[SamuelMcF]

We have never been close to 65.  :)

The word “functionally” is doing some work there.  We were in the mid to upper 70’s, but amongst those players, there were easily 10+ non-contributors, so that’s like having functionally 65 players.

Obviously, every team is going to have some non-contributors.  You can’t have 85 players on your two-deep, but if you start with 85 players, having a dozen non-contributors leaves you with plenty depth, whereas if you start with 76, you will be dangerously thin at some positions *cough* inside linebackers, safety *cough*

BC

Agree 100% here. You need to start with as full a roster as possible. There's a reason scholarship sanctions affect teams and set them back years...

This is generally the same issue I took with the recruiting class of '18. Just as with every team overall, every individual recruiting class will have some non-contributors. If (as is the case with '18 so far) 6-7 guys in the class are non-contributors, that's both expected and not a big deal when the class size is pushing 20 or more. It's a MUCH BIGGER deal when the class size is 15. 

The '17 class - also 15 players IIRC - got lucky in terms of "hitting" on most players, but you simply can't count on that. This is why I'm glad the target size for the "smaller" class of '21 appears to be ~18, not 15. If those 3 players all contribute, amazing - but even just 1-2 more contributors per class can make a significant difference when you aggregate over multiple classes.

[SamuelMcF]

We have never been close to 65.  :)

The word “functionally” is doing some work there.  We were in the mid to upper 70’s, but amongst those players, there were easily 10+ non-contributors, so that’s like having functionally 65 players.

Obviously, every team is going to have some non-contributors.  You can’t have 85 players on your two-deep, but if you start with 85 players, having a dozen non-contributors leaves you with plenty depth, whereas if you start with 76, you will be dangerously thin at some positions *cough* inside linebackers, safety *cough*

BC

Agree 100% here. You need to start with as full a roster as possible. There's a reason scholarship sanctions affect teams and set them back years...

This is generally the same issue I took with the recruiting class of '18. Just as with every team overall, every individual recruiting class will have some non-contributors. If (as is the case with '18 so far) 6-7 guys in the class are non-contributors, that's both expected and not a big deal when the class size is pushing 20 or more. It's a MUCH BIGGER deal when the class size is 15. 

The '17 class - also 15 players IIRC - got lucky in terms of "hitting" on most players, but you simply can't count on that. This is why I'm glad the target size for the "smaller" class of '21 appears to be ~18, not 15. If those 3 players all contribute, amazing - but even just 1-2 more contributors per class can make a significant difference when you aggregate over multiple classes.