It's August 3rd...and we don't know how many they'll take and what their needs are. No one should be concerned in Aug.
Just a few observations: * In general I think we're doing fine, but the state of La. is down this year and that can't help but affect our recruiting ranking. * On stars in the draft, keep in mind that there are only 25-40 players (depending on if you look at Rivals or Scout which is a little more liberal in rating 5 stars) in a given year rated 5 stars, maybe 150ish as 4 stars, and a lot more 3 and then 2 stars. So even though you're looking at a similar raw number of 2 and 4 star players in the top 100 draft positions (thanks for posting that, btw), on a percentage basis the 4 stars are a lot higher. The key is identifying the few 3 or even 2 star guys who can contribute in the SEC. Also recall that 2 stars tends to be a "default" rating if the recruiting service doesn't get film or other evaluation material. * We did have some turnover in the staff with 3 new coaches on O, so it's not quite correct to say the staff didn't just forget how to recruit. I have faith that Crowton, Studrawa and esp. McCarthy are both good coaches and good recruiters, but relationships do have to be refreshed when there's a change in personnel.
We've only got 2 superstars, but the meat of this year's La class is fine & not as down as Rivals thinks it is. It is a rule that any player who sign's a D1 LOI is a 2 star. 3 stars has become generally a default when big programs show serious interest.
But that change in staff doesn't affect how the head coach, and recruiting coordinator, evaluate who to accept commitments from. The turnover has nothing to do with whether the people who make the decisions know what talent looks like. We're talking about whether recruiting is slipping because of the players we've accepted commitments from - and that turnover has zero to do with that. Also, this year is not a down year for talent in La., only a down year for recruiting services to rate them highly.
You have a point, but the 2 could work hand and hand. For instance, if the new coaches are not as good at recruiting for what ever reason, the head coach and recruiting coordinator would accept lesser players because they don't expect to sign the top tier ones. If the talent pool this year has shrunk, the head coach, etc. should be getting feedback on who we have a good shot at signing and may be pulling the trigger on some lesser athletes because they don't think we can do any better.
Possibly... but it seems like people complain every year about La. recruits not being rated highly enough. There is probably some merit to that esp. for some of the smaller schools that don't have a lot of resources to get film out for evaluation. However, comparing 2007 vs 2008 by stars or position. This is going by Scout's rankings since I don't sub to Rivals, and including 3 star and up. This admittedly could still change for 2008, but most 2 star recruits are not on LSU's radar and I don't think we'll see a large number of players go from 2 to 3 or 3 to 4, and none to a 5 for this year. Factoring in positions of need (bolded below) I think we had roughly: 2007 OL, WR, TE, DB, DL; 2008 OL, QB, WR, LB. 5* 2007: 2 (1 RB, 1 DB) 5* 2008: 0 4* 2007: 13 (5 DL, 4 WR, 2 DB, 1 TE, 1 OL) 4* 2008: 6 (2 TE, 2 DB, 1 DL, 1 WR) 3* 2007: 18 (5 DL, 3 TE, 3 OL, 2 LB, 2 DB, 2 WR, 1 RB) 3* 2008: 22 (5 WR, 4 RB, 4 DB, 3 OL, 3 LB, 1 TE, 1 DL) So, um, trying to make sense of it is a little hazy (for example I didn't break down DB into CB & S, or DL into DE & DT) but I think it looks like not only was there a little better talent in 2007 but it lined up more closely with the recruiting needs.
There is definite merit to it. One, we aren't a big media market and two it is difficult to get decent film on many of the state's targets. Just FYI, you don't have to be a member to look at rankings on Rivals. I bet a couple 3 stars will go to 4, but we won't have a 5 star in La this year (although Tolliver's stats look like they should make him a shoe-in).
According to Rivals. 07 ***** 2 **** 14 *** 24 08 ***** 0 **** 9 *** 21 However, there will probably be a few more 3 stars added, and a couple could be bumped to 4 stars. As for the rankings, my theory is that the 2 stars of last year's class brought a lot more attention to La, which in turn helped the publicity of the whole class. Six of 07's **** were never offered by LSU, and one had his offer revoked (L. Davis). 07 had stars at the top & was very deep. Only one of 08's ****'s has not been offered by LSU, Prentiss Waggner, and he may drop to a *** (although probably not if he commits to Bama). La's class this year doesn't have the star player(s) that it had last year, but the meat of the class is pretty much the same - just not as deep. Last year, the only La prospect that LSU missed out on was Joe McKnight. This year, the only La prospect that we may miss out on is Robby Green. It is no coincidence that these 2 attended the same High School...
When the scholarship papers are signed, we'll come back and see that this year was as deep as most we've had when it comes to D1 recruits getting full rides. I do not care what the websites rank our players other than it makes a difference to the media when ranking preseason and carrying on about 'best teams' during their hype shows.
