National Signing Day

[dapokes]

Could someone pull up the year our class had Josh Allen in it and say the national ranking?

Only 2 NFL players from that class. No big deal.

[ragtimejoe1]

It matters a lot for the top level, but not so much for the MWC. I'm not in the least disturbed or worried.

I'm not worried either but I'm curious what you are basing this on? Like I said, I haven't done an analysis since the MWC left FBS, but prior to that, stars were highly correlated to all-conference appearances. Always some exceptions and not all highly ranked recruits were all-conference but the majority of all conference were highly regarded recruits.

You could be right; I was just curious what you are basing this on?

[ELKMT]

The Sean Chambers example is bunk, he was a 3 star at Rutgers and a 3 star at Wyoming. Recruiting does matter and development matters. They arent mutually exclusive concepts. Bohl does a decent job either way, but there can be some flaws (he gives some scholarships to kids he could get as walkons). I don't want to name the kids but he completely reaches at times. His system seems to be working, so let him keep it up.

[LaradiseCowboy]

On the bright side, there is one remedy for pedestrian recruiting: WINNING! Although it can be rather difficult to win with pedestrian recruiting....

If we can manage to win a couple championships and crack into the T25, I think that will be a great impact. Our national relevance is just not quite there yet.

[onePokeovertheline]

Could someone pull up the year our class had Josh Allen in it and say the national ranking?

Only 2 NFL players from that class. No big deal.

Another post said it was #113

Josh Allen - 1st Rounder
Carl Granderson - 1st team All MWC, Bohl recently called "an NFL player"
Andrew Wingard - Freshman All American, Multi time All MWC and Bohl said same thing about him
Yo Ghaifan - 1st team All MWC
Logan Wilson - Freshman All American and MWC Freshman of the Year
Kevin Prosser - Great athlete playing out of position. Will probably get NFL looks as an OLB
Zach Wallace and Kaden Jackson - Both OL starters for multiple seasons
James Price, CJ Johnson, Jaylon Watson, Antonio Hull, Josh Harshman, Kellen Overstreet - All significant contributors

This was Bohl's first full cycle class and its safe to say this is the class that all future classes will be judged against.

[Poke in New England]

It matters a lot for the top level, but not so much for the MWC. I'm not in the least disturbed or worried.

I'm not worried either but I'm curious what you are basing this on? Like I said, I haven't done an analysis since the MWC left FBS, but prior to that, stars were highly correlated to all-conference appearances. Always some exceptions and not all highly ranked recruits were all-conference but the majority of all conference were highly regarded recruits.

You could be right; I was just curious what you are basing this on?

Since MWC left FBS? What do you mean by this?

[LanderPoke]

It matters a lot for the top level, but not so much for the MWC. I'm not in the least disturbed or worried.

I'm not worried either but I'm curious what you are basing this on? Like I said, I haven't done an analysis since the MWC left FBS, but prior to that, stars were highly correlated to all-conference appearances. Always some exceptions and not all highly ranked recruits were all-conference but the majority of all conference were highly regarded recruits.

You could be right; I was just curious what you are basing this on?

Once you get past 5*, 4* and highly-rated 3* players it's a crap shoot. The vast majority of players in the MWC are low 3* and 2*. It's about player development and having a good eye for talent. Cowboys are good at these two things. Bohl has my trust. What we have is good enough to be a top team in our conference

[Wyokie]

It matters a lot for the top level, but not so much for the MWC. I'm not in the least disturbed or worried.

I'm not worried either but I'm curious what you are basing this on? Like I said, I haven't done an analysis since the MWC left FBS, but prior to that, stars were highly correlated to all-conference appearances. Always some exceptions and not all highly ranked recruits were all-conference but the majority of all conference were highly regarded recruits.

You could be right; I was just curious what you are basing this on?

Since MWC left FBS? What do you mean by this?

I was wondering the same thing!

[LaradiseCowboy]

It matters a lot for the top level, but not so much for the MWC. I'm not in the least disturbed or worried.

I'm not worried either but I'm curious what you are basing this on? Like I said, I haven't done an analysis since the MWC left FBS, but prior to that, stars were highly correlated to all-conference appearances. Always some exceptions and not all highly ranked recruits were all-conference but the majority of all conference were highly regarded recruits.

You could be right; I was just curious what you are basing this on?

Since MWC left FBS? What do you mean by this?

