|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 6, 2019 21:30:37 GMT -8
Nemec goes crazy when uo flips a three-star DT from Minnesota, then is ho-hum when we flip a 3-star DB from Utah State, not a P5 school but certainly a quality program. We'll see who is the better flip in the long run, I guess.
Row the Boat Man can't be real happy. I'd have pulled the kid's offer the second he said he was committed, but still gonna visit someplace else. That's how Petersen rolls and maybe Smith rolls the same way. You're with us, or you're not, and if you're looking someplace else, you're not.
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Feb 6, 2019 22:02:26 GMT -8
Oh geez, Louise! Who cares? Y'all acting like you got dissed by the pimply girl next door. Move on.
|
|
|
Post by bucktoothvarmit on Feb 6, 2019 22:09:59 GMT -8
Nemec remains a journalistic pipsqueak and it is a sad commentary that any newspaper would retain him on their staff. I wouldn't mind seeing him banned from Reser, Gill and Goss. How do you feel about inducting him into the beavermobile douchebag HoF? Go Beavs!!
|
|
|
Post by hottubbeaver on Feb 6, 2019 22:12:48 GMT -8
Oh geez, Louise! Who cares? Y'all acting like you got dissed by the pimply girl next door. Move on. The only place I've heard this guy mentioned is on this board. I don't go to Olive for OSU recruiting news and updates nor care what they have to say about OSU.
In case there is anyone who doesn't know this already, what you see on tv, in the paper, or hear on the radio is a narrative that caters to the sponsors of said outlet. Fake News is essentially survival mode "journalism". If olive advertising dollars comes primarily from the other side, then duck stories with a positive slant will rule the day and stories with a negative slant towards the Beaver is just as good.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 6, 2019 23:27:18 GMT -8
I heard the first part of that Nemec interview on 1080. He did a much better job laying out his case on the radio than he did in print. While I don’t agree with him, he at least had more info as to why he felt the way he did. Said OSU tried to recruit like UW did, but it didn’t work because we don’t have the prestige of UW. Also said he heard from Big Sky coaches who told him OSU was trying to poach way more of their recruits than he could ever remember. These are things that I understand. This class seems rather on par with what we normally get to me. A couple really good players and a heck of a lot of projects and under recruited kids.
I took more issue with the “worst ever” and “colossal failure” stuff than his opinion that the Beavs had a meh recruiting class. I don’t get how that’s accurate when the average ranking of recruits was the highest it’s been since 2010
|
|
|
Post by beaverdude on Feb 7, 2019 7:47:05 GMT -8
The decline in quality from the sports writers is the result of a long history of poor recruiting by the little zero.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 7, 2019 8:11:47 GMT -8
I heard the first part of that Nemec interview on 1080. He did a much better job laying out his case on the radio than he did in print. While I don’t agree with him, he at least had more info as to why he felt the way he did. Said OSU tried to recruit like UW did, but it didn’t work because we don’t have the prestige of UW. Also said he heard from Big Sky coaches who told him OSU was trying to poach way more of their recruits than he could ever remember. These are things that I understand. This class seems rather on par with what we normally get to me. A couple really good players and a heck of a lot of projects and under recruited kids. I took more issue with the “worst ever” and “colossal failure” stuff than his opinion that the Beavs had a meh recruiting class. I don’t get how that’s accurate when the average ranking of recruits was the highest it’s been since 2010 My issue is that "commentary" these days is grossly negative. There were a million ways to write this article that was less disparaging to OSU. And then of course there is the simply idiocy of declaring the 2019 recruiting class a flop before a single player steps on the field. And then having to selectively completely ignore the transfer haul we brought in to make your case. When the transfers ARE brought up, it is only to mention 247 regraded them all lower (which is horses%#t). Then there is the simple fact that 2019 is actually a higher rated class than 2018. The fact that our class on a star average is BETTER than a good chunk of early Riley classes. This article was a needless effort to be controversial for clicks. It is another example of the current failure of today's shock journalism.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 7, 2019 9:15:41 GMT -8
