God I hate giving Wilner clicks. But he's generally on the mark here. I also don't think we get 22... 20-21 most likely IMO, unless we count an LDS guy (would be c/o '22 so I don't count him). Roughly the class size I'd ideally want every year. The "smaller" classes should be 18, not 15.
He does make a good point about more than half our scholarships going to underclassmen. This, folks, is why the '18 class was so disastrous for the team, and why our depth seemed nonexistent this year. If you have 5-7 guys that don't make an impact in a given class, that's pretty normal/understandable when the class size is 20+. When the class size is 15 and you're giving a scholarship to a walk-on S in the next class because he's already better than a scholarship RS Fr who has an entire year of practice and S&C under his belt? Yikes.
He does make a good point about more than half our scholarships going to underclassmen. This, folks, is why the '18 class was so disastrous for the team, and why our depth seemed nonexistent this year. If you have 5-7 guys that don't make an impact in a given class, that's pretty normal/understandable when the class size is 20+. When the class size is 15 and you're giving a scholarship to a walk-on S in the next class because he's already better than a scholarship RS Fr who has an entire year of practice and S&C under his belt? Yikes.