Zion Nelson was a 2-star. Jakai Clark a 3-star. Corey Gaynor was a 3-star. They make up over half our starting OL. Add Scaife and Campbell, we've got a ton of youth on that line. If Donaldson comes back, we return everyone.
Nelson, Clark and Gaynor.....is that a sign of good recruiting, good evaluations, or just plain dumb luck? Are we to make that there's been some good stuff coaching up kids who want to take that next step? Or is there something to say about the fact that these freshmen even had a chance to start? How woeful was our line before they got here???
We hear from Diaz about the excitement the staff has for 3-star Holley, and 3-star Hunte. I know it's a bit early, but was this good recruiting, good evaluations? Or good coaching? All of the above?
I ask these questions because of what you said about the need to improve our recruiting. In my opinion, you still have not clarified what exactly it is you mean. These kids are 2/3 stars, and while some had ok offer lists, we weren't fighting off the Bamas of the world to get their commitment. I'm just curious if you consider these to be "good recruiting" stories, or examples of what you mean that our recruiting needs to improve. We have a tendency of over-simplifying things that are just very complicated in real life. But, I would take a hungry 3-star who wants to be coached and to take that next step over an entitled 5-star who has been over-recruited and pampered (and stands a big chance of being a bust). Of course, we all want the 5-star who is also hungry. But we haven't had one of those in a long time.
Nelson, Clark and Gaynor.....is that a sign of good recruiting, good evaluations, or just plain dumb luck? Are we to make that there's been some good stuff coaching up kids who want to take that next step? Or is there something to say about the fact that these freshmen even had a chance to start? How woeful was our line before they got here???
We hear from Diaz about the excitement the staff has for 3-star Holley, and 3-star Hunte. I know it's a bit early, but was this good recruiting, good evaluations? Or good coaching? All of the above?
I ask these questions because of what you said about the need to improve our recruiting. In my opinion, you still have not clarified what exactly it is you mean. These kids are 2/3 stars, and while some had ok offer lists, we weren't fighting off the Bamas of the world to get their commitment. I'm just curious if you consider these to be "good recruiting" stories, or examples of what you mean that our recruiting needs to improve. We have a tendency of over-simplifying things that are just very complicated in real life. But, I would take a hungry 3-star who wants to be coached and to take that next step over an entitled 5-star who has been over-recruited and pampered (and stands a big chance of being a bust). Of course, we all want the 5-star who is also hungry. But we haven't had one of those in a long time.
