Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

http://oregon.scout.com/a.z?s=128&p=9&c=14&yr=2011

Random tidbit of the year, but that's just for now. I think we'll end up in the 10-15 range when it's all said and done.

it's a shame we're not going to get a better class

but then again, maybe we'll get some great players at the end?

we could really use a big tall playmaker at WR and a nice TE along with another speedy ATH type of guy

we're doing well with defense so far, but it'd be nice to book a couple monster DEs and a monster DT too

Patience young one. Most of those classes are rated high due to number of commits. We are still only at 13 and the guys we are going after are very highly rated by our coaches.

Doesn't really mean much - it's very early.

Duke already has 24 commits, 0 4/5 star commits. Average star rating: 2.5
Pretty unimpressive

Rutgers has 16 commits, 2 from 4 star recruits. Average star rating: 2.94

Oregon has 11 commits. 4 from 4 star recruits. Average star rating: 3.09

uostudent wrote:Doesn't really mean much - it's very early.

Duke already has 24 commits, 0 4/5 star commits. Average star rating: 2.5
Pretty unimpressive

Rutgers has 16 commits, 2 from 4 star recruits. Average star rating: 2.94

Oregon has 11 commits. 4 from 4 star recruits. Average star rating: 3.09

And I believe one of Rutgers 4 star commits is a soft verbal.

Rutgers is also one of the more well-known schools in the Northeast so they'll attract a lot of players who want to play in a home-like atmosphere. UO's brand, though, has made it out there. Wore my JJ Jersey in Nashua last year, some people actually threw up the "O". That, and a few more thumpings like Thursday, we'll beat out most teams easily, even this early in the recruiting cycle.

Rankings at this time of year don't mean nothing yet because there is such a long time remaining in this cycle and there are still lots of highly rated recruits looking at Oregon.

yeahboyd wrote:Patience young one. Most of those classes are rated high due to number of commits. We are still only at 13 and the guys we are going after are very highly rated by our coaches.

check that out... they rank recruiting classes not on an average but on total stars?!?

that's ridiculous... so the recruiting rankings are actually a load of bollocks then? consider schools with a small class, they have no way of catching up to an SEC overbooking at 35 players or whatever they do.

we've had good classes the past three years so i expect we'll end up with another good class.

just the same, we did the Rose last year and we're #1 right now, so you'd figure some top guys would be all jumping on the bandwagon and it doesn't seem to be the case.

maybe things will turn around once we get some visits??

vagusnerve wrote:

yeahboyd wrote:Patience young one. Most of those classes are rated high due to number of commits. We are still only at 13 and the guys we are going after are very highly rated by our coaches.

check that out... they rank recruiting classes not on an average but on total stars?!?

that's ridiculous... so the recruiting rankings are actually a load of bollocks then? consider schools with a small class, they have no way of catching up to an SEC overbooking at 35 players or whatever they do.

we've had good classes the past three years so i expect we'll end up with another good class.

just the same, we did the Rose last year and we're #1 right now, so you'd figure some top guys would be all jumping on the bandwagon and it doesn't seem to be the case.

maybe things will turn around once we get some visits??

I don't know. Average isn't a good indicator. Are you saying getting 3 five star players would be a better recruiting class than 20 four stars? because the average would be higher for 3 five stars.

also, you have to take into account the number of commits. you can find some real gems in lower stars. Diondre Borel, utah state's qb, has been called one of the best qbs this year. Runs the spread perfectly. espn is always saying he could have played anywhere. He was a 2 star recruit and nobody thought he could play anything but receiver.

USUaggieDuck wrote:

vagusnerve wrote:

yeahboyd wrote:Patience young one. Most of those classes are rated high due to number of commits. We are still only at 13 and the guys we are going after are very highly rated by our coaches.

check that out... they rank recruiting classes not on an average but on total stars?!?

that's ridiculous... so the recruiting rankings are actually a load of bollocks then? consider schools with a small class, they have no way of catching up to an SEC overbooking at 35 players or whatever they do.

we've had good classes the past three years so i expect we'll end up with another good class.

just the same, we did the Rose last year and we're #1 right now, so you'd figure some top guys would be all jumping on the bandwagon and it doesn't seem to be the case.

maybe things will turn around once we get some visits??

I don't know. Average isn't a good indicator. Are you saying getting 3 five star players would be a better recruiting class than 20 four stars? because the average would be higher for 3 five stars.

also, you have to take into account the number of commits. you can find some real gems in lower stars. Diondre Borel, utah state's qb, has been called one of the best qbs this year. Runs the spread perfectly. espn is always saying he could have played anywhere. He was a 2 star recruit and nobody thought he could play anything but receiver.

A big thing that the recruiting rankings don't take into account are fits and needs for each program. A small class doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be a bad class and vice versa with a big class.

greenyellow wrote:

USUaggieDuck wrote:

vagusnerve wrote:

yeahboyd wrote:Patience young one. Most of those classes are rated high due to number of commits. We are still only at 13 and the guys we are going after are very highly rated by our coaches.

check that out... they rank recruiting classes not on an average but on total stars?!?

that's ridiculous... so the recruiting rankings are actually a load of bollocks then? consider schools with a small class, they have no way of catching up to an SEC overbooking at 35 players or whatever they do.

we've had good classes the past three years so i expect we'll end up with another good class.

just the same, we did the Rose last year and we're #1 right now, so you'd figure some top guys would be all jumping on the bandwagon and it doesn't seem to be the case.

maybe things will turn around once we get some visits??

I don't know. Average isn't a good indicator. Are you saying getting 3 five star players would be a better recruiting class than 20 four stars? because the average would be higher for 3 five stars.

also, you have to take into account the number of commits. you can find some real gems in lower stars. Diondre Borel, utah state's qb, has been called one of the best qbs this year. Runs the spread perfectly. espn is always saying he could have played anywhere. He was a 2 star recruit and nobody thought he could play anything but receiver.

A big thing that the recruiting rankings don't take into account are fits and needs for each program. A small class doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be a bad class and vice versa with a big class.

That's exactly what ESPN does actually,

If you take Scouts rankings by total points there are only 3 pac 10 teams in the top 30. If you take star avg there is 6.

Gee, that seems to make sense when you consider we swamp stomp the other conferences

What i don't understand is why people use Scout and Rivals.

The websites are ridiculous. They look like they were made by a retarded monkey.

There's useless information all over the pages... most of it isn't accurate or useful.

ESPN has a great page, simple, with great information. The ratings seem to be pretty accurate, and when they haven't rated a player, they don't try to guess that he's gonna suck.

You look at Oregon's classes on ESPN, and the top guys on our team, the real standouts, are all highly rated on ESPN. Seems pretty accurate to me.

Biggus Duckus wrote:shill

are you serious?

...both Duke and Rutgers ARE supposed to have better classes than Oregon.....academically !