Recruiting Class of 2002--Rating

[LordJeffBuck]

Well, I'm certainly glad to see that my article isn't very controversial, and that you all agree with me....

First a few general comments: The three-star rating is for the class as it stands today. If several players emerge either this year or next, then the rating could very well improve. I think that many of you are still factoring potential into the equation when evaluating this class. It concerns me that, after three years in the system, so many of the former recruits are still being viewed as "potential stars" - highly-rated players like Hall, Datish, Zwick, White, etc. should really be beyond the "potential" stage of their careers.

I also think that some of you are overrating the performances of players like Sims, Mangold, and Salley, who have been generally solid but rarely excellent over their first three seasons. I am hoping that at least one of those three makes major strides this season and has an All-American type year.

Remember that four- and five-star players are supposed to be the best in the country. Are there more than a handful of players from the class of 2002 who are now amongst the best college football players in the nation? Hawk, Carpenter, and Holmes, for sure, but I don't see any others right now.

A few comments on individual players:

1. The highest rated players in the class of were Clarett, Morris, and D'Andrea; the first two are long gone, and D'Andrea has not lived up to expectations. When your super blue chip prospects don't pan out, then the overall class will suffer.

2. Two of the lowest-rated players - Hawk and Holmes, both only three-star recruits - have had the most impact so far. The point of the article was not only to show how the class of 2002 has not lived up to its lofty expectations, but also to demonstrate that recruiting rankings often do not accurately predict success at the college level.

3. Clarett had a five-star freshman year, then left the team and put the OSU football program into a state of turmoil from which it is still trying to recover. Even disregarding his off-the-field antics, I don't really think that he deserves more than 2-1/2 stars for his overall contribution to the program. Averaged over three years, Clarett has 400+ yards and 6 TD's per year.

4. It is very disappointing that neither of the Elite 11 QB's has taken charge of this team. I have doubts whether the QB situation will be resolved this season; if neither QB emerges as a true team leader, then one of the apparent strengths of the class of 2002 will have become a glaring weakness instead.

top to bottom 2002, IMHO, was the best OSU class of my lifetime..and I'm 42..

It might be - some day. Right now, I'd have to say that the classes of '96 (Andy Katzenmoyer, Gary Berry, Na'il Diggs, Michael Wiley, David Boston); '99 (Michael Doss, Tim Anderson, Matt Wilhelm, Craig Krenzel, Ben Hartsock, B.J. Sander); and '00 (Alex Stepanovich, Will Smith, Darrion Scott, Shane Olivea, Michael Jenkins, Will Allen) are all better. Going back a few years, the class of '84 had three all-time Buckeye greats - Chris Spielman, Cris Carter, Jeff Uhlenhake - and plenty of other solid players. Of course, there were many great classes in the late '60's and early '70's. I also like the potential of the '04 and '05 classes.

2. Two of the very best, including arguably the best, LBs in the country (Hawk and Carpenter) are from this class. Hawk is a sure-fire repeat first-team AA, and Carpenter has a very good chance of being first-team all-conference. Hawk is also two-time all-conference selectee.

3. Holmes was 2nd-team all-conference last year and is almost guaranteed to be first-team this season seeing as both first-teamers graduated, and has a good shot at AA.

4. Salley was second-team all-conference last year, and should be first-team this year since both first-team safeties graduated. He will also be on many AA lists.

Those four players were prominemntly mentioned as being the cream of the crop of 2002; Hawk (5*); Carpenter (4-1/2*), and Holmes (4*) received the three highest ratings, and Salley (3-1/2*) was said to be a leader of the defense and in position to have a breakout season in 2005. However, the Bucks signed 25 players in 2002, and approximately half of those signees have to date had limited (or no) success on the college level.

while the above is pretty accurate, then why do this article now and not at the end of next season?

I think that three years is enough time for a preliminary assessment; I will update my blog a year from now and revise my ratings accordingly. I certainly hope that most of the scores will move up a star or two.