I heard the first part of that Nemec interview on 1080. He did a much better job laying out his case on the radio than he did in print. While I don’t agree with him, he at least had more info as to why he felt the way he did. Said OSU tried to recruit like UW did, but it didn’t work because we don’t have the prestige of UW. Also said he heard from Big Sky coaches who told him OSU was trying to poach way more of their recruits than he could ever remember. These are things that I understand. This class seems rather on par with what we normally get to me. A couple really good players and a heck of a lot of projects and under recruited kids. I took more issue with the “worst ever” and “colossal failure” stuff than his opinion that the Beavs had a meh recruiting class. I don’t get how that’s accurate when the average ranking of recruits was the highest it’s been since 2010 My issue is that "commentary" these days is grossly negative. There were a million ways to write this article that was less disparaging to OSU. And then of course there is the simply idiocy of declaring the 2019 recruiting class a flop before a single player steps on the field. And then having to selectively completely ignore the transfer haul we brought in to make your case. When the transfers ARE brought up, it is only to mention 247 regraded them all lower (which is horses%#t). Then there is the simple fact that 2019 is actually a higher rated class than 2018. The fact that our class on a star average is BETTER than a good chunk of early Riley classes. This article was a needless effort to be controversial for clicks. It is another example of the current failure of today's shock journalism. I agree with you that the current trend is to skew Beaver stuff negative. However, it is sort of his job to declare "winners" and "losers" of recruiting cycles right away, and if he thinks this one sucks, he's gotta roll with that. I have no problem with him calling it a bad class....but the worst ever stuff makes no sense to me. Furthermore, our class 1-19 ended up better than the state of Oregon 1-19. Also, two of the top four kids in the state (Johnson Jr. and Speights) were transfer kids late in high school. And again, it's impossible to call anything the worst ever because I'm convinced that you cannot compare stars or ratings year over year. How is it that this classes average rating is .8401 and 68th in the country, but our 2013 class had an average rating of .8380 and finished 45th? Or how about 2003? According to 247, our best recruit that year was Ryan Gunderson, with a .8333 average. There's some nuance I think Nemec is leaving out intentionally to further the "this is a bad class" narrative, but that doesn't mean he's ultimately wrong. I'll agree that the schools we beat out for services of kids are concerning. I'll agree that if Big Sky coaches are saying we are trying to poach kids at an alarming rate, that raises some eyebrows. But we have 9 wins in the last four seasons. We have a new head coach going through his first full recruiting cycle as the main guy. We are the worst team in what is perceived nationally to be the worst major conference. We are an FBS school in a state with very little FBS talent. We do not have Nike money. We had five spots taken by transfer kids. I may sound like an apologist, but if there was ever a year where our recruiting was going to hit rock bottom, this was it. It's not like Oregon State has been a mid-tier Pac-12 recruiting force ever. We are consistently in the 10-12 range in the conference, even when we're good. Heck, the 2001 class, coming off the Fiesta Bowl was a top 25 class, but our best recruit was an Oregon kid (Derek Anderson). Also in that class were Bill Swancutt (another Oregon kid) and Trent Bray (whose dad was on the staff). Yes, we got Steven Jackson, but other than that it seems like a pretty typical OSU class bolstered by a few exceptional in-state guys. My expert opinion: We flip recruiting when we start keeping the best kids in the state home....and for the most part we did that this year. Of the top 10, we got half. No, we didn't get the top 3, but we got 4-8. 2018: 1 of the top 10 (Tegan Quitoriano - 10) 2017: 1 of the top 10 (David Morris - 3) 2016: 1 of the top 10 (Trevon Bradford - 9) 2015: 1 of the top 10 (Blake Brandel - 3) 2014: 2 of the top 10 (Ryan Nall -5, Tanner Sanders - 7) We almost brought in as much top in-state talent this year than we did in the past five years combined. This is how we turn things around. Pat Casey didn't have a special team until he got that special group of in state talent. Once those guys put us over the top, recruiting opened up and now the thing is rolling. I'd exclude basketball from this, because more than any other team sport, one guy or girl can make a huge difference. You just gotta convince one or two out of state talents to come and you're off to the races.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 7, 2019 9:50:14 GMT -8
