Most ESPN Top 300 signees since 2013 *
by NDCuse (2019-02-07 10:11:22)

In reply to: FYI: BK just inked lowest-ranked recruiting class since 2012  posted by ndzippy


This user did not provide content for this post


How about Top 100? *
by ACross  (2019-02-07 12:00:27)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


You post the same thing every year.
by NDCuse  (2019-02-07 12:18:27)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Except that if we get a bunch of guys in 50-100, then you ask how many top 50. You obviously have internet access so you can look it up.

I don't like Kelly. His coaching and recruiting are below expectations. However, this isn't his worst class since 2012.


What's the best measure
by HTownND  (2019-02-07 13:18:15)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Instead of dicking around back and forth, let's just pick a measure and go with it.

Average stars?

Composite ranking?

Top 300 count?


All of those can and will say different things. I don't think any of them, individually, is conclusive.

As for Cross' point, given the holes on offense (and the composite ranking, and number of 5 stars) of this class, it's not a completely baseless claim.


No single measure is indicative, but
by NDCuse  (2019-02-07 15:02:53)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

the goal should be having 4* or better starting at every position with the occasional exception like Julian Love. Ideally, we have a 5* at every level of the defense. Everyone who's followed recruiting knows that what's consistently missing are elite WR, RB and defensive recruits. However, there are sixteen 4* players which means 16 guys with that should be able to contribute and have substantial pro potential. It's an mediocre class. Not great. Not disastrous.


OK
by HTownND  (2019-02-08 12:28:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

" It's an mediocre class. Not great. Not disastrous."


Is that contrary to saying it's our lowest ranked class since 2012?

That doesn't mean it's a disaster, it's just the lowest ranked, using one of the metrics.


USA Today first and second teams
by domer4  (2019-02-07 13:26:32)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

No kidding... during the late 80s/early 90s - we would get 4 or so on the first team (offense and defense combined) and another 4-5 on the second team.

That would be around 8 or so.

No other college would get more than 2-3.


We’ve signed scads of players in the top 50-100
by ACross  (2019-02-07 13:16:51)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Oodles.

Especially receivers and running backs. Not to mention defensive ends and tackles.

You are such a pathetic, besotten homer.


Your posts are rote and tired
by NDCuse  (2019-02-07 14:42:08)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I realize that you need to troll the board to boost traffic, but its becoming painfully redundant. The original post indicated that this may be one of Kelly's worst classes. My response simply noted that it probably wasn't. That doesn't make me a homer, Kelly-lover or an enabler. Bruno nailed it. This is a 10-2 level class.


Yeah, BoardOps pay me by the eyeballz, you dolt
by ACross  (2019-02-07 16:23:59)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

If you find the posts "tired" it's because the circumstances haven't changed, as our offensive performance in the bowl game, and the treadmarks on our defense's jerseys; should have told you.

Which class since 2012 was worse


> 2017 and >/= 2018, 2016, 2014 , but < 2015, 2013.
by NDCuse  (2019-02-07 20:06:34)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Year 247Sports Pts. Rivals Pts. Rivals Star Avg.

2013 284.77 2893 3.92
2014 260.44 2211 3.52
2015 267.79 2423 3.54
2016 249.43 2289 3.57
2017 251.32 2144 3.33
2018 268.86 2380 3.44
2019 258.56 2274 3.55

I don't like Kelly. I don't want Kelly. 2012 and 2018 are his peak. We should've canned him in 2016 or long before. But if more of the same means that we string together several consecutive 10+ win seasons so the job is as attractive as possible when it open up, I'm for it and I will enjoy wins over Michigan and SC along the way.

How many programs are currently better positioned than ND?
Bama, Clemson, Ohio State, UGA, OU. That's about it.


It’s a class that will help ND reach the playoffs again.
by Bruno95  (2019-02-07 11:25:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

It’s also a class that won’t likely change ND’s fortunes in such a game.


Probably right
by NDCuse  (2019-02-07 11:52:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

There is a gap that ND needs to close with the top 5 programs (Bama, OSU, Clemson, UGA, OU) which will likely require a 3-4 years of sustained success (stringing together 10-12 win seasons) to boost recruiting and/or a new head coach. Oregon (2008-14) and Clemson (2011-18) and the type of stretches that come to mind.