EDIT: By the way, the article was not meant to be a panicked "sky is falling" rant; I tried to provide an objective evaluation of the 2002 class. And, yes, I do think that the Bucks have a legit shot at a title in 2005.

 

[NevadaBuck]

when 16 of the players in a particular class START games BEFORE their senior season that is something quite remarkable--and unprecedented in OSU history.


Say what you want but Clarett, Troy Smith(coming off the heels of the greatest single game performance in UM-OSU history), Holmes, Hawk, Carpenter, Pitcock, and Salley are all bona-fide college stars. Zwick, Sims, Mangold, Downing, Datish, Kudla, D'Andrea, Everett and Mitchell have all been multi-year starters(BEFORE THEIR SENIOR SEASON)---

their is NO comparison--to compare a class with three, four or five greats is laughable.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

Say what you want but Clarett, Troy Smith(coming off the heels of the greatest single game performance in UM-OSU history), Holmes, Hawk, Carpenter, Pitcock, and Salley are all bona-fide college stars. Zwick, Sims, Mangold, Downing, Datish, Kudla, D'Andrea, Everett and Mitchell have all been multi-year starters(BEFORE THEIR SENIOR SEASON)---

1. Clarett was a college star.

2. Smith has had one excellent game, and is currently under suspension; his future is unclear.

3. Pitcock has potential to be a star (as I mentioned in the article), but he ain't there yet; let's hope that he breaks out in 2005.

4. Obviously, I agree with your assessments of Holmes, Hawk, Carpenter, and (to some extent) Salley.

5. Your statement about Zwick, et al. is completely misleading. To date, Sims and Mangold are the only legit starters in the group; the others have been spot starters, and it appears that Datish, D'Andrea, and Mitchell (and possibly Everett and Downing) will end their careers as back-ups; Zwick could go either way, but I doubt that he is the answer at QB.

 

[tsteele316]

like i said on the first page, and as the discussion here on page 2 illustrates, this article needed to be done at the end of the upcoming season.

lordjeff you make as many predictions and forecasts about the 2002 recruits as nevada does in making your assessment, which is why i have said that it is mistimed to say the least.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

1. Clarett was a college star.

...

3. Pitcock has potential to be a star (as I mentioned in the article), but he ain't there yet; let's hope that he breaks out in 2005.

...

5. ... the others have been spot starters, and it appears that Datish, D'Andrea, and Mitchell (and possibly Everett and Downing) will end their careers as back-ups...

1. Doesn't matter that Clarett bailed...he was in a class all by himself. His performance in his only year at Ohio State makes the 2002 class that much better.

3. He's as close to being a star as you can be. He was superb in both The Game and the Alamo Bowl. You don't have to "hope" he breaks out in 2005.

5. D'Andrea's not being a starter isn't a result of a lack of talent, but rather injuries. He was starting over Schlegel and was really starting to blossum until he got hurt. As for Everett, who is going to start at safety over him?

In my mind, you judge a class on how well they've turned out compared to their pre-NLOID expectations. Not everyone in a recruiting class can be expected to become a starter, let alone all-conference or even All American. If the 2002 class has 25 players, that alone means that at least 3 can't be starters. To me, a good recruiting class should have about half of them starting as seniors. In the case of the class of 2002, if they have 11 or more of them starting on opening day, then their class is successful. We expected Clarett to become a great RB, which he did, and then bailed. We expected to have an All American LB in that class, and we got one...it just wasn't the guy we expected it to be. We've also had a pleasant surprise in Holmes. The only real "disappointment" so far in my mind is Zwick, and he still has a chance to have a great year or two.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

As for Everett, who is going to start at safety over him?

Donte Whitner.

With respect to Clarett, I guess that we have to disagree over whether one outstanding year and nothing more equals a great career; I can see your point, and thinks that it has some merit, but ultimately I don't agree with it.

Besides Zwick, I'd say that Morris, Clarett, D'Andrea, Hall, and Datish have all been major disappointments. On Signing Day of 2002, I would have predicited that at least four (if not all six) of those players would be All-American caliber players in the 2005 season; as it stands, none will be.