My issue is that "commentary" these days is grossly negative. There were a million ways to write this article that was less disparaging to OSU. And then of course there is the simply idiocy of declaring the 2019 recruiting class a flop before a single player steps on the field. And then having to selectively completely ignore the transfer haul we brought in to make your case. When the transfers ARE brought up, it is only to mention 247 regraded them all lower (which is horses%#t). Then there is the simple fact that 2019 is actually a higher rated class than 2018. The fact that our class on a star average is BETTER than a good chunk of early Riley classes. This article was a needless effort to be controversial for clicks. It is another example of the current failure of today's shock journalism. I agree with you that the current trend is to skew Beaver stuff negative. However, it is sort of his job to declare "winners" and "losers" of recruiting cycles right away, and if he thinks this one sucks, he's gotta roll with that. I have no problem with him calling it a bad class....but the worst ever stuff makes no sense to me. Furthermore, our class 1-19 ended up better than the state of Oregon 1-19. Also, two of the top four kids in the state (Johnson Jr. and Speights) were transfer kids late in high school. And again, it's impossible to call anything the worst ever because I'm convinced that you cannot compare stars or ratings year over year. How is it that this classes average rating is .8401 and 68th in the country, but our 2013 class had an average rating of .8380 and finished 45th? Or how about 2003? According to 247, our best recruit that year was Ryan Gunderson, with a .8333 average. There's some nuance I think Nemec is leaving out intentionally to further the "this is a bad class" narrative, but that doesn't mean he's ultimately wrong. I'll agree that the schools we beat out for services of kids are concerning. I'll agree that if Big Sky coaches are saying we are trying to poach kids at an alarming rate, that raises some eyebrows. But we have 9 wins in the last four seasons. We have a new head coach going through his first full recruiting cycle as the main guy. We are the worst team in what is perceived nationally to be the worst major conference. We are an FBS school in a state with very little FBS talent. We do not have Nike money. We had five spots taken by transfer kids. I may sound like an apologist, but if there was ever a year where our recruiting was going to hit rock bottom, this was it. It's not like Oregon State has been a mid-tier Pac-12 recruiting force ever. We are consistently in the 10-12 range in the conference, even when we're good. Heck, the 2001 class, coming off the Fiesta Bowl was a top 25 class, but our best recruit was an Oregon kid (Derek Anderson). Also in that class were Bill Swancutt (another Oregon kid) and Trent Bray (whose dad was on the staff). Yes, we got Steven Jackson, but other than that it seems like a pretty typical OSU class bolstered by a few exceptional in-state guys. My expert opinion: We flip recruiting when we start keeping the best kids in the state home....and for the most part we did that this year. Of the top 10, we got half. No, we didn't get the top 3, but we got 4-8. 2018: 1 of the top 10 (Tegan Quitoriano - 10) 2017: 1 of the top 10 (David Morris - 3) 2016: 1 of the top 10 (Trevon Bradford - 9) 2015: 1 of the top 10 (Blake Brandel - 3) 2014: 2 of the top 10 (Ryan Nall -5, Tanner Sanders - 7) We almost brought in as much top in-state talent this year than we did in the past five years combined. This is how we turn things around. Pat Casey didn't have a special team until he got that special group of in state talent. Once those guys put us over the top, recruiting opened up and now the thing is rolling. I'd exclude basketball from this, because more than any other team sport, one guy or girl can make a huge difference. You just gotta convince one or two out of state talents to come and you're off to the races. While you are at it, take a look at OSU's list of "all time top recruits" half our top 10 were ineffectual, never made campus, or headcases that left. We all know rankings and stars are just part of the picture. We also know that there are nearly a million high school football players every year and in no universe are they all effectively evaluated. They system absolutely HAS to lean on who is looking at who. Offers and attention matter more than height and speed. It is why 247 took the liberty of downgrading our transfers. Had Gebbia transferred to Alabama, do you think for one millisecond they knock him down a star? It isn't just looking for sunshine in a dark place here. it is the reality. OSU offering doesn't move the needle for the kid in terms of ranking.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 7, 2019 9:59:03 GMT -8
