What the 09 class might look like

He seems to be a pretty good prospect but he have some guys right now that could project to center, or are centers. I would assume we will wait with him unless he blows it up in camps or our offensive line prospects arent turning out like what we thought.

 

We're talking about the # of scholarships offered, not recruits signed- nice try though.

Remember this? It was on a thread about the number of scholarships.

http://69.93.172.10/~tigerfor/showthread.php?p=747328

Got gas?? :hihi:

 

:geaux::crystal::helmet: Thanks for the comment/feedback. Also to islstl for his.
:geauxtige:champs::LSU231:

 

If that were true, why are there SO many qualification questions about kids we sign every year? Not exclusive to LSU, I might add, but who aren't we signing out of fear from their qualifying? T. Toliver? no; Keliand Williams? no; D. Benton? no; see what I'm saying? I know D Benton ended up elsewhere but we (LSU) were all over him.

I don't remember if it was Mike or Sonny who'd said they had no way of knowing who would or wouldn't qualify (Outside the obvious). You can't even assume a kid who makes "B's" will do well on standardized tests, etc. cause: 1/ Sometimes high school course grades are inflated by "Projects", etc. and some teachers are "Easy"- open book tests...
2/ Some kids aren't good test-takers.

Even issy said we'd sign more than 20 in case some don't qualify so if LSU will take a chance by signing them, why would a recruiting service not rank them on ability?

I do understand how offers affect ratings but I can't buy the other argument about academics hurting their ratings. Issy said "Not all are hurt by it, obviously" so that says what? I haven't followed recruiting long and I'm not sure I'm right but I'm not convinced either, in fact, I feel stronger about my opinion now than I did initially.

Does anyone know of specific players whose academics affected their star ratings? Parso, Vball? Have you ever heard of specific instances?

 

Trying to think logically here...........yes, I know that's a stretch for a dip blonde from Cali and a Trojan no less, but. Star rankings for the most part start to come out about now and into June after many of the camps and the coaches have gotten an actual look at players. The already known superstars are an exception of course and those kids would likely neither need more stars or be downgraded because of grades. Schools will do just about anything to assist that player in qualifying.

So, any issues RIGHT NOW regarding academic qualifying is based off of junior grades which leaves the entire senior year to turn things around. It seems unlikely that any schools would back off at this point simply because there is a whole year to fix it. Academic issues start to play a role when the season starts and a bulk of the players begin to make their choices. Players have to submit their grades and schools who have done their homework already know who their problem children are. If the talent is there, the grades are NOT going to impact the pursuit, only the secondary pursuit of other lesser players who may be needed to fill the spot.

While there is some logic to suggest that a non qualifier might lose the attention of big schools and thereby be unable to gain more stars, I would have to think that it's only the "average" player, many probably even unknown, and a very small group at that.

Look at the schools who have reputations for high level academia. Notre Dame, Stanford, ucla (ugh) to name a few. They go after talent too and with the "golden ticket" special admit policy available to university president's, grade issues are rarely the norm and more the exception.

 

Good point, I hadn't thought of that.

 

Rivals rankings are very subjective - sometimes they chose to take it into consideration, sometimes they don't. My impression is that they determine it by how hard the prospects continue to be recruited by big schools. Some guys will be recruited hard no matter what, while many guys aren't quite worth it so their recruitment drops off.

DeAndre Brown, for instance, was still very very heavily recruited despite not having a chance at qualifying, which is why Rivals didn't let it affect his rating.

No way to know, but with the proper information you can make a good guess.

Because it looks bad if 3 years from now we want to see how good of a job Rivals did, so we look at the Rivals 100 from that year & half the guys never made it to D1 ball.

I can't think of anyone off the top of my head, but there are examples of it.

 

Happens all the time. Alonzo Lawrence was a three star even though people had watched him and knew he was incredible. The college teams and All-Star games realized his grades werent as bad as they thought and he then eventually moved up to the #CB in the country.