ABSOLUTELY right.
by JMAC  (2019-02-07 12:45:06)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

There is no: Tee Higgins, Amari Rogers, Justin Ross, Trevor Lawrence, Travis Etienne, Clelin Ferrell, Christian Wilkins, Austin Bryant, or Dexter Lawrence's in this class. No Tua Tagovailoa, Jerry Juedy, or Najee Harris.

There are NO skill difference makers on Offense or the D-line.
There's not even a Dexter Williams.

It's a good class; but a 10-2 class. I'm not even sure it's a playoff class.


Kelly whiffed on an elite RB and WR...again.
by goldhelmethead  (2019-02-07 14:35:43)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

He simply gets outworked by other schools.

Nothing against the kids we brought in. K. Williams may turn out to be a nice player.

The issue remains that he continues to have talent gaps between classes at various positions. You cannot do that. Creating tough practices through competition is crucial to your depth chart.


Dexter Williams was just as good as Etienne
by athlete37  (2019-02-07 16:04:43)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

The gap was at receiver


I was trying to make a point on recruiting inconsistencies.
by goldhelmethead  (2019-02-08 10:06:11)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Or, the importance of bringing in elite players every cycle to keep the gap small between starter and 2 deep.

Dexter was great last year. I wouldn't disagree with your opinion.






He was really good this season. He was apparently
by SEE  (2019-02-07 20:36:45)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Very good in senior bowl practice as well.


Kyren Williams might surprise everyone
by SEE  (2019-02-07 14:35:03)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

As might KAR. But I agree lacking difference makers.That’s two years in a row with misses at RB.


maybe, but our guys are RKG's. Eat that Clemson *
by irishrock  (2019-02-07 11:47:53)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I think that's a poor assumption.
by ndroman21  (2019-02-07 11:46:47)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Clemson's class has 1 five star recruit to ND's 0 this year. ND has more 4 stars and Clemson has a boatload of 3 stars, with the numbers bringing their class higher.

Their recruiting has been around this level during their ascent to the pinnacle of college football.

I think the larger difference starts after the kids are on campus.




Wasn't Hamilton a 5 star in final rankings? *
by btd  (2019-02-07 20:40:10)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I agree about the larger difference.
by Bruno95  (2019-02-07 13:31:43)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I don't think ND's recruiting is very good but not elite. I think their offensive coaching is well south of elite.

They're capable of making a run if everything falls into place: low injury rate, favorable schedule, USC & Stanford having down years, good luck in a close game or two. I don't think they can beat a good team that sees them coming.


They've beaten good teams that saw them coming.
by rockmcd  (2019-02-07 14:19:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Michigan in 2018 & USC in 2017 are the 2 most recent examples.
I would change that to say "I don't think they can beat teams coached by Dabo/Saban/Urban when they see them coming."


Michigan was just OK.
by Bruno95  (2019-02-07 20:15:43)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

USC is coached by an idiot.


Clemson's recruiting has been slightly better recently.
by mocopdx  (2019-02-07 12:04:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

They really haven't had recruiting like Alabama or OSU. Their five year recruiting composite is right with us, actually. The difference is that each year they get 1-2 guys, typically in the front seven, who are truly elite. The difference is only a few players, but 3-5 truly elite players means everything when the other 80 or so are equal.

Plus Dabo is just a better coach than BK ever will be.


agree *
by jt  (2019-02-07 12:02:09)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


In 6 years? *
by HTownND  (2019-02-07 11:37:04)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


ESPN isn't a legitimate source of recruiting rankings. *
by rkellyatrecess  (2019-02-07 11:14:19)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Is that you, Jack? *
by ndzippy  (2019-02-07 10:28:03)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Since when is Top 300 what Notre Dame shoots for?
by Wolfetone  (2019-02-07 10:13:53)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Who lowered the bar?


About 2010. *
by captaineclectic  (2019-02-07 10:15:32)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


I'd guess 2013 or so.
by KeoughCharles05  (2019-02-13 14:06:20)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Looking briefly at recruiting rankings, the class of 2013 was the last time we had multiple top 50 players.


More like 1999 *
by Bones  (2019-02-07 13:43:37)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


That’s bull
by captaineclectic  (2019-02-07 16:04:44)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Say what you will about Weis, he didn’t aim for the middle.


We’ve been partying like ‘99 ever since *
by 2ndstreeter  (2019-02-07 13:49:28)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post