It isn't just looking for sunshine in a dark place here. it is the reality. OSU offering doesn't move the needle for the kid in terms of ranking. This is an excellent point. How exactly are we supposed to win recruiting battles with kids who have offers from other Pac-12 schools? I love OSU. I cannot imagine my life being better if I had gone anywhere else. Now flash back to when I was 17. If you had told me I could go to any school in the Pac-12 and it's free? 100% I'm taking the opportunity to go somewhere else. If Stanford offers, you take it right? If UCLA offers, you take it. Berkeley is one of the best public schools in the country. You turn that down? Maybe you turn it down and come to OSU to play for Mike Riley or another established coach with a defined system and proven history of success. But for a first year coach? No way.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 7, 2019 11:00:55 GMT -8
It isn't just looking for sunshine in a dark place here. it is the reality. OSU offering doesn't move the needle for the kid in terms of ranking. This is an excellent point. How exactly are we supposed to win recruiting battles with kids who have offers from other Pac-12 schools? I love OSU. I cannot imagine my life being better if I had gone anywhere else. Now flash back to when I was 17. If you had told me I could go to any school in the Pac-12 and it's free? 100% I'm taking the opportunity to go somewhere else. If Stanford offers, you take it right? If UCLA offers, you take it. Berkeley is one of the best public schools in the country. You turn that down? Maybe you turn it down and come to OSU to play for Mike Riley or another established coach with a defined system and proven history of success. But for a first year coach? No way. Yep, which is part of my problem with Nemec's mouth breather article. OSU has never historically recruited high ranked classes, and yet now, after arguably our 3 worse years in a generation he expects us to be... what? Bringing in all these top flight guys? Get the outta here with that. I for one, am happy Smith isn't offering 4* guys that don't have a prayer of getting here. We don't need Simi Kulis or Craig Evans littering our class just to increase our rep. We need guys that are going to make it on campus. What I find laughable, is if we did have a class with two or three 4* guys that do not have a snowball's chance in hell of hitting campus, Nemec would be raving about OSU is hitting it out of the park. Even though you, me, and everybody with a shred of common sense knows it is a joke, those guys are never going to make it, and our remaining class is (people might want to sit down for this) exactly like every class before. I am just sick and damn tired of this low effort crap coming out of media these days. All this lowest common denominator s%#t stirring that is in no way insightful or intelligent. It is just all junk. garbage littering the road way that is not value added in any way. It just makes me sad that this is the new norm my children are growing up into
|
|
|
Post by beavadelic on Feb 7, 2019 13:38:10 GMT -8
Nemec is a clown. I’m pretty sure he wants to have Crystalballs’ babies, judging by the way he delivers his syrupy diatribes about his recruiting prowess. He spends less time extolling his abilities to, I don’t know, coach. Maybe it was the pedestrian work he’s done in the bowl games or a less-than-scintillating overall record with all of that talent in Eugene, but never mind....that guy can sure recruit. The rankings are silly. Georgia stayed at the top because they hauled in a bunch of 5 star guys and really there were no 2 stars to be found. Oregon came down to earth because half of their class were 3 star and they had no 5 star guys, which is what most solid programs do. They ripped on USC early, but in the end they have another top 5 class so there’s Nemec’s reality and there’s, well, true reality. I wonder what he’d say about Fresno, who has done so well recently, yet split their class of 23 evenly between 3 and 2 star guys. No 4 stars. Was this a major fail by Tedford? I know that we are in a Power 5 conference and the Bulldogs aren’t, but virtually all of our signees are 3 star. How is that a “fail”? The Utes were up at 33, and I’m not sure that their actual group is much better than ours. It’s all speculation on signing day - DE used to say that you ciuldn’t evaluate a class for 2 to 3 years - but Nemec’s spin sure seems to be negative when it comes to our program. This is by no means a great class on paper, but the difference between 35 and 65 seems awfully thin.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Feb 7, 2019 13:54:39 GMT -8
Nemec used to love Andersen too. Hailed his crew's innovation on the recruiting trail with the custom edits and tweeting out the cities they'd be in and all that.
I don't think he's in the bag for the Ducks. He's just gravy training on the top prospects Oregon is hauling in. If he's in good with those kids and he talks about how great they are, when you google those guys names later on, his articles will pop up. It's in the interest of self promotion, which I can't argue with. It's a smart business decision for him.