 

[jwinslow]

Keep in mind how suspect Schlegel looked early on in this season. I wasn't happy about him being our 3rd LB at all once Mike went down. Had Mike played this whole season, I think he would have improved even more than Schlegel did.

I still don't understand disregarding Clarett. Sure if he had stayed we would have been a lot better off, but it was actually the failures of Lydell Ross that truly hurt the most. Ross should have been an average sub and instead was very mediocre. If you want to find a guy to rate lowly in this type of analysis, I'd go with him.

You also have to realize you're evaluating those other classes after the fact (I know you admitted your view could change based on this year, but I'm gonna argue anyway :)). Will Allen, while he made a few big plays, was not a star until his senior year.

And as for the evaluation of Smith, I seem to remember him helping to turn around a hapless team and barely lose a tough game to Purdue (which was much more the fault of unlucky bounces and poor work by Snyder). Sure you can argue that he had some luxuries that Zwick didn't, but the fact was Smith came in and turned things around. Whether that was 10% him or 50% him, it doesn't matter. He brought confidence to a team that had none. If he had finished out the Alamo Bowl with a stronger performance surely than what we saw from a gimpy Zwick, we would be raving about his talents.

Everett and Whitner will both be starting in the secondary at the same time unless someone comes on strong.

 

[osugrad21]

and barely lose a tough game to Purdue (which was much more the fault of unlucky bounces and poor work by Snyder).

I agree Smith provided a major spark and is the best "gamer" QB we have seen on the roster, but to give him a free pass for Purdue while blaming Snyder is misguided IMO. 3 INTs and one KEY fumble in the redzone puts him very much at fault for that loss...

He was not alone, but he was certainly a key component..

 

[NevadaBuck]

LordJeffBuck...would you consider Eddie George an "All time Great Buckeye"??


If so, he really only had one GREAT year..that being his senior year---

why would Clarett having only one great year(his freshman year)-be held to a different standard??

If its "extra-curricular" acitivities then Art Schlichter, Alonzo Spellman, etc..would all have to be excluded from the list....

 

[jwinslow]

I agree Smith provided a major spark and is the best "gamer" QB we have seen on the roster, but to give him a free pass for Purdue while blaming Snyder is misguided IMO. 3 INTs and one KEY fumble in the redzone puts him very much at fault for that loss...

He was not alone, but he was certainly a key component..

I wouldn't give him a free pass but I think he showed much good with the bad vs purdue. And I refuse to acknowledge any more than 1 INT, as two of them were right on target and teh WRs failed to catch the ball that hit their hands. The fumble and the other INT were a mistake however.

Yet they showed some offensive explosions at time in that game that we had not seen much of that year.

 

[osugrad21]

I'd definitely agree with the INTs but the redzone fumble was a dagger in the heart...poor decision that has been masked by his passion and his performance in the scUM game.

 

[jwinslow]

I just feel like we would not have been in games like Purdue, and Michigan would have been a lot different with Zwick. Smith only got to play from Indiana on (Iowa doesn't count), and can't be faulted for that. He improved game by game and had a pretty exciting game at purdue (with a very costly mistake on the pitch by trying to do too much) followed up by a splendid scUM game. Perhaps he still has more to prove, but most of us liked our chances going into next year with him at the helm.

 

[osugrad21]

I just feel like we would not have been in games like Purdue, and Michigan would have been a lot different with Zwick..

I agree 110% with that...

Remember, this all started as a debate over Snyder getting the bulk of the blame for the Purdue game...I'm a defense guy, gotta defend the family.

Troy Smith is a phenomenal player who has a chance to go down as one of the greats in tOSU history. I love the way he plays the game with intensity, creativity, passion, and especially a charisma that raises the level of play in those around him. If he keeps his head on straight, the best performances of Troy Smith are yet to be seen.

However, he is not above reproach...

Good discussion BfS...

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

As for Everett, who is going to start at safety over him?

Donte Whitner.

...

