[oman]

[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=7402.msg57443#msg57443 date=1358482748]
How 'bout this class of mostly two-stars. http://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruiti...tanford-63

They really sucked. Eight three stars, seven two stars and only two guys with four stars. We couldn't possibly have been thinking about the Rose Bowl with those guys. The only people worth note were the quarterback and wide receiver. Only three linemen were selected, one of them with two stars.

Well, sure, if you want to change the premise entirely -- from "the star system likes our players just fine!" to "the star system sucks!" -- then that's totally fine and your right. But it's an epic goalpost-move.

Yeah because back then we didn't have three all conference guys returning. You're not going to get top five classes every year. To get a class that fills in some holes and adds depth to an already good team is nothing to sneer at.

This is a pretty good strawman. Having all-conference players returning didn't seem to hurt us in 2012, and more to the point I'm not sneering at the class. I'm calling it "OK, not disastrous" and a "B/B+" type of a class. And I don't believe I've posited expectations of a top five class, as I've been measuring the class by a star average basis anyway.

So unless we're in a Little League world where everyone gets a trophy, this seems like a fair judgment of the class to me. Of course, as I've also noted, because of the small class we can afford a bit of an off class, but it's not the sort of thing we want to repeat if we like the idea of Pasadena in January.

Yes, I know this is the point where you harumph about the 2008 class, but what made the 2008 class special was that it was, well, special. It's hard to expect even a really highly-ranted class to perform that well -- I'd be shocked if our 2012 class produced the equivalent of maybe the best QB, maybe the best offensive lineman, and of the best pass rushers in program history.

Nevertheless, looking at history indicates that if you want the odds in your favor, it's a good idea to bring in highly ranked classes. Here's the list of BCS national championship game participants from 2000: Oklahoma, Florida State, Miami, Nebraska, Ohio State, LSU, S.C., Texas, Florida, Alabama, Oregon, N.D, Auburn. 

Feel free to identify the teams in that list that aren't fixtures in the top ten recruiting rankings. Again, you'll find exceptions, but that's all they are -- exceptions.
[/quote]

This is why washingtonismoney is money.

[oman]

[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=7402.msg57443#msg57443 date=1358482748]
How 'bout this class of mostly two-stars. http://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruiti...tanford-63

They really sucked. Eight three stars, seven two stars and only two guys with four stars. We couldn't possibly have been thinking about the Rose Bowl with those guys. The only people worth note were the quarterback and wide receiver. Only three linemen were selected, one of them with two stars.

Well, sure, if you want to change the premise entirely -- from "the star system likes our players just fine!" to "the star system sucks!" -- then that's totally fine and your right. But it's an epic goalpost-move.

Yeah because back then we didn't have three all conference guys returning. You're not going to get top five classes every year. To get a class that fills in some holes and adds depth to an already good team is nothing to sneer at.

This is a pretty good strawman. Having all-conference players returning didn't seem to hurt us in 2012, and more to the point I'm not sneering at the class. I'm calling it "OK, not disastrous" and a "B/B+" type of a class. And I don't believe I've posited expectations of a top five class, as I've been measuring the class by a star average basis anyway.

So unless we're in a Little League world where everyone gets a trophy, this seems like a fair judgment of the class to me. Of course, as I've also noted, because of the small class we can afford a bit of an off class, but it's not the sort of thing we want to repeat if we like the idea of Pasadena in January.

Yes, I know this is the point where you harumph about the 2008 class, but what made the 2008 class special was that it was, well, special. It's hard to expect even a really highly-ranted class to perform that well -- I'd be shocked if our 2012 class produced the equivalent of maybe the best QB, maybe the best offensive lineman, and of the best pass rushers in program history.

Nevertheless, looking at history indicates that if you want the odds in your favor, it's a good idea to bring in highly ranked classes. Here's the list of BCS national championship game participants from 2000: Oklahoma, Florida State, Miami, Nebraska, Ohio State, LSU, S.C., Texas, Florida, Alabama, Oregon, N.D, Auburn. 

Feel free to identify the teams in that list that aren't fixtures in the top ten recruiting rankings. Again, you'll find exceptions, but that's all they are -- exceptions.
[/quote]

This is why washingtonismoney is money.