CRBULL

Also surprised not to see Juju

What a great trend. You guys should go through each recruit thread and list off all the reasons you would speculate that the recruit should want to attend a different school. I'm sure we'll all appreciate the diverse perspective. Another idea would be to invite fans of the other top schools recruiting the athlete to add their comments as well just to reinforce some of the speculation.

I think it's an unfair critism to say that he hasn't been ranked well from the pay sites. They currently have him listed as follows:

 

ESPN:3 Star Rating - 74 rating - #78 OLB in the country

Scout: 3 Star Rating - #102 best OLB in the country

247: 82 rating - #87th best OLB in the country, #171 in State

Rivals: 2 Star Rating - 5.4 score

 

It's really just Rivals that has him underrated here and I think I read that Singer expects him to get a bump up once he is further evaluated this fall.

Not disagreeing with the 'focus on the offers' and 'he'll blow up his senior season' comments, but those rankings are exactly what I was referring to. 78/102/87/NR are pretty mediocre rankings. Top 50 for their position is a decent ranking.

Man, if Taggart can coach as well as he has been recruiting these will be some exciting years!

He may very well be a great pick up and I'm pleased with all of the solid commits this early in the year (far more than we have ever had), but the recruiting sites don't seem to favor Brown. I'm taking the number of early commits as a sign that Taggart is confident in the talent (as opposed to holding out to see who might work out by the end of the season) and not concerned with how they might stack up against other recruits more favored by the recruiting sites.

Interesting and perhaps telling that Skip didn't take more of them with him.

As I recall, the big games the we lost during the Leavitt days, it was the defense that failed.

 

With Holtz, I remember not being able to score and letting people score at will at times.

 

I think we can conclude the following:

 

1) The Big East had talented coaches.

2) Leavitt employed a football scheme that couldn't handle a well-coached team with talent: The Sun Bowl!

3) We were always short on depth. Yes, we had talent but not at every position.

4) Our assistants were not the best; we couldn't afford them.

5) The same system, Leavitt made it work better than Holtz.

 

It wasn't Holtz system, so he failed. He's probably a pretty coach under a different system (I don't know about this part).

 

Leavitt probably maxed out the success with his system (mobile QB, athletes everwhere and playing with intense emotions).

 

Looking back, could we have won more important games? I think so. The defense failed at the worst times during the Leavitt days.

 

As for Holtz, he was doomed from the start.

 

This is why I'm very optimistic about our new staff. It's a new system and we are going after talent, not just athletes. It may not be instant success, but I think this is the only way to go.

I'm not so sure about the athletes part. We seem to be recruiting more athletes than ever. I don't think that's a bad thing, we'll just have to see what Taggart does with 'em.

I think it's the glass-half-empty mentality/wording that is starting to get to people. There was a time in here where the glass was always half full with any of the recruits we were pursuing - and that was with less highly rated recruits. Why take a negative stance and come out with such a bold statement, and then aggressively defend it with those who question.

 

"Same old out of this world expectations on this board"

That is how it should be when you are a Bull through and through.

 

I think you have confused "expectations" with "hopes" when talking about being a Bull through and through ...

 

If you don't mind me asking, what are your "expectations" and what are your "hopes" for the Bulls, Trip?

 

"Same old out of this world expectations on this board"

That is how it should be when you are a Bull through and through.

 

With all due respect, gimme a break.  

 

Just because someone isn't an apple-pie-in-the-sky Bulls fan doesn't mean they aren't a fan.  

 

We're coming off a 3-9 year, have a brand new coaching staff, will be starting a relatively inexperienced QB and we lost a lot of seniors. 

 

Forgive us if we're realistic and practical, but do us a favor and don't define our fanhood for us.  I'm as diehard a Bull as it gets and I'll be ecstatic if we get 6-7 wins this year.  

 

Could be wrong, but I think around 6 wins is what most are hoping for. To say "Reality is this year will be 4 - 8 at best." is probably what's drawing ire, and perhaps by design. Even if it's truly his opinion, it's probably one of only a few on that end. Sounds like we need a survey.