I think he stated elsewhere that the level of competition is not where it used to be, comparing what it is now to FCS football. Which is completely ridiculous.

[ragtimejoe1]

It matters a lot for the top level, but not so much for the MWC. I'm not in the least disturbed or worried.

I'm not worried either but I'm curious what you are basing this on? Like I said, I haven't done an analysis since the MWC left FBS, but prior to that, stars were highly correlated to all-conference appearances. Always some exceptions and not all highly ranked recruits were all-conference but the majority of all conference were highly regarded recruits.

You could be right; I was just curious what you are basing this on?

Once you get past 5*, 4* and highly-rated 3* players it's a crap shoot. The vast majority of players in the MWC are low 3* and 2*. It's about player development and having a good eye for talent. Cowboys are good at these two things. Bohl has my trust. What we have is good enough to be a top team in our conference

I don't disagree that recruits and Bohl development are good enough to compete in MWC. I was just wondering if there was an analysis or something. I was surprised how much recruiting ranking impacted all-conference appearances when I looked before. I didn't know if that was still the case, and it took too much time for me to want to do it again, lol.

[ragtimejoe1]

It matters a lot for the top level, but not so much for the MWC. I'm not in the least disturbed or worried.

I'm not worried either but I'm curious what you are basing this on? Like I said, I haven't done an analysis since the MWC left FBS, but prior to that, stars were highly correlated to all-conference appearances. Always some exceptions and not all highly ranked recruits were all-conference but the majority of all conference were highly regarded recruits.

You could be right; I was just curious what you are basing this on?

Since MWC left FBS? What do you mean by this?

I think he stated elsewhere that the level of competition is not where it used to be, comparing what it is now to FCS football. Which is completely ridiculous.

Mainly being sarcastic, but the MWC is closer to FCS than the old MWC at the peak. Hell, I think even Missouri Valley Conference had a higher Sagarin rating than the West division. I'm not sure how apples to apples that really is, but MWC is mostly terrible.

[joshvanklomp]

The biggest flaw in the recruiting rankings: they look more at the big schools. I'm not just talking about the big colleges, but the big high schools as well. A lot of them don't know how to properly evaluate a small-school kid. Is he actually any good or does he just look good because he's facing poor competition? Also, they're sometimes evaluating these kids at positions they won't be playing at the next level.

Look back at the 2015 class. Three of the five lowest-ranked signings in our class: Andrew Wingard, Youhanna Ghaifan, Logan Wilson.

From what I've read, Wingard played mostly RB late in high school, not much on defense. Wilson is still listed today on 247 as a WR from that class. I'm guessing those things were reflected in their rankings as well.

[LanderPoke]

It matters a lot for the top level, but not so much for the MWC. I'm not in the least disturbed or worried.

I'm not worried either but I'm curious what you are basing this on? Like I said, I haven't done an analysis since the MWC left FBS, but prior to that, stars were highly correlated to all-conference appearances. Always some exceptions and not all highly ranked recruits were all-conference but the majority of all conference were highly regarded recruits.

You could be right; I was just curious what you are basing this on?

Once you get past 5*, 4* and highly-rated 3* players it's a crap shoot. The vast majority of players in the MWC are low 3* and 2*. It's about player development and having a good eye for talent. Cowboys are good at these two things. Bohl has my trust. What we have is good enough to be a top team in our conference

This is just my opinion that is based on an article that I saw once. I'll try to find it..

[poke_addict]

The biggest flaw in the recruiting rankings: they look more at the big schools. I'm not just talking about the big colleges, but the big high schools as well. A lot of them don't know how to properly evaluate a small-school kid. Is he actually any good or does he just look good because he's facing poor competition? Also, they're sometimes evaluating these kids at positions they won't be playing at the next level.

Look back at the 2015 class. Three of the five lowest-ranked signings in our class: Andrew Wingard, Youhanna Ghaifan, Logan Wilson.

From what I've read, Wingard played mostly RB late in high school, not much on defense. Wilson is still listed today on 247 as a WR from that class. I'm guessing those things were reflected in their rankings as well.

Agreed it's not worth the time for many evaluators to spend much time grading small high school prospects. The number of high school kids playing football surpasses a million. It's much more likely to overlook a kid than many realize. I've always thought this was one of our advantages in recruiting.

