had maybe the 'best recruiting class in MAC history' and now another very good class. Lot of 3-star recruits.

Even though CMU isn't a great team, they did beat Purdue this year so that means we are far behind them, also.

I continue to be optimistic about our hoops (men and women) but I do not see the 'green shoots' yet in football. (it is O/T but our women's basketball recruiting is very good.)

I still maintain that given where we are at, small steps forward isn't enough...

If we recruit say 10th best recruiting class in the MAC and are the 11th or 12 best team (this year) what does that say about our future????

We've lost a lot of ground and still losing it to schools in the MAC West.

I've been saying that for years regarding football ie the comments that we don't recruit in a vacuum. I also maintain that is the case with this year's (the 2014) EMU men's basketball class-good enough to maintain where we are but not put us over the top ie Toledo and WMU.

but recruiting is one part of the equation and the other is development and coaching, I think the strength and conditioning staff we now have at EMU puts in the race, like to see how CC and staff coach up their style of players once they are in the system.

This is a very accurate list:

http://www.hustlebelt.com/mac-football-r...s-database

To check out EMU player rankings I would suggest you look at Scout and/or ESPN. They should have the latest player rankings.

CC is not in over head.

(09-29-2014 02:39 PM)emussuperfan Wrote:  CC is not in over head.

Compelling argument. Debate team??

(09-29-2014 02:39 PM)emussuperfan Wrote:  CC is not in over head.

It is hard to tell about head coaches.

Why?

1). They manage the program.

2). They coach the game on game day.

3). They recruit.

So a HC could be like a MLB player - strong is some respects but weak in others.

Miggy is a hall of fame hitter but 'average' defensively.

Because he'll be in the HOF some day doesn't mean he has 5 - 10 gold gloves in his trophy case (he doesn't have one).

I believe everyone highly respects CC as a college football program manager.

How well is he handling game day? Debatable. I don't have a firm opinion.

How well is he handling recruiting? Debatable.

This is the reverse (opposite) of the P.J. Fleck debate:

P.J. is considered an exceptional G5 recruiter (best in the MAC, easily).

How is he as a program manager? I don't know.

How is he as a game day coach? I don't know.

(09-29-2014 02:50 PM)Bob Wickersham Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:39 PM)emussuperfan Wrote:  CC is not in over head.

Compelling argument. Debate team??

nope. just testing to make sure you haven't changed and you haven't.

(09-29-2014 02:50 PM)Bob Wickersham Wrote:  

(09-29-2014 02:39 PM)emussuperfan Wrote:  CC is not in over head.

Compelling argument. Debate team??

one holds a debate with equals you are not up to my level.

I agree with Steve. I think Fleck has something special brewing at Western.

(09-29-2014 04:02 PM)Bob Wickersham Wrote:  I agree with Steve. I think Fleck has something special brewing at Western.

I was surprised to see Western hang with Va Tech after a complete debacle the first 8 seconds (think that is right, 8 seconds). Fumble at the 12 on the KO and run in for a special teams TD. Another key TD was when the DB started his break, at the snap, and fell leaving the WR with no one within 20 yards of him for an easy TD. (I've never seen this before).

WMU did not play Corey Davis (held out injured for the one game).

Put Corey Davis, Braverman, Terrell (QB) and super-RB, Franklin, on the field together and this team is potent on offense.

This will be a fun team to watch.

Dear Friends,
I did not see the Western, Virginia Tech game, so I can't really say how good Western played. What I would like to know is what was the yardage gained by Franklin? And on how many carries?
I did see somewhere that Virginia Tech had the ball for forty minutes. That would seem incredible. That might be the most important statistic of the game.

(09-29-2014 05:07 PM)Ken Barna Wrote:  Dear Friends,
I did not see the Western, Virginia Tech game, so I can't really say how good Western played. What I would like to know is what was the yardage gained by Franklin? And on how many carries?
I did see somewhere that Virginia Tech had the ball for forty minutes. That would seem incredible. That might be the most important statistic of the game.

I looked it up:

15 / 76 with 2 TDs.

http://scores.espn.go.com/ncf/gamecast?g...groupId=15

Quote:What I would like to know is what was the yardage gained by Franklin? And on how many carries?
I did see somewhere that Virginia Tech had the ball for forty minutes. That would seem incredible. That might be the most important statistic of the game.

Franklin ran 15 times, averaging 5.1 yards a carry. Most carries he was stuffed for about 1-3 yards, though. We passed the ball mostly.

VT's QB is not good. They passed a lot 1st half, but 2nd half it was almost all running -- so the few times they WOULD pass, it opened things up for their sour QB.

With our Offense struggling to move the ball in the 1st half, and for much of the 2nd half, their running game ended up wearing us down. I think if WMU just ran the ball more and STOPPED VaTech on 3rd downs where it was 5+ yards to go -- at least half the time -- it would have made it a more interesting game.

Franklin did get 20+ yards on one run. One of his TDs was very impressive; he went over the goal line like a missile.

Anyone else notice that not only is Florida still not ranked, they have received ZERO votes.They are also ranked #3 on the USA Today Misery Index. That 65-0 loss (gulp) is looking HIDEOUS!

(09-29-2014 08:41 PM)Bob Wickersham Wrote:  Anyone else notice that not only is Florida still not ranked, they have received ZERO votes.They are also ranked #3 on the USA Today Misery Index. That 65-0 loss (gulp) is looking HIDEOUS!

Yeah Bob. I search the internet to find data to feel worse about this season.