 

 

Time will tell. The future looks bright but it did in 2010 also. Recruiting for football is looking very promising in June, hoping it stays that way until Feb. 2014. On paper we look better, but it's going to come down to whether or not players can execute the new schemes. I'm confident in our coaches' ability to coach the guys up.

Basketball, I am not all that up on so ill leave that to others to declare.

I agree.  CWT seems to be driving us in the right direction and there seems to be a lot of excitement around him, but after having the same situation the last few seasons, its hard to get hopes up too high until we see the results on the field. 

 

if vince lombardi was coaching the bulls it wouldnt help because the qualily talent will flow to big 5 schools

 

If that were the case we wouldn't be seeing the level of recruiting that we have been for 2014. Instead, we may end up with one of our best classes with a strong/promising season.

 

The assumption that USF and Western Kentucky are swimming in completely different talent pools...is a bad assumption. Especially when Willie Taggart was at Western Kentucky. He was aiming high when he was there, and he got some pretty good recruits too.

 

It doesn't take more than a google search to see where these guys rate according to services like ESPN and Rivals and whatnot. James Mauro was a three star guy with a 75 rating in 2011. Matt Floyd was a three star guys that had a 76 rating in 2011 and they had USF as the only school offering him a scholarship, just as ESPN had Western Kentucky the only school offering James Mauro a scholarship.

 

The star ratings and whatnot aren't great predictors but that alone should tell you that USF fans have no room whatsoever to be all high and mighty about a Western Kentucky recruit not being desirable because we should be recruiting better than Western Kentucky.

 

The difference between the two is Floyd continually disappoints, as we've seen with his not even being able to correctly handle snaps, and Mauro was Taggart's guy while Floyd never was. Taggart regularly recruited from Florida while at Western Kentucky. He pilfered the QB that will start this year under Bobby Petrino, Brandon Doughty, from the Miami area. He recruited Greg Windham the QB of King High School right here in Tampa. I'm sure he knew who Matt Floyd was. He just wasn't interested.

 

Two more guys to pay attention to would be Jamil Golden and Austin Appleby. Neither would be a guy that could play right away, of course.

 

Appleby committed to Purdue as part of the 2012 class but the new coach there Darrell Hazell did not recruit Appleby. His big fish is Danny Etling who was on Elite 11 with Asiantii Woulard if you recall, and he convinced Etling to come to school early so he could jump right into the starting competition, which he's done. In fact onlookers think the coaches are already putting Etling ahead of Appleby. I think the writing on the wall is pretty obvious.

 

Jamil Golden was offered by Taggart at Western Kentucky and ESPN had him rated pretty high. I believe he ended up walking on at Mississippi State. Thing is, let's say Steven Bench chooses to come to Mississippi State. That could take a little bit of wind out of Golden's sails. Could see him try and transfer after that.

Agreed. 3-4 years ago, I'd have scoffed at us and WKU fighting over the same QB. These days...

 

Disagree. Floyd, who parrot is comparing, wasn't the intended starter, Woulard was. That's the caliber of QB we would expect out of high school.

If by negative slant/outlook since the recent realignments you mean an outlook grounded in reality, guilty as charged ... 

Just a caveat before discussing further, I'm guessing that you have an ulterior motive to keep the board conversation going and/or participate as a mod, and you don't whole heartedly stand behind all of the interjections you make across the threads - many of them contrarian or argumentative in my opinion.

Grounded in reality is an interesting phrase to use and is very generic without context or relative perspective. Can't anyone with an outlook construed as negative toward a specific topic stand behind the phrase grounded in reality? What I'm getting at is the concept of how individuals handle adversity, and questioning one of the common approaches of saying "oh well that's just the way it is."

 

Interesting. But Uncle Luke lost me in the first paragraph when he said that he signed with a major college program.  I thought he signed with USF.