[PotatoCreekPete]

The Sean Chambers example is bunk, he was a 3 star at Rutgers and a 3 star at Wyoming. Recruiting does matter and development matters. They arent mutually exclusive concepts. Bohl does a decent job either way, but there can be some flaws (he gives some scholarships to kids he could get as walkons). I don't want to name the kids but he completely reaches at times. His system seems to be working, so let him keep it up.

The Sean Chambers example is NOT bunk. I am talking about Rivals rating, and at Wyoming, Sean is rated a 2 star recruit, but he was rated a 3 star recruit when he was a Rutgers commit. Maybe you should know more about what you are talking about instead of messing up like you did. The 247 rating is not the one I was speaking of, the 247 is much more freer in giving out stars than Rivals.

Recruiting does matter, I never said that it didn't. But these rating systems are so full places for mistakes and errors to being made that it isn't even funny. Bohl himself has said basically the same thing, but it sounds like you are putting your own knowledge above his, ...."His system seems to be working, so let him keep it up." That is so condescendingly nice of you to allow Bohl to "so let him keep it up."

[ELKMT]

Nothing condescending,he does seem to be doing a good job with recruiting. I'm magically supposed to know your talking about rivals? Also, who cares what one ( historically inaccurate and inaccessible ) scouting site says? The concenensus among sites has him as three star which did not change from when he was committed to Rutgers. Even espn has him listed as a 3 star before and after.

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/foot ... n-chambers

You come across as pompous snow flake. If you think anything I wrote was condescending you are wrong, and you should look in the mirror at your last post to another poster in this thread. Clearly you have issue if you think my opinion on Wyoming football would remotely reach the ears of CB or any other football coach at a D1 school ( or that I think that I know more than any professional coach). The point of message boards is to speak about what is great and what could be better ( it is okay to be critical , I promise Bohl's feelers won't be hurt by an arm chair qb). Would be a boring place if everything was sunshine and unicorns, and boards like this are for entertainment.

[PotatoCreekPete]

Nothing condescending,he does seem to be doing a good job with recruiting. I'm magically supposed to know your talking about rivals? Also, who cares what one ( historically inaccurate and inaccessible ) scouting site says? The concenensus among sites has him as three star which did not change from when he was committed to Rutgers. Even espn has him listed as a 3 star before and after.

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/foot ... n-chambers

You come across as pompous snow flake. If you think anything I wrote was condescending you are wrong, and you should look in the mirror at your last post to another poster in this thread. Clearly you have issue if you think my opinion on Wyoming football would remotely reach the ears of CB or any other football coach at a D1 school ( or that I think that I know more than any professional coach). The point of message boards is to speak about what is great and what could be better ( it is okay to be critical , I promise Bohl's feelers won't be hurt by an arm chair qb). Would be a boring place if everything was sunshine and unicorns, and boards like this are for entertainment.

Through all of this long windbag name calling that you do....you are still wrong about Sean Chambers not being a good example.

[ELKMT]

It was pretty mean of scout to give Sean Chambers a 2 star rating when he committed to Rutgers, than give him a 3 star rating when he committed to Wyoming.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit ... 7_edition/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.fresnobe ... 23709.html

I mean signs, with Wyoming and goes from a 2 star to nearly a four star in the scout ratings.

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/foot ... n-chambers

I backed my opinion with facts, Chambers star totals weren't changed once he gained 3 star status and committed to Wyoming. He remains nearly a 4 star recruit according to espn and scout.

[Expat_Poke]

It was pretty mean of scout to give Sean Chambers a 2 star rating when he committed to Rutgers, than give him a 3 star rating when he committed to Wyoming.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.reddit ... 7_edition/

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.fresnobe ... 23709.html

I mean signs, with Wyoming and goes from a 2 star to nearly a four star in the scout ratings.

http://www.espn.com/college-sports/foot ... n-chambers

I backed my opinion with facts, Chambers star totals weren't changed once he gained 3 star status and committed to Wyoming. He remains nearly a 4 star recruit according to espn and scout.

I wonder how much Wentz and Allen have to do with scout and espn perhaps giving Chambers some extra analysis. I mean when was the last big name QB prospect coming out of Rutgers or from their coaches when Bohl/Vigen have recruited and at least aided in the development of two recent top NFL QB prospects.

A question, do these rankings take into account character?

[SDPokeFan]

I'm guessing Alabama and Clemson are happy with their four and five star guys and don't have (Also recruited by: Weber St. North Dakota, South Dakota Tech, Chadron St.) next to their guys. Just saying.