|
|
|
Post by obf on Feb 7, 2019 14:36:43 GMT -8
Nemec is a clown. I’m pretty sure he wants to have Crystalballs’ babies, judging by the way he delivers his syrupy diatribes about his recruiting prowess. He spends less time extolling his abilities to, I don’t know, coach. Maybe it was the pedestrian work he’s done in the bowl games or a less-than-scintillating overall record with all of that talent in Eugene, but never mind....that guy can sure recruit. The rankings are silly. Georgia stayed at the top because they hauled in a bunch of 5 star guys and really there were no 2 stars to be found. Oregon came down to earth because half of their class were 3 star and they had no 5 star guys, which is what most solid programs do. They ripped on USC early, but in the end they have another top 5 class so there’s Nemec’s reality and there’s, well, true reality. I wonder what he’d say about Fresno, who has done so well recently, yet split their class of 23 evenly between 3 and 2 star guys. No 4 stars. Was this a major fail by Tedford? I know that we are in a Power 5 conference and the Bulldogs aren’t, but virtually all of our signees are 3 star. How is that a “fail”? The Utes were up at 33, and I’m not sure that their actual group is much better than ours. It’s all speculation on signing day - DE used to say that you ciuldn’t evaluate a class for 2 to 3 years - but Nemec’s spin sure seems to be negative when it comes to our program. This is by no means a great class on paper, but the difference between 35 and 65 seems awfully thin. It's not just thin it's non existent. Statistically speaking classes 35-70 are equal, equivalent, the same. Not similar, not close.... identical. But we live in a world that MUST order and rank things. It's like if I gave you this list of numbers and asked you to order them least to greatest: 1 2 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 15 15 15 15 Would you say that the 8 sevens are tied for fourth or that that last poor 7 is ranked 11th and has had the worst perfomace in it's history? Statistically speaking it would be a lot more useful to discuss these things in terms of "bins". In this case you would have the top bin (1,2,3) the middle bin (all the 7s) and the bottom bin (the 15s). Truth of the matter is that in general the pac 12 also has three bins, and yup us and half the other teams are all in the bottom bin, and probably always will be. Stiving to change your bin is probably futile. Now, striving to find excellent players that fit your mold, fit your scheme, and are coachable? THAT may actually change your out come on the field, that may actually effect wins and losses and that is exactly what Coach Smith is trying to do. Striving for higher rated "athletes" that end up transfering because they can't swivel their hips, or lower their shoulder, or get into school, etc? That does nothing to help you except impress an idiot recruiting reporter for about 30 seconds until you win 7 games in 3 years and quit abruptlty....
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 7, 2019 15:38:11 GMT -8
Nemec is a clown. I’m pretty sure he wants to have Crystalballs’ babies, judging by the way he delivers his syrupy diatribes about his recruiting prowess. He spends less time extolling his abilities to, I don’t know, coach. Maybe it was the pedestrian work he’s done in the bowl games or a less-than-scintillating overall record with all of that talent in Eugene, but never mind....that guy can sure recruit. The rankings are silly. Georgia stayed at the top because they hauled in a bunch of 5 star guys and really there were no 2 stars to be found. Oregon came down to earth because half of their class were 3 star and they had no 5 star guys, which is what most solid programs do. They ripped on USC early, but in the end they have another top 5 class so there’s Nemec’s reality and there’s, well, true reality. I wonder what he’d say about Fresno, who has done so well recently, yet split their class of 23 evenly between 3 and 2 star guys. No 4 stars. Was this a major fail by Tedford? I know that we are in a Power 5 conference and the Bulldogs aren’t, but virtually all of our signees are 3 star. How is that a “fail”? The Utes were up at 33, and I’m not sure that their actual group is much better than ours. It’s all speculation on signing day - DE used to say that you ciuldn’t evaluate a class for 2 to 3 years - but Nemec’s spin sure seems to be negative when it comes to our program. This is by no means a great class on paper, but the difference between 35 and 65 seems awfully thin. It's not just thin it's non existent. Statistically speaking classes 35-70 are equal, equivalent, the same. Not similar, not close.... identical. But we live in a world that MUST order and rank things. It's like if I gave you this list of numbers and asked you to order them least to greatest: 1 2 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 15 15 15 15 Would you say that the 8 sevens are tied for fourth or that that last poor 7 is ranked 11th and has had the worst perfomace in it's history? Statistically speaking it would be a lot more useful to discuss these things in terms of "bins". In this case you would have the top bin (1,2,3) the middle bin (all the 7s) and the bottom bin (the 15s). Truth of the matter is that in general the pac 12 also has three bins, and yup us and half the other teams are all in the bottom bin, and probably always will be. Stiving to change your bin is probably futile. Now, striving to find excellent players that fit your mold, fit your scheme, and are coachable? THAT may actually change your out come on the field, that may actually effect wins and losses and that is exactly what Coach Smith is trying to do. Striving for higher rated "athletes" that end up transfering because they can't swivel their hips, or lower their shoulder, or get into school, etc? That does nothing to help you except impress an idiot recruiting reporter for about 30 seconds until you win 7 games in 3 years and quit abruptlty.... the 247 35th ranked class has an average score of 85.90 OSU is the 68th ranked class with an average score of 84.01 Even within 247's own evaluation system, there is zero functional difference between 86 and 84. Both scores equate to middle level 3*. Interestingly, OSU has a higher average score than four teams ranked ahead of us and within a half a point of about 20. OSU signed 19 recruits not including transfers and every one of them were at least a 3* athlete which 247 defines as the "top 10% of all football players in the country"
|
|