 

Unfortunately I'm not surprised you would say something like that. I don't normally bring up tendencies of individual posters, but I figured you might find it informative. Seeing the trend you have taken since the realignment process crippled the BE is disappointing, and it's coming across as you bashing USF or our conference situation every chance you get. I realize things aren't optimal at this point, but there is no need to pick up the torch for those who already look down on our situation. Even if it's just self deprecating to be funny, it's coming across as so frequent that it begins to put your character in question. You may not care what I think, but the fact that I felt the need to point it out to you probably means many more are thinking it.

 

 

I guess I need to pay closer attention .... Bashing USF/conference situation every chance he gets is not the impression I have of CousinRicky at all.

Fair enough, I was just speaking my mind. FWIW, I also see you as someone who has taken somewhat of an outspoken negative slant/outlook since the recent realignments so we may tend to view things differently.

On a positive note, the fact that top tier recruits are still looking at USF as an option is the main thing we can point at and take comfort in our future. If we can pull in recruiting classes like we expect Taggart to be able to do in the next year or two, and he's a solid coach like we expect he is, everything else will follow and Taggart knows this.

The potential we showed prior to the last couple years is still strong in the minds of the recruits and gives us an advantage. The fact that we can look at any school outside the elite ('Bama, USC, OU, etc.) competing with us on a recruit and have confidence we will get the commit is saying a lot.

Interesting. But Uncle Luke lost me in the first paragraph when he said that he signed with a major college program.  I thought he signed with USF.

Unfortunately I'm not surprised you would say something like that. I don't normally bring up tendencies of individual posters, but I figured you might find it informative. Seeing the trend you have taken since the realignment process crippled the BE is disappointing, and it's coming across as you bashing USF or our conference situation every chance you get. I realize things aren't optimal at this point, but there is no need to pick up the torch for those who already look down on our situation. Even if it's just self deprecating to be funny, it's coming across as so frequent that it begins to put your character in question. You may not care what I think, but the fact that I felt the need to point it out to you probably means many more are thinking it.

There were shots of Gagloev in practice and his bio was up on the roster all year.

We have some pretty decent depth on the DL. Even as talented as Calloway, Senat and the others may be, it would probably make more sense to RS them unless they are phenoms.

 DE   

#1

Ryne Giddins 6-3 266 RSr.

Julius Forte 6-2 260 RSr.

Aaron Lynch 6-6 262 Rso.

Tevin Mims 6-3 245 Sr.

#2

Eric Lee 6-3 240 So.

Daniel Perry 6-7 250 So.

#3

Guito Ervilus 6-4 252 So.

Clavion Nelson 6-3 274 RSo.

 DT   
#1

Elkino Watson 6-2 293 Jr.

Luke Sager 6-3 297 RSr.

Todd Chandler 6-0 312 RJr.

#2

James Hamilton 6-2 324 So.

Soslan Gagloev 6-4 308 RJr.

Demi Thompson 6-1 281 RSr.

I wish him well, but I really am curious which train of thought AW and his father are under at this point. Have they considered the benefit of training under the UCLA staff and weighed out the benefit of sitting for the next few years while getting the training that they believe will put him in the NFL? Or, have they somehow been sold on a high possiblity of contributing right away as was noted as one of AW main concerns going into this recruiting season? With the #3 QB in the country signing to UCLA in the last two seasons and one of them entrenched, I don't see how that could have been sold so I'm guessing they have decided to be patient and go for the long term development potential they feel they can get.

B to B-

Weighted for a new coach with a very short recruting period and coming off of two very poor seasons, A to A-

Landing any one of the 3-5 blue chips we had showing interest up to NSD would have taken us to a solid A to A+ weighted. Scout only shows us with 23 LOI, but I thought we could sign more than that so, just like CJL used to do, perhaps CWT has some backup transfers he's now going to slide in to fill any major holes. With some decent success next year I think we could shoot for anywhere from a B+ to a solid A. A+ in my book is at least one 5 star, several 5+ 4 stars and the rest upper to middle 3 stars to put us in the top 20.

I thought he wanted to be a contributor or at least try to have a shot at contributing right away.  Hundley was pretty big time for them this year and he was a freshman.  Unless hundley gets hurt Woulard won't see the field at UCLA for at least three years at QB.

They also have the #3 QB in the country Devin Fuller from last year's class behind Hundley.

