(09-03-2015 04:05 AM)emu79 Wrote: (09-02-2015 07:32 AM)emu steve Wrote: (09-02-2015 07:24 AM)Bob Wickersham Wrote: (09-02-2015 04:48 AM)emu steve Wrote: (09-02-2015 04:05 AM)emu79 Wrote: To me this season will seem more like a continued training session. I think about how many newcomers are on this team, redshirts, JUCOs true frosh . Whatever happens this season these newcomers will get a season under their belt and game experience. I'm looking forward to see how it all develops this year.
This year's team will be the most inexperienced team I've seen at EMU in a quarter of a century.
I'm almost shocked at the lack of experience in the 2-deeps at many positions. Most of the talent English recruited is 'gone, gone, gone.'
I really think we're going to take our lumps and hope for a decent season in 2016. Folks will be clamoring for November and the start of the basketball season.
I'm much less optimistic than say two or three weeks ago.
Agree. I think the ODU game will open some eyes here (in a bad way). Hey, no one would wish 20 straight losing seasons on anyone, let alone our beloved EMU, but this is going to be a rough year.
I'm afraid I agree with Bob.
This seems like year #1 (not #2) of a complete rebuild.
We are not recruiting 3-star recruits who can step in their first year and make a difference. It will take time...
Our hope is that the team will be better coached, better chemistry, better conditioning, never-quit attitude, etc. but not out-talent the other guys.
Disagree somewhat, CC first two classes has a sprinkling of three star recruits just not enough of them. The current class (2016) is a more traditional class so far for EMU. But as we have found out recruiting rankings don't always pan out. They can't measure conditioning, coaching and desire. CC recruits athletes but better quality ones than Genyk. Regarding the newcomers, this year will begin to separate those who need to move on and those who have a future with the program. I do believe we have one of the top 10 strength and conditioning coaches in the country here at EMU. Bigger and faster no longer seems like an empty motto. (and yes that began with Woody W. was coach)
I don't use the 'star system' for a lot of reasons.
First, if 80 - 90% of MAC recruits are all 2-star recruits, what does it tell us? Nothing. Get a FBS offer and a player is labeled '2-star' recruit. Using that criterion, they are all 'equal' which is VERY inaccurate. Some 2-star recruits are high quality recruits; others are at best projects.
Lot of so-called 3-star recruits are recruits who were probably ranked 3-star as juniors, had sub-par senior years and were never 'downgraded.' These recruits are not ranked, re-ranked, etc. every season. Once a recruit commits, interest in him diminishes.
And as far as ranking recruit prospects, if a college can't really judge the difference between a high school senior with a 23 ACT vs. a 22 ACT (not much predictive difference in say one or two or even 3 ACT points), then how can one predict with any definitiveness an offensive lineman. How does one judge? What criterion? 40 yard times? (unless electronically timed, very, very unreliable). Number of 225 reps (bench presses)? Never saw that data for h.s. players.
WHAT I USE: Simplest thing in the world... Who else offered the recruit. Players with mostly or solely FCS offers are probably more likely projects. Players with a half dozen MAC offers and some P5 interest is likely to be good MAC prospects.
In hoops, much easier: Some of our newcomers (Toney, Madray) have D-1 college experience. Some have JUCO experience. One (Thompson) played post-high school ball. Stone is the only scholarship player who is a true high school recruit.