Besides Zwick, I'd say that Morris, Clarett, D'Andrea, Hall, and Datish have all been major disappointments. On Signing Day of 2002, I would have predicited that at least four (if not all six) of those players would be All-American caliber players in the 2005 season; as it stands, none will be.

No way does Whitner push Everett out of starting safety, barring injury...no way. I'll put huge vCash on that.

If you were really predicting 4-6 All-Americans from a class that had only two or three guys that were in the top three of their positions nationally in high school, then you were really dreaming. Morris busted at NC State, so he would've done no better here. Clarett was indeed All-American caliber but chose to leave early...you can't fault JT and the staff for that because in the long run they were right on target about his talent. You can't write off D'Andrea either (yet)...he has at least this year and may get a medical fifth year. True, Roy Hall and Doug Datish have been disappointments so far, but don't punish the entire class because of them.

 

[LordJeffBuck]

LordJeffBuck...would you consider Eddie George an "All time Great Buckeye"??


If so, he really only had one GREAT year..that being his senior year---

why would Clarett having only one great year(his freshman year)-be held to a different standard??

First off, let's dispell the notion that Eddie had only one "GREAT" year; Eddie's stats are set forth below:

1992-3: rushed for a combined 400 yards.

1994: 1,442 yards rushing (the 8th best single season for a Buckeye RB); he had a 219 yard game against Michigan State.

1995: 1,927 yards rushing (the best single season); 25 TD's rushing (also a record); 12 straight 100-yard games (and he had 99 yards in the opener against BC, a blow-out in which he played sparingly); Eddie also had a Buckeye record 314 yards against Illinois that year, and had two other 200+ yard games that season (against Notre Dame and Washington); finally, Eddie had 47 receptions that year (for 417 yards), which is a record for a Buckeye RB and the 15th best season for any Buckeye receiver. Might I also remind you that Eddie was an All-American in 1995, and also won the Heisman Trophy (not to mention the Doak Walker Award, the Maxwell Award, the Walter Camp Player of the Year Award, and Big Ten MVP; he also was a team co-captain).

So, Eddie's junior AND senior years were both better than Clarett's outstanding freshman year (1,237 yards rushing [14th best for a Buckeye], 18 TD's, one 200+ yard game, All Big Ten honors).

For his career, Eddie had 3,768 yards rushing (second only to Archie); 44 rushing TD's (third behind Pete Johnson [56] and Keith Byars [46]); twenty 100-yard games (second to Archie's NCAA record 34); five 200-yard games (a Buckeye record); and scored 272 points (8th all-time for a Buckeye, 3rd amongst non-kickers). Oh, and he also graduated from OSU, something that MoC will never do.

So, I think that you can see that there really is no comparison between Eddie and Reecie when you look at what each player actually accomplished on the field, and when you disregard the many "what ifs" that will perpetually surround Clarett.

Now, as to the more fundamental point - "why would Clarett having only one great year(his freshman year)-be held to a different standard??" Because timing does mean something. A player who has three mediocre seasons as a reserve, but finally blossoms and has an All-American season as a senior (Will Allen is a close example, although he did make some huge plays as a nickel back during the NC season in 2002) is more important and valuable to his team than a guy who has a great freshman year and then bails. The player who sticks with the program can benefit his team during practice, and at least he is available to play, if needed; also, he can be an ambassador for the program and an inspiration for his teammates, even if he has limited abilities (guys like Maurice Lee and Thomas Matthews come to mind). The player who leaves early only serves to disrupt his team. As I mentioned before, Clarett's leaving was a blow to the team not only because he was so talented, but also because he left such a huge void, a void which no one has filled for the past two years; Clarett's sudden departure also affected recruiting, as the Bucks were not able to land an RB in 2003 because no high school kid wanted to compete with Reecie. Clarett's "off-the-field" problems only exacerbated the football problems; they were a distraction throughout both the 2003 and 2004 seasons, and affected overall recruiting in 2004, as at least a few recruits (Kevin Bemoll and Rico McCoy, possibly others) mentioned the possible (but unlikely) NCAA sanctions resulting from the Clarett affair as a reason not to attend Ohio State.