He's not going to UCLA, he's going to Clemson. The thing is, he's going to redshirt no matter where he goes. Cole Stoudt isn't that good. If Woulard is as good as everyone says he is, he could easily jump Cole when he a redshirt frosh. It's not a horrible choice. If he's good enough, he'll start after 1 year.

I hear ya and when you look at the two options/situations, Clemson is the better of the two. However, what's still lingering in the back of my mind is the timing of these two schools. What is the likelihood that either of them really believe Woulard is thier future starter? Looking at UCLA's situation it seems to be a clear case of wanting depth. With Clemson it's not so clear, but again no contact until the 11th hour.

Other supporting thoughts.

Woulard won the elite 11, why not start courting him then even if he wasn't at the top of their list?

Woulard's senior performance with the team around him was poor, what has changed since winning the elite 11 that would make them interested now?

I understand he was solidly committed to us after the second time, but that usually doesn't stop elite schools from offering thier top blue chip targets.

To me this adds up to Woulard being a ways down on the board and a back up option to fill this recruiting class. It doesn't add up to either school feeling confident he is truly their future QB. These are the questions I would be asking myself if I were Woulard.

Sorry to quote my own post, but really no one has any other thoughts on this?

He's not going to UCLA, he's going to Clemson. The thing is, he's going to redshirt no matter where he goes. Cole Stoudt isn't that good. If Woulard is as good as everyone says he is, he could easily jump Cole when he a redshirt frosh. It's not a horrible choice. If he's good enough, he'll start after 1 year.

I hear ya and when you look at the two options/situations, Clemson is the better of the two. However, what's still lingering in the back of my mind is the timing of these two schools. What is the likelihood that either of them really believe Woulard is thier future starter? Looking at UCLA's situation it seems to be a clear case of wanting depth. With Clemson it's not so clear, but again no contact until the 11th hour.

Other supporting thoughts.

Woulard won the elite 11, why not start courting him then even if he wasn't at the top of their list?

Woulard's senior performance with the team around him was poor, what has changed since winning the elite 11 that would make them interested now?

I understand he was solidly committed to us after the second time, but that usually doesn't stop elite schools from offering thier top blue chip targets.

To me this adds up to Woulard being a ways down on the board and a back up option to fill this recruiting class. It doesn't add up to either school feeling confident he is truly their future QB. These are the questions I would be asking myself if I were Woulard.

Unfortunately I agree. I might even take it a step further and say in that scenario he ends up at UCF instead because we would have an entrenched QB by then. I'm just hoping that he steps back, really weighs out the probabilities of the amount of playing time at all of his options, and goes with what he knows is the right choice rather than what everyone around him is selling - this is his life. If you are Woulard you also have to consider that those schools are going to be pulling in top QBs almost every year, so it's not just the older guys you'll have to compete with when you finally think you've paid your dues on the bench.

I’m not sure what UCLA and Clemson are telling him, but it would be somewhat of a head scratcher for him to choose either of them, based on his father stating that they were looking for early playing time and the most opportunity to showcase his talents. Since neither have a QB commit this year he is probably hearing he is “THE†QB target for this year.

Here are the under classmen from the 2012 season.

UCLA

Name Year Rank Stars

Brett Hundley rFR #3 *****

Devin Fuller FR #3 ****

T.J. Millweard FR #31 ***

The five star, #3 QB in the country with 2 years at UCLA is the projected starter. You’d have to think that the #3 ranked QB in the country from last years recruiting class would be the backup.

Clemson

Name Year Rank Stars

Cole Stoudt SO #28 ***

Chad Kelly FR #20 ***

Tony McNeal rFR #30 ***

He’s not going to displace their senior Tajh Boyd. When Boyd finishes after the 2013 season, Cole Stoudt will then be a Jr with 3yrs in Swinney’s system, not to mention the other two under classmen.

Based on this I would say USF is still the best opportunity/probability for him to showcase his talents. Throw in the friends, family, and top talent he would have to throw to and it seems like the logical choice.

Surprised we're looking at more DBs.