Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

Miami constantly gets top notch recruits, why have they sucked the last few years?

There is a reason they call Miami "thug university". Top rankings/recruits certainly aren't the only factor. Coaching, togetherness as a team, injuries, etc are also big factors.

Don't confuse the NegaDuck with facts. He's blinded by the stars.

duckgrad99 wrote:Miami constantly gets top notch recruits, why have they sucked the last few years?

There is a reason they call Miami "thug university". Top rankings/recruits certainly aren't the only factor. Coaching, togetherness as a team, injuries, etc are also big factors.

There you go. Winning games is more than recruiting.

Now quit complaining.

UOducksTK1 wrote:Miami constantly gets top notch recruits, why have they sucked the last few years?

Don't forget Notre Dame ... they get a ton of 4 and 5 star recruits and still suck

duckseason wrote:

duckgrad99 wrote:Mosoli was a 5* not a 1*



Ok cool, then that even further proves what I'm trying to say. The higher ranked recruits are more likely to make an immediate impact.

Kinda like Chung and Unger, right?

They didn't excel right away, and they weren't as good as some of our 4 or 5 star recruits anyway like Jonathan Stewart. I would rate Chung at about a 3 star. Ceratainly good, but there was a reason he wasn't ranked higher.

Now quit complaining.[/quote]




Sorry, but what's your problem? I never started any complaints on this thread. Read my first response here, there was nothing wrong with it. Don't worry, I will leave this board and make everyone happy if this continues. People attack me for no good reason and I'm sick of it.

echo31 wrote:

UOducksTK1 wrote:Miami constantly gets top notch recruits, why have they sucked the last few years?

Don't forget Notre Dame ... they get a ton of 4 and 5 star recruits and still suck

UCLA has had top 25 classes 6 out of the last 7 years. Including 3 top 10 classes..

And I'd rather been Oregon the last 7 years then UCLA. But apparently duckgrad like to lose more, but get better recruiting.

Wow, Chung and Unger aren't top 10 draft picks but you get one of those every decade. Chung played like a 5 star; he is projected in the top three rounds, which put him as a top 100 player in the class. He started like 51 games, so what does it take to be considered dominate early in your book?

Dude....duckgrad99, where are you getting this stuff? Unger & Chung started as RS freshman, how is that not competing right away? Chung was a Fresman AA, 2 year 1st team all conference & a likely 2nd round pick.....yeah he was no good.

All I said was that I prefer 4 or 5 star recruits to 1 or 2 star recruits. That isn't complaining, and I'm sure there are others who share that sentiment.

duckgrad99 wrote:

duckseason wrote:

duckgrad99 wrote:Mosoli was a 5* not a 1*



Ok cool, then that even further proves what I'm trying to say. The higher ranked recruits are more likely to make an immediate impact.

Kinda like Chung and Unger, right?

They didn't excel right away, and they weren't as good as some of our 4 or 5 star recruits anyway like Jonathan Stewart. I would rate Chung at about a 3 star. Ceratainly good, but there was a reason he wasn't ranked higher.

WOW. Starting from day 1 isn't excelling?? Ending up at the top of their respective positions heading into the NFL draft means less than that all-powerful star rating coming out of HS?

How about this:

2004- Duck fans are ecstatic to hear the Ducks sign two very highly regarded 4* CB's Willie Glasper and Jackie Bates.

2005- The Ducks sign a pair of 2* CB's Jairus Byrd and Walter Thurmond, with very little fanfare.

2006 Ducks starting CB's: Jairus Byrd and Walter Thurmond.

duckgrad99 wrote:All I said was that I prefer 4 or 5 star recruits to 1 or 2 star recruits. That isn't complaining, and I'm sure there are others who share that sentiment.

Who doesn't prefer that? I'd prefer 4s/5s anyday over 1s/2s. But that doesn't mean we can't win with 4s/3s/2s...

And we know you think like that. You post it in every thread.

this is why i cant wait until the spring game. We get a recruit and when you look at the thread its three pages of back and forth. The coaches obviously felt this kid deserved a spot and he accepted it. I have faith in the staff and by the time we know if this is a good recruiting or not, people will be complaining about another class

duckgrad99 wrote:

duckseason wrote:

duckgrad99 wrote:Mosoli was a 5* not a 1*



Ok cool, then that even further proves what I'm trying to say. The higher ranked recruits are more likely to make an immediate impact.

Kinda like Chung and Unger, right?

They didn't excel right away

What?!?!

Come on duckgrad, get the facts straight..

duckgrad99 wrote:All I said was that I prefer 4 or 5 star recruits to 1 or 2 star recruits. That isn't complaining, and I'm sure there are others who share that sentiment.

I agree, I'd love to have 25 5*/4* recruits every year... but that's not realistic, unless your USC or UF.. will we ever be at that point, hard to say, but probably not.. it's cold and wet!
So we have to evaluate talent better then the top BCS schools and go after athletes that we think can/will excel over time.. Let's welcome all of these kids into our school without knocking them before they've taken the field..