I'm referencing this years team.....
by Wolfetone (2019-07-10 11:12:47)

In reply to: How would that be obvious?  posted by RIBS

Post Reply Return to Rock's House

As Hanratty pointed out we are top heavy with 3-star prospects as a
matter of course. We should have higher rated prospects. Perhaps
mediocrities is too strong a word but LB recruiting needs better than plus 200 talent.

2 of our potential starters (Simon and Lamb) were top 100
by smithwick  (2019-07-10 11:47:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

prospects. Asmar Bilal was top 200. All 3 were four stars. Not saying it's some amazing LB depth chart, but you overstate the case.

The biggest issue this year is the gap between the Elko/Lea prospects and those recruited under BVG; the 2016 and 2017 classes were duds.

wow, BVG didn't do a good job recruiting?
by jt  (2019-07-10 13:22:12)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

man, who would have guessed?
This year's team.
by RIBS  (2019-07-10 11:45:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Ok, let's go with that. Find me the recruiting profile of Gilman and Pride, Notre Dame's best defensive backs. The latter is making some pre-season All-American teams. Let's try Ian Book. No doubt he's among the best at his position. Again, I could go on and on, and we could contrast Gilman, Pride and Book with a bunch of top-100 high school guys. Pride, Gilman and Book would come out ahead. A lot.

Deciding whether a player is ever going to be good (enough) or bad based on a high school profile is absolutely stupid. As JT said, there is less margin for error with a lower-ranked guy, but that doesn't damn the entire position group. See Clemson example above.

Oh, and I love the suggestion that Todd Lyght be put out to pasture. Seems like Love, Pride and Gilman might have been coached up a bit.

When you have a plethora of under recruited prospects....
by Wolfetone  (2019-07-10 12:16:55)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

And are fantasizing that they will be coached up, rememember that
BK has never won a NC or even a major bowl game. History repeats
itself when not addressed. I can't live on maybe,should be,could be
might be,etc. To me that is stupid. Why should ND settle for so
many 3-star players and then hope they are coached up? Sure,one
or two might develop into a good player,but you aren't going to win
a NC with that level of talent.
what about if you have a plethora of pinatas? *
by jt  (2019-07-10 13:35:26)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

On the other hand, taking kids based on their Rivals ranking
by smithwick  (2019-07-10 12:25:05)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

leads to a lot of dead weight as we saw under Charlie.

Based on the play of the linebackers the last two years and the defense last year, Clark Lea has earned some respect. If they don't think a kid, whose brother is on the team and plays at a ND feeder school, is worth the scholarship compared to the guys already on the team, I'm not sure why we wouldn't trust their evaluation. They've obviously scouted this kid extensively and